General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsATTN Mueller haters; Stone's indictment was the last brought by special counsel Robert S. Mueller II
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/roger-stone-jury-weighs-evidence-and-a-defense-move-to-make-case-about-mueller/2019/11/15/554fff5a-06ff-11ea-8292-c46ee8cb3dce_story.htmlRoger Stone guilty on all counts in federal trial of lying to Congress, witness tampering
By
Rachel Weiner,
Spencer S. Hsu and
Matt Zapotosky
November 15, 2019 at 11:52 a.m. EST
A federal jury has convicted longtime Trump confidant Roger Stone of lying to Congress and tampering with a witness about his efforts to learn about the anti-secrecy group WikiLeaks release of hacked Democratic emails in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
The panel of nine women and three men deliberated for less than two days before finding Stone, 67, guilty on all seven counts resulting from his September 2017 testimony to a House intelligence committee investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election and the Kremlins efforts to damage Trumps Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton.
snip
Stones indictment was the last brought by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, putting on trial his slippery brand of political brawling and revealing important new details about the Trump campaigns keen interest in computer files hacked by Russia and made public by WikiLeaks. He was accused of lying to Congress and tampering with a witness, an associate prosecutors said Stone threatened in a bid to prevent the man from cooperating with lawmakers.
Though prosecutors sought to prove only that Stone had lied to Congress, they asserted that his motive for the falsehoods was protecting Trump from embarrassment and thus made the president and his campaign a key component in their case.
malaise
(268,693 posts)Mueller will be vindicated
Botany
(70,447 posts)n/t
malaise
(268,693 posts)It will all come out - they are screwed
barbtries
(28,769 posts)very long and difficult read, but even in the redacted version the story is told.
https://www.amazon.com/Mueller-Report-Washington-Post/dp/1982129735/ref=sr_1_3?keywords=the+mueller+report&qid=1573838682&sr=8-3
worthwhile even if redacted. I think a good part of the redactions having to do with Roger Stone are part of the public record now.
50 Shades Of Blue
(9,920 posts)NRaleighLiberal
(60,006 posts)Bev54
(10,038 posts)I suspect there are a few more hidden gems out there.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)I am so tired of the "Mueller was a dud/coward/tool" attacks.
Mike 03
(16,616 posts)I get tired of seeing Mueller beat up and the fact is he brought us a long way.
irisblue
(32,928 posts)okaawhatever
(9,457 posts)sheshe2
(83,647 posts)hvn_nbr_2
(6,485 posts)Barr shut down virtually all the investigations that Mueller spun off to DOJ. Why did he let Stone's case go on?
Botany
(70,447 posts)... for Barr to stop it and or that Trump and company have committed so many crimes that Barr missed this one.
But Stone does tie Trump to Russia/Wikileaks.
Hermit-The-Prog
(33,249 posts)Botany
(70,447 posts)If they were exculpatory then they would have released by now.
Hermit-The-Prog
(33,249 posts)Vinca
(50,236 posts)investigation. Most particularly, I will never forget that he said it's unconstitutional to indict a sitting president and that's why he didn't pursue anything other than a written Trump interview. It's not even a law about not indicting a president. It's a memo from the 1970's and the author of it said he never anticipated it would be taken as seriously as it has been. That said, I'm happy as a clam about Stone and everyone else who went down for crimes relating to Russia. Sadly, the big fish got out of the net.