Numerous charges, pleas, and convictions resulting from Mueller investigation (amended) (2 Viewers)

DavidM

Admin Emeritus
VIP Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 1999
Messages
45,112
Reaction score
17,579
Offline
Sticky Post
Washington (CNN)A federal grand jury in Washington, DC, on Friday approved the first charges in the investigation led by special counsel Robert Mueller, according to sources briefed on the matter.

The charges are still sealed under orders from a federal judge. Plans were prepared Friday for anyone charged to be taken into custody as soon as Monday, the sources said. It is unclear what the charges are.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/27/politics/first-charges-mueller-investigation/index.html
 

mt15

Subscribing Member
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Subscribing Member
Platinum VIP Contributor
Joined
Mar 14, 2006
Messages
12,553
Reaction score
16,731
Offline
Rudy is ill. He’s become a cartoonishly bumbling vestige of his former self.
 

N.O.Bronco

Super Forum Fanatic
VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 29, 2006
Messages
9,443
Reaction score
7,739
Offline
- There was no contact with Russia and our campaign

- Ok maybe there was some contact, but it was innocent, normal political stuff

- Ok maybe there was a lot of contact, but NO collusion

- Ok maybe there was some collusion, but Trump certainly didn’t know about it or direct any of it!

Within the next couple of months

-_______________________________



Wonder what the next blank gets filled with? My money is on maybe the president knew but collusion is not a crime!
 

brandon8283

Probably a drive-by
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Messages
5,940
Reaction score
6,201
Age
35
Offline
- There was no contact with Russia and our campaign

- Ok maybe there was some contact, but it was innocent, normal political stuff

- Ok maybe there was a lot of contact, but NO collusion

- Ok maybe there was some collusion, but Trump certainly didn’t know about it or direct any of it!

Within the next couple of months

-_______________________________



Wonder what the next blank gets filled with? My money is on maybe the president knew but collusion is not a crime!
Followed by “Conspiracy is a crime, but you can’t indict a sitting president!”, “I’ll resign to avoid impeachment.”, and “I made a deal to resign to avoid jail time.”
 
Joined
Jul 19, 2001
Messages
21,242
Reaction score
51,034
Location
GBTR
Offline
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/roger-stone-longtime-trump-friend-indicted-special-counsel/story?id=59520432

Roger Stone has been indicted on seven counts, including one count of obstruction of an official proceeding, five counts of false statements and one count of witness tampering in special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into possible collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign during the 2016 presidential election.
I really wonder what evidence Mueller has and if he can win in court. My gut says he can because he has so far and does not seem to over reach.
 

FullMonte

Super Forum Fanatic
Joined
Dec 23, 2002
Messages
5,332
Reaction score
3,082
Age
51
Location
Shreveport/Bossier City
Offline
Rudy is ill. He’s become a cartoonishly bumbling vestige of his former self.
This interview with him is great. Concerning the Buzzfeed story about Cohen claiming that Trump directed him to lie....

Interviewer: Do you...
Rudy: But I can tell you, from the moment I read the story, I knew the story was false
Interviewer: Because?
Rudy: Because I have been through all of the tapes, I have been through all of the texts, I have been through all of the emails, and I knew none existed. And then, basically, when the special counsel said that, just in case there are any others I might not know about, they probably went through others and found the same thing.
Interviewer: Wait, what tapes have you gone through?
Rudy: I shouldn't have said tapes. They alleged that there were texts and emails that corroborated that Cohen was saying the President told him to lie. There were no texts, there were no emails, and the President never told him to lie.
Interviewer: So, there were no tapes you listened to, though?
Rudy: No tapes. Well, I have listened to tapes, but none of them concern this.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-new-yorker-interview/even-if-he-did-do-it-it-wouldnt-be-a-crime-rudy-giuliani-donald-trump-robert-mueller-moscow-buzzfeed
 

efil4stnias

ppfffffttttt
VIP Contributor
Joined
Jul 9, 2001
Messages
28,287
Reaction score
24,582
Location
Madisonville
Offline
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/roger-stone-longtime-trump-friend-indicted-special-counsel/story?id=59520432



I really wonder what evidence Mueller has and if he can win in court. My gut says he can because he has so far and does not seem to over reach.
Enough.

This is a federal investigation. These dudes dot I's and cross t's for a living. Methodical and thorough. Doesn't mean they don't make errors, but with an investigation of this magnitude, they are triple checking their work.
 

superchuck500

tiny changes
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Diamond VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 9, 2004
Messages
45,020
Reaction score
58,911
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Offline
Here is the indictment. It certainly makes more clear than ever that senior members of the Trump team were aware of the DNC hacks and intentionally sought to coordinate campaign strategy with the content of the hacked materials and WikiLeaks’s activity to release that material. Whether those senior campaign officials knew the source was Russian military cyber-actors isn’t clear (that I can see).

One particularly noteworthy line from the indictment is in paragraph 12, where is says “a senior Trump campaign official was directed to contact Stone" about finding out what other damaging info WikiLeaks had that it was planning to release. This line is important for a couple of reasons. First, because obtaining and releasing hacked material is illegal in the US, this demonstrates the Trump campaign’s willingness to not only benefit from the release of stolen material, but to actually be aware of future releases so that it may maximize strategic impact for the campaign. Second, if a senior campaign official “was directed”, that means the instruction came from someone more senior (perhaps even Trump himself).

https://static.politico.com/f1/c0/8e83987b43b599a2e8f6ee507c2f/roger-stone-indictment.pdf
 
Last edited:

superchuck500

tiny changes
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Diamond VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 9, 2004
Messages
45,020
Reaction score
58,911
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Offline
Here is the indictment. It certainly makes more clear than ever that senior members of the Trump team were aware of the DNC hacks and intentionally sought to coordinate campaign strategy with the content of the hacked materials and WikiLeaks’s activity to release that material. Whether those senior campaign officials knew the source was Russian military cyber-actors isn’t clear (that I can see).

One particularly noteworthy line from the indictment is in paragraph 12, where is says “a senior Trump campaign official was directed to contact Stone" about finding out what other damaging info WikiLeaks had that it was planning to release. This line is important for a couple of reasons. First, because obtaining and releasing hacked material is illegal in the US, this demonstrates the Trump campaign’s willingness to not only benefit from the release of stolen material, but to actually be aware of future releases so that it may maximize strategic impact for the campaign. Second, if a senior campaign official “was directed”, that means the instruction came from someone more senior (perhaps even Trump himself).

https://static.politico.com/f1/c0/8e83987b43b599a2e8f6ee507c2f/roger-stone-indictment.pdf
CNBC is reporting that the person that directed Stone be contacted (and effectively tasked) was Bannon.

EDIT: Or that Bannon was the official directed (by someone possibly DJT) to contact Stone.
 
Last edited:

insidejob

Respect existence or expect resistance.
Approved Blogger
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
25,587
Reaction score
41,909
Location
70005
Offline
One particularly noteworthy line from the indictment is in paragraph 12, where is says “a senior Trump campaign official was directed to contact Stone" about finding out what other damaging info WikiLeaks had that it was planning to release.
CNBC is reporting that the person that directed Stone be contacted (and effectively tasked) was Bannon.
I thought they were saying that Bannon is the senior campaign official and that he was the one being directed to contact Stone? And that the logical conclusion is that he was directed by Trump since there wasn't anyone really above him to be directing him to do anything. Did I misinterpret what they were saying?
 

superchuck500

tiny changes
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Diamond VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 9, 2004
Messages
45,020
Reaction score
58,911
Location
Mt. Pleasant, SC
Offline
I thought they were saying that Bannon is the senior campaign official and that he was the one being directed to contact Stone? And that the logical conclusion is that he was directed by Trump since there wasn't anyone really above him to be directing him to do anything. Did I misinterpret what they were saying?
Yeah that makes sense. I just heard a quick sound bite and didn’t really process it.
 

insidejob

Respect existence or expect resistance.
Approved Blogger
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
25,587
Reaction score
41,909
Location
70005
Offline
Yeah that makes sense. I just heard a quick sound bite and didn’t really process it.
Same here. And I've only skimmed the indictment. By the end of the day, we'll have the breakdown of this whole thing. I mean, he was only arrested a few hours ago and things are getting revealed every fifteen minutes it seems.

Apparently, person #2 is that NY radio host that he made Godfather references to about lying to investigators, hence the witness intimidation. I still haven't seen the part about him texting someone and threatening to kill or steal their dog if they talked, but this bizarre threat is apparently word for word in the indictment, if I heard correctly.

ETA: Found it.
During these conversations, STONE repeatedly made statements intended to prevent Person 2 from cooperating with the investigations.
For example: a. On or about December 24, 2017, Person 2 texted STONE, “I met [the head of Organization 1] for frst time this yea[r] sept 7 . . . docs prove that. . . . You should
be honest w fbi . . . there was no back channel . . . be honest.” STONE replied approximately two minutes later, “I’m not talking to the FBI and if your smart you
won’t either.” b. On or about April 9, 2018, STONE wrote in an email to Person 2, “You are a rat. A stoolie. You backstab your friends-run your mouth my lawyers are dying Rip
you to shreds.” STONE also said he would “take that dog away from you,” referring to Person 2’s dog. On or about the same day, STONE wrote to Person 2, “I am so ready. Let’s get it on. Prepare to die [expletive].” c. On or about May 21, 2018, Person 2 wrote in an email to STONE, “You should have just been honest with the house Intel committee . . . you’ve opened yourself up to perjury charges like an idiot.” STONE responded, “You are so full of [expletive]. You got nothing. Keep running your mouth and I’ll file a bar complaint against your friend [the attorney who had the ability to contact the head of Organization 1]
Literally threatening to kill the dude, not just his dog. Can't see how he's getting out of this charge. I'd love to see him try to fight it. Seems like person #2 isn't scared to testify.
 
Last edited:

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
coldseat Political Discussion Board 45



Saints Headlines (The Advocate)

Headlines

Top Bottom