Monday, January 28, 2019

Rolling Stone Russiagate

You know, that’s a question I would have to – I have to determine after my attorneys have some discussion. If there’s wrongdoing by other people in the campaign that I know about, which I know of none, but if there is I would certainly testify honestly.

I’d also testify honestly about any other matter, including any communications with the president. It’s true that we spoke on the phone, but those communications are political in nature, they’re benign, and there is – there is certainly no conspiracy with Russia.

At Da Caller, Corsi: ‘I Will Be Happy’ To Testify Against Roger Stone. If he were a left-wing journolist, journolisters everywhere would be screaming. Da Beast, No Escape for Roger Stone: Mueller’s Case Is a Slam Dunk and He’s Too Slimy to Get Flipped
Finally, do not expect to see Special Counsel Robert Mueller make any attempt to flip Stone and have him cooperate. A defendant like Stone is far more trouble than he is worth to a prosecutor. Stone is too untrustworthy for a prosecutor to ever rely upon. He has told so many documented lies, and bragged so often about his dirty tricks, that he simply has too much baggage to deal with even if here to want to cooperate—which seems unlikely in any event. Mueller, I suspect, would not even be willing to engage in a preliminary debrief with Stone to just test the possibility of cooperation out of concern that Stone would immediately go on television with his pals at Fox News to decry Mueller’s Gestapo tactics.
Neo, The capture of Roger Stone, Public Enemy #2 "You can rest easy in your beds, folks, because the intrepid FBI has captured fearsome process criminal Roger Stone" ChiTrib Commentary: Roger Stone's indictment is all bun and no beef
“By in or around June and July 2016, Stone informed senior Trump Campaign officials that he had information indicating Organization 1 had documents whose release would be damaging to the Clinton Campaign. After the July 22, 2016 release of stolen DNC emails by Organization 1, a senior Trump Campaign official was directed to contact Stone about any additional releases and what other damaging information Organization 1 had regarding the Clinton Campaign. Stone thereafter told the Trump Campaign about potential future releases of damaging material by Organization 1.”

But what, exactly, did Stone know? How did he know it? And how did that help the Trump campaign?

The indictment doesn’t offer much grist for those mills. It portrays Stone as operating on the fringe of the Trump campaign, having trouble getting his calls returned by a top campaign official. It also suggests that he lied when he publicly claimed to have been briefed directly by WikiLeaks leader Julian Assange; Stone appears to have relied on conspiracy theorist Jerome Corsi and Credico for all his information about WikiLeaks. And the only useful tip Stone is accused of providing the campaign is advance knowledge that WikiLeaks would make another Clinton-related data dump in October.

Perhaps that’s why Stone, whose official role as a Trump campaign adviser ended acrimoniously in 2015, had trouble getting his calls returned.

One of the more tantalizing allegations in the indictment is that Stone worked through Credico to ask Assange for any hacked emails he might have from Clinton herself or the State Department that could confirm an unspecified accusation about Clinton’s work as secretary of state. While the indictment asserts that Assange got the request, there’s no indication that anything came of it.

That’s the indictment in a nutshell. Stone comes across as someone who talked a good game about his insights into what WikiLeaks had obtained and what it planned, then allegedly lied to Congress about what he’d done and said. But Mueller’s team hasn’t offered much about what Stone actually knew and how he knew it, which seem like the most consequential questions.
The Last Tradition, Tucker Carlson: Robert Mueller commands his own domestic army Watch video at link.

At Lawfare, Chuck Rosenberg insists that Roger Stone’s Arrest Was Appropriate, Not Heavy-Handed. A 29 gun salute to the value of government. Roger Stone indictment: Is this all Mueller has, or is he closing in on Trump? Analysis: The charges do not allege Russian coordination, but Mueller might be building a conspiracy case says the Peacock, hopefully.
Glenn Kirschner, another former federal prosecutor and NBC News contributor, went further:

"This is a conspiracy indictment," he said. "He just left out the conspiracy charges."

In an effort to induce Stone to cooperate, Kirschner believes, Mueller filed a basic set of charges that allowed him to arrest Stone in a pre-dawn raid with heavily armed FBI agents.

If Stone fails to flip, Kirschner and other experts theorize, Mueller will file a superseding indictment in a few weeks detailing much more serious charges. Mueller followed that pattern in the case of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, observers point out.
Hot  Air: Poll: Support For Investigating Trump — But Skepticism That It’ll Be Fair. Democrats don't want it to be fair, Republicans suspect it isn't. Julie Kelly at American Greatness asks Who Leaked the Bogus WikiLeaks Email About Don Jr.? Sounds like Shit to me. The Battleswarm Blog reminds us, The “Russia Hacked The DNC” Allegation Remains Unproven. All the talking heads seem to take it as a fact, but in truth, it's just a allegation by the CIA and FBI that have been wrong many times before. It needs to be tested publicly, in a court.
But to quote another hard-left outlet, The Nation, about the DNC hack:
This journalistic mission led The Nation to be troubled by the paucity of serious public scrutiny of the January 2017 intelligence-community assessment (ICA) on purported Russian interference in our 2016 presidential election, which reflects the judgment of the CIA, the FBI, and the NSA. That report concluded that Russian President Vladimir Putin personally ordered the hacking of the DNC and the dissemination of e-mails from key staffers via WikiLeaks, in order to damage Hillary Clinton’s candidacy. This official intelligence assessment has since led to what some call “Russiagate,” with charges and investigations of alleged collusion with the Kremlin, and, in turn, to what is now a major American domestic political crisis and an increasingly perilous state of US-Russia relations. To this day, however, the intelligence agencies that released this assessment have failed to provide the American people with any actual evidence substantiating their claims about how the DNC material was obtained or by whom. Astonishingly and often overlooked, the authors of the declassified ICA themselves admit that their “judgments are not intended to imply that we have proof that shows something to be a fact.”
But the Democratic Media Complex will still push the “Russia hacked the DNC!” talking point out out of political necessity. Anything to maintain the mass hysteria bubble.
Fox, Gregg Jarrett: Testimony in Russia probe shows FBI and Justice Department misconduct in effort to hurt Trump

And for our moment of lefvity, Michael Avenatti Trolls Trump at the Oscars of Porn: ‘He’s F*cked More People Than Anybody’
On Saturday night, celebrity attorney Michael Avenatti, a man whose quick ascent to mainstream fame came almost as suddenly as his decline this past winter, accompanied his client Stormy Daniels on the red carpet of the 36th annual AVN Awards, known as the “Oscars of Porn.”

Avenatti, who briefly flirted with a 2020 run until a domestic violence allegation against him in December, spent more of his time talking about centrist policy than smut. Though he endorsed Medicare for All and free college, the lawyer also expressed wariness of the Abolish ICE movement, and a familiar skepticism against a Green New Deal, calling it “unrealistic.”

“I think we certainly have to figure out the health-care situation,” Avenatti told The Daily Beast. “There’s too many Americans that don’t have insurance and are concerned about their health care and rightfully so. I do think we have to have a strong southern border, but that doesn’t mean we necessarily have to build a wall. I think we’ve got to find a way for each kid in America to go to college if they want to go to college. Above all else, whoever the Democrats nominate, they’ve got to be a fighter. If Trump is the nominee on the other side, he’s not just going to roll over, you’re going to have to take the fight to him.”
What a cute couple! Won't they look good as President and First Hooker? The Democrats should be proud of attracting a blackmailer, and her lawyer to their ranks.

No comments:

Post a Comment