Roger Stone refuses to cooperate with Senate Judiciary Committee
Source: Raw Story
ongtime Donald Trump confidante Roger Stone is refusing to produce documents requested by members of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
On the advice of counsel, Mr. Stone will not produce the documents requested by you in your capacity as Ranking Minority Member of the Judiciary Committee, Stones defense attorneys wrote to Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA).
Feinstein had requested communications related to hacked emails, communications with Russian hackers of Wikileaks, and communications with the Trump campaign.
Mr. Stone decries secrecy, his lawyers claimed. He will not subject himself to the innuendo of non-public proceedings. Nor will he confirm the existence of, or produce the documents of the request, for the purpose of being used in secret proceedings.
Read more: https://www.rawstory.com/2018/12/roger-stone-refuses-cooperate-senate-judiciary-committee-trump-praises-stonewalling-mueller/
UpInArms
(51,295 posts)Contempt of court and all that
Stone behind bars on 10-thread count sheets is becoming one of my heartfelt desires
Response to UpInArms (Reply #1)
LudwigPastorius This message was self-deleted by its author.
pecosbob
(7,549 posts)but that constitutes contempt. I imagine House Dems will revisit this...
BigmanPigman
(51,660 posts)Doesn't this make him appear guilty?
brooklynite
(94,985 posts)The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,996 posts)"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
That's what "taking the Fifth" means - you can't be forced to be a witness against yourself when your testimony would place you in jeopardy of criminal prosecution. In a criminal trial the jury will be instructed that a person's silence or refusal to testify should not be construed as meaning they are guilty.
cstanleytech
(26,361 posts)lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)"The mob takes the Fifth. If youre innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?"
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Cold War Spook
(1,279 posts)A person is innocent until proven guilty in a trial. My attorneys have always told me to keep my mouth shut. If you tell your attorney that you are guilty then he/she can not put you on the stand without suborning perjury.
underpants
(183,036 posts)Bleacher Creature
(11,258 posts)justgamma
(3,667 posts)They were in the majority when Karl Rove ignored their subpoena and did absolutely nothing about it.
Sanity Claws
(21,866 posts)They wouldn't be my first choice to help defend against a Congressional subpoena.
Haggis for Breakfast
(6,831 posts)Care to share ? I have family there and have heard some jaw-dropping stories about attorneys there. And who doesn't love Cohen and Cohen ?!
Sanity Claws
(21,866 posts)I am sure that there are many truly competent attorneys in the area. However, I doubt any of them have any experience with defending against a congressional subpoena. If I were a Ft. Lauderdale attorney and wanted to help my client (i.e., not just collect fees and make my own name more prominent), I would co-counsel with attorneys in D.C. who have experience and subject matter expertise in defending against Congressional subpoenas.
When I posted my first remark, I was unaware of the history of these attorneys and Roger Doger. See https://www.democraticunderground.com/100211511218
How do so many criminals find each other? Was my mother right: Birds of a feather flock together?
ScratchCat
(2,022 posts)and is clearly out of his league in dealing with Congressional subpoenas. The letter reads like a joke, especially the end where he tries to tie the invocation of the 5th to the alleged "secrecy" of the testimony.
byronius
(7,411 posts)Wellstone ruled
(34,661 posts)will send in the Boys in a nighttime raid,watch and see. Stone is toast one way or another. Team Mueller knows where Roger the Dodger keeps his stash.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)Haggis for Breakfast
(6,831 posts)erronis
(15,469 posts)Too bad dump and stone and epstein are getting too old to execute.
bitterross
(4,066 posts)As minority leader Feinstein doesn't have subpoena power.
He's not out of the hot water yet.
LudwigPastorius
(9,262 posts)prosecute a congressional contempt citation.
I still think that ratfucker will end up jailed, but it wont be for stonewalling a congressional subpoena.
bluestarone
(17,127 posts)He's not listening to the senators questions. Instead he's listening to RUMPYS pardon promise. We'll wait and see the outcome of this!!! Mueller will have the right answer to this i'm sure!!
sakabatou
(42,204 posts)Marie Marie
(9,999 posts)Zippy the Pinhead.
mahatmakanejeeves
(57,755 posts)Please unroll the thread. Thank you.
Roger Stone is taking the Fifth in response to a Congressional subpoena, let's do a 'splainer about how the Fifth applies to production of documents, since some of you want to know and because this is the life I've chosen.
/1
Link to tweet
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)Let's see how Republicans get away with things...are we going to force Stone? We should.
The new private Comey "interview" will have a released transcript, as part of the deal. Woop de doo.
Mc Mike
(9,116 posts)The FBI leader that Stone's crooked boss fired doesn't get that option, apparently.
AndJusticeForSome
(537 posts)He objects to the closed hearing; open it. Simple.
Eliot Rosewater
(31,138 posts)would lose their fucking minds and said person would have 24 hours to do as told or red would be the streets.
Filthy fucking hypocritical fucking scumbag republicans.