HUGE DEVELOPMENT: ROGER STONE Files Two Court Documents – BLASTS FBI and Mueller’s False Allegations

Sure.

 

Read Papadopolous

https://www.justice.gov/file/1007346/download

Was pretty minor stuff, big picture, but it cost him 14 days of freedom.....14 days I tell ya....

 

Ok, here's the thing. Lying under oath is not a crime unless you do so with a corrupt intent AND you do it about a fact that is material and significant to the crime. So unless the date is really pertinent to the crime being charged, (for example, you said that you sold the stock two days before you got the insider information, but actually you sold the stock two days after you got the insider information) then you are not guilty of lying simply because you got the date wrong.

 

So you give the same example except you use murder instead of robbery.

Oh and by the way, a video of a self defense shooting would show....self defense.



Problem 1: A crime was still committed (murder)
Problem 2: Covering up a known crime (murder) is a crime

So, please show us:

1 The crime committed in the Trump/Russia investigation
2 The statute of the crime committed to cover it up

 

So what crime was Papadopolous charged with in addition to the "lying" charge.

 

Yep.... that's the one.... Links and/or coordination.... Mueller found the links but not the criminal coordination..

Where does that say Trump colluded with the Russians??

 

I literally told you in the facts that your brother acted in self-defense. Pro-tip: That means that a murder did not take place.

 

He lied about a material fact - i.e. that he spoke to the Ambassador about Russia being in possession of Hillary's emails.

I was taking issue with your "you can be charged for lying because you got the date wrong" bullshit.

 

Charges are not proof. Stone is fighting the very wealthy Feds with his own wealth vastly diminished. This is the true ruin the Feds can do to us all.

 

How many successful convictions resulted from the Mueller investigation?

 

So make sure you donate to the #RogerStoneLegalDefenseFund now!

 

A. There are no examples of obstruction by the POTUS
B. None of them having anything to do with his appointment letter.

Not a single American was indicted for working with the Russian government, there was no conspiracy to effect an election, and you claiming Manafort's prosecution (which Mueller decided NOT to prosecute in 2014) has any relevance is just ridiculous.

 

Then that's a win in and of itself... Nobody should profit by impersonating a human being....

 

Other than the guy he decided not to prosecute for the crimes he knew about in 2014? None.

 

All of the convictions were well within the realm of authority granted by the appointment letter, especially considering that Obstruction of Justice is explicitly enumerated in that appointment letter.

And the absurdity is your simplistic defense of implying that Roger Stone can only be guilty of obstruction of justice, lying under oath, and intimidating witnesses IF Trump committed a crime personally.

 

Like I said he isn't charged with stealing anything....at least I always thought the term crook referred to a theft

 

You literally just referenced the criminal conviction against Papadopoulis (hint: he is different from Manafort).

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/do...recard-who-s-been-convicted-sentenced-n980731

 

So he found links to a non-conspiracy. Funny.

 

I never said he was a crook, that is was the hand jester he gave said, he may be, I do not know one way or the other

 

I never said charges where in fact, there is a jury instruction saying just that. I do not disagree, where it be the Feds or a State Govt, they have all the money in the world, it can be difficult for anyone to fight charges. Not just expensive, but also a lot of pressure to plea. Potential charges can carry a lot of time, and a lot of risk....sometimes it's easier not to take the risk.

 

Pro-tip: A video of a self defense shooting shows self defense.

Pro-tip # 2: There is a statute for destruction of evidence.

I'm sure in your imagination you think this means something when compared to the false allegations against the POTUS for a crime concocted by the government.

 

So you have a process crime that wasn't a cover up for an actual crime and a guy Mueller declined to prosecute in 2014.

You think this helps your argument?

 

You’re right. BTW You can read the indictment of the Russian hackers if you wanna know the evidence it was them.

 

https://www.justice.gov/file/1080281/download

 

A few basic facts to end my discussion with you.

1) Obstruction of Justice does not require that an underlying crime be proven before you can be found guilty of the crime of Obstruction of Justice.
2) Mueller successfully indicted and convicted several individuals and, as such, it is objectively true that crimes existed.
3) Roger Stone's legal pleading to see whether Russia actually hacked the DNC server has zero bearing on the elements of the crimes being alleged against Roger Stone.
4) Every Trump appointed intelligence officer agrees with the conclusion that Russia did, in fact, hack the DNC.