Crime Get me Roger Stone (for obstruction, lying, and witness tampering) (SCO thread v. 28)

Status
Not open for further replies.
This may be a tad late but :


Alan Dershowitz: I've read the indictment and it's a typical Mueller indictment. Very heavy on stories. Stories involving Wikileaks, but the indictment itself all relates to obstruction of justice and tampering with witnesses. In other words, crimes that occured as a result of the investigation. This is typical of Mueller. He has found almost no crimes that occurred before he was appointed Special Counsel.

He was appointed Special Counsel to uncover crimes that had already occurred. He has virtually failed in that respect in every regard. Almost all the crimes that he has indicted people for are crimes that resulted from his investigation. False statements, tampering with witnesses, obstruction of justice. I went through the list today of all the people who had been indicted by Mueller. It was very hard to find any American who had been charged with any crime that occurred before Mueller was appointed Special Counsel. So what's happened here is that these are crimes which were generated by the investigation---that doesn't make them any less criminal---but it really means that there has been a failure to uncover the basic crimes for which he was appointed. Namely, before he was appointed, was there illegal conspiracy with Russia? We don't find that.

In this indictment, he tells stories about alleged collusion, stories about Wikileaks but that's not the basis for the indictment. The basis for the indictment are all events that occurred after he was indicted. That's very significant.

 
ImNotSurpisedDonks! said:
The irony is in that Wikileaks exposed the government and media were in bed together, both above the law, and rather than fixing the lawlessness exposed by Wikileaks, we continue to go after those that exposed that corruption and lawlessness. To rub it in our faces, CNN was there an hour before, clearly tipped off by the FBI to help in political consent manufacturing.
Click to expand...
While Fox News was investigating Pizzagate and Hillary's emails, CNN's reporter David Shortell noticed some unusual grand jury activity in Washington yesterday (Thursday). So one of the obvious places to go was Stone's house, CNN did something good. And BTW, why would it bother anyone if it was leaks, good reporting or scoops? Roger Stone did something (many things) illegal and was indicted, why are you in love with criminals these days?
 
Cake4Breakfast said:
What fantasies are you talking about? You asked about the pee tape (which wouldn't have been released if it existed, as once it were released it would lose its value for the purpose of blackmail, no?) and I told you where the story could have been misconstrued from, which was a verified story about a pretty fucked up thing itself, and that Steele told Isikoff that he was only 50/50 on it being true, which is similar to what Comey stated about "the Russians possibly having a tape of Trump with prostitutes peeing on each other in Moscow".

Those are facts that upset you, beyond you being upset by the focus of this thread, the fact that yet another high profile person involved in the Trump campaign is going to prison.

th
th
th
th
th
th
th
Click to expand...
Definitely not reading LOLOL
 
glenwo2 said:
This may be a tad late but :


Alan Dershowitz: I've read the indictment and it's a typical Mueller indictment. Very heavy on stories. Stories involving Wikileaks, but the indictment itself all relates to obstruction of justice and tampering with witnesses. In other words, crimes that occured as a result of the investigation. This is typical of Mueller. He has found almost no crimes that occurred before he was appointed Special Counsel.

He was appointed Special Counsel to uncover crimes that had already occurred. He has virtually failed in that respect in every regard. Almost all the crimes that he has indicted people for are crimes that resulted from his investigation. False statements, tampering with witnesses, obstruction of justice. I went through the list today of all the people who had been indicted by Mueller. It was very hard to find any American who had been charged with any crime that occurred before Mueller was appointed Special Counsel. So what's happened here is that these are crimes which were generated by the investigation---that doesn't make them any less criminal---but it really means that there has been a failure to uncover the basic crimes for which he was appointed. Namely, before he was appointed, was there illegal conspiracy with Russia? We don't find that.

In this indictment, he tells stories about alleged collusion, stories about Wikileaks but that's not the basis for the indictment. The basis for the indictment are all events that occurred after he was indicted. That's very significant.

Click to expand...



He hasn't charged everyone when the investigation isnt over yet.

Brilliant from mr dershowitz.
 
7437 said:
He hasn't charged everyone when the investigation isnt over yet.

Brilliant from mr dershowitz.
Click to expand...

Fox News should do a segment with Fox fan favorites Fuhrman and Dershowitz to rehash to their opposing positions on the OJ trial.
th
 
Last edited:
Cake4Breakfast said:
that's why i included pictures for you, you gave off the "type who gets confused by words and facts" vibe. it's good McDonald's has pictures on their menus or you would starve.
Click to expand...
Eww you eat at McDonalds? Damn poor people, get out of my country!!
 
Throttlehead said:
While Fox News was investigating Pizzagate and Hillary's emails, CNN's reporter David Shortell noticed some unusual grand jury activity in Washington yesterday (Thursday). So one of the obvious places to go was Stone's house, CNN did something good. And BTW, why would it bother anyone if it was leaks, good reporting or scoops? Roger Stone did something (many things) illegal and was indicted, why are you in love with criminals these days?
Click to expand...

Exactly, even Caputo (who was haranguing Corsi and Nunberg on Ari Melber's show earlier in the week about them not being loyal to their "friend" Roger Stone) stated that CNN had been at Stone's house more than once before waiting for an FBI raid.
 
Warlord Palis said:
Eww you eat at McDonalds? Damn poor people, get out of my country!!
Click to expand...

th
th

You know Trump eats at McDonald's right? You know he was in one of McDonald's commercials right? You know that's a running joke about Trump right? "Hamberders" right? You wanna pretend like you didn't make that post, get a good night of sleep, and think your next post through in the morning.

 
splendica said:
Hannity with some good stuff. Amazing that CNN was there to capture this raid by FBI agents with assault rifles, magazines, even grenades. Sends a message to Trump supporters.

Click to expand...


Surprised Hannity isn't thinking about how safe Stone was with all of those good guys with guns there to protect him from illegal aliens and potential grizzlies.<Y2JSmirk>

Kinda hurts his point about how having armed teachers would make students safer if Stone wasn't totally safe with trained FBI agents and SWAT officers handling weapons around him, his wife, and his dogs.
 
abiG said:
LOL, the only evidence of Russian collusion we KNOW of is:
As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors....

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/...s-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html
Click to expand...

Uranium one. {<jordan}{<jordan}

 
th


“WikiLeaks walks like a hostile intelligence service and talks like a hostile intelligence service,” Mr. Pompeo said. To support his assessment, he cited how the group had encouraged followers to join the C.I.A. and steal secrets, and how “it overwhelmingly focuses on the United States while seeking support from antidemocratic countries.”

“It’s time to call out WikiLeaks for what it really is: a nonstate hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors like Russia,” he said.

“Russian military intelligence, the G.R.U., had used WikiLeaks to release data of U.S. victims that the G.R.U. had obtained through cyberoperations against the Democratic National Committee.”

He also said that Mr. Assange, who has spent nearly five years holed up in the Ecuadorean embassy in London to avoid extradition on sexual assault charges in Sweden, did not enjoy First Amendment protections.

“No one has the right to engage in the theft of secrets from America,” Mr. Pompeo said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/13/us/politics/mike-pompeo-cia-wikileaks.html

th
 
Cake4Breakfast said:
Surprised Hannity isn't thinking about how safe Stone was with all of those good guys with guns there to protect him from illegal aliens and potential grizzlies.<Y2JSmirk>

Kinda hurts his point about how having armed teachers would make students safer if Stone wasn't totally safe with trained FBI agents and SWAT officers handling weapons around him, his wife, and his dogs.
Click to expand...

Yes, freaking amazing how they jerk off to a show of force on a regular basis and cheer when 5 year olds are lead away in cuffs but performing an early morning raid is too much!!!!
 
glenwo2 said:
This may be a tad late but :


Alan Dershowitz:
Click to expand...


It's a stupid summary, per the usual, from Dershowitz.

In an organized criminal case with over a dozen defendants, you wouldn't just lay out the laws you can prove Stone violated at the get go, and give every other defendant a heads up on where you're looking or what you've found.

Now from a practical standpoint, this may mean the prosecutor might have to hold off in regards to one defendant for a time. But that prosecutor is in luck if you have a dipshit defendant like Stone who's going around emailing, calling, and texting threats to various witnesses (and that's a crime in and of itself). Now you can take him in, put his feet to the fire, without having to show your hand.

Derpowitz argument is: Here goes Mueller again, arresting another Trump official for similar charges as other defendants. Yeah, that's because these defendants keep lying. That's not on Mueller, it's on them. What is Dersh even suggesting? That Stone was tricked or forced into threatening witnesses? And of course Dersh neglects the obvious question: Why a defendant would do something like that if he wasn't guilty?

Regardless, threatening the witnesses of a federal prosecutor is a crime, and I don't know how any lawyer can honestly act surprised that a defendant wouldn't be charged if found doing that.
 
Last edited:
Darkballs said:
It's a stupid summary, per the usual, from Dershowitz.

In an organized criminal case with over a dozen defendants, you wouldn't just lay out the laws you can prove Stone violated at the get go, and give every other defendant a heads up on where you're looking or what you've found.

Now from a practical standpoint, this may mean the prosecutor might have to hold off in regards to one defendant for a time. But that prosecutor is in luck if you have a dipshit defendant like Stone who's going around emailing, calling, and texting threats to various witnesses (and that's a crime in and of itself). Now you can take him in, put his feet to the fire, without having to show your hand.

Derpowitz argument is: Here goes Mueller again, arresting another Trump official for similar charges as other defendants. Yeah, that's because these defendants keep lying. That's not on Mueller, it's on them. What is Dersh even suggesting? That Stone was tricked or forced into threatening witnesses? And of course Dersh neglects the obvious question: Why a defendant would do something like that if he wasn't guilty?

Regardless, threatening the witnesses of a federal prosecutor is a crime, and I don't know how any lawyer can honestly act surprised that a defendant wouldn't be charged if found doing that.
Click to expand...
I asked this before, still curious. Isn't witness tampering/witness intimidation one of the more serious offenses one could commit due to its impact on the integrity of the whole justice system?
 
Warlord Palis said:
Eww you eat at McDonalds? Damn poor people, get out of my country!!
Click to expand...

Cake4Breakfast said:
th
th

You know Trump eats at McDonald's right? You know he was in one of McDonald's commercials right? You know that's a running joke about Trump right? "Hamberders" right? You wanna pretend like you didn't make that post, get a good night of sleep, and think your next post through in the morning.

Click to expand...

gV-bir.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,275,210
Messages
57,974,710
Members
175,888
Latest member
whatsername

Share this page

Back
Top