Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
1 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
No surprise: Roger Stone loses bid to have indictment dismissed. (Original Post) triron Aug 2019 OP
The judge kicks Roger's butt: The Velveteen Ocelot Aug 2019 #1

The Velveteen Ocelot

(115,734 posts)
1. The judge kicks Roger's butt:
Thu Aug 1, 2019, 02:43 PM
Aug 2019
Based on the allegations in the indictment which are assumed to be true for purposes of
these motions, it is fair to say that Roger Stone has no one but himself to blame for the fact that
he was investigated by the Department of Justice.
In August 2016, on various occasions, Stone
publicly stated that he has “communicated with [the head of Organization 1].” Indictment ¶ 14.
From August to October 2016, Stone sent a number of text messages and emails with Person 2
about Organization 1, and what the head of Organization 1 planned to do. Id. ¶¶ 14–16. And in
October 2016, Stone allegedly made statements about Organization 1’s future releases to
members or supporters of the Trump Campaign. Id. ¶ 16. It may well be that the defendant was
being more truthful in his later disavowal of those statements than in his original braggadocio.
But there is no question that when he chose to take credit for the Wikileaks release and to
tantalize the public with hints that he had inside information about more to come, he chose to
place himself directly in the vortex of the issues that became the focus of multiple law
enforcement, counterintelligence, and congressional investigations.
And he can hardly complain
that under those circumstances, once he appeared before the Committee, his veracity, along with
the veracity of other witnesses, was subject to scrutiny.
(Footnote 30, p. 51)
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1z32CnEgCitkQfn91A5GWWHsLpY1M05pp/view
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»No surprise: Roger Stone ...