I've lost all respect for the government with the ridiculous arrest of Roger Stone

[edward37]

Must agree but on the other side,,, better safe than sorry Who knows what that nut is capable of?

Better to buy steel from Russia than China, just sayin'.

and make Trumps pal Putin richer?? ,,,,,and wouldn't one think it was trump just trying to keep Putins mouth shut?

The Russian economy is 1/10th the size of the U.S.; they cannot compete with us militarily or economically. China, on the other hand, has the second largest economy in the world and is quite aggressive with its military expansion. And, didn't your Obabble-Messiah assure us all that Russia was So Yesterday back in 2012?

I can agree there economy is in the toilet but they have a pretty expansive military lots of nukes

Which they won't use as they can't afford to.

hope you're right

 

[H B Lowrie]

For you bri

Guess Who Is Likely To Profit If Trump Gets His Border Wall? RUSSIAN Steel

You're such a gullible moron. Do you actually believe Trump is doing all this solely so some Russian steel company and get the contract?

along with putin benefiting? and trump wants to build in russia Are you so stupid as to think trump is above that???

What did Obabble get for giving $ Billions to Iran?

You're not still on about Iran getting its own money back are you? Please tell us you're referring to something else.

It's truly dreary what you think passes for wit.

Just sayin'.

Darling your perceptual reality is what is hopelessly dreary.

 

[bodecea]

They should really reserve all that nonsense for genuinely dangerous criminals, there's no need to burst out all the military hardware for a guy who has no record of violence who is being arrested for non-violent process crimes.

The FBI will never recover it's reputation.

But I bet you think it's fine for cops to use MRAPs in rough neighborhoods huh.

It's highly unlikely the ghetto criminal is being arrested for process crimes ya dingbat.

And that has what to do with my question?

Good God you're an idiot!!!!
Who's is more likely to shoot it out with the cops?
A white collar criminal or a drug dealer?

So, cops are supposed to risk their lives based on "more likely"?

 

[H B Lowrie]

I read it. It doesn't say what you wish it did

It says precisely what I said it does. And the raid was to arrest him and get his devices, so that they can get his encrypted messages.

I'd suggest you read the entire excellent analysis by Andrew McCarthy, but that would be futile. Instead, I quote and link to if for the intellectually honest posters on the board.

That is, it’s a clown show. A despicable one, at that. Assange is an inveterate anti-American who has done incalculable damage to U.S. intelligence operations. How interesting that Robert Mueller led the FBI during those debacles and has special incentive to dig into the WikiLeaks–Kremlin connection. And how interesting that Assange was a heroic figure to the Left, and the bane of the national-security Right, before his apparent distaste for Hillary flipped the script (at least for blind Trump and Clinton partisans). In any event, we have Stone and Corsi racking their brains about how to ferret out what Assange has got, and to understand the timeline in which he might release it — hoping against hope that it will kill off the Clinton bid. And we have Credico, Stone’s radio-host pal, dealing directly with Assange (mainly by interviewing him), then passing information along to Stone while imploring Stone to keep his (Credico’s) name out of it.

Meanwhile, Stone tells his friends in the Trump campaign that he has heard WikiLeaks may have information that would damage Hillary Clinton’s campaign. After the hacked DNC emails are published in July 2016, a “senior Trump campaign official was directed to contact Stone about any additional releases and what other damaging information [WikiLeaks] had regarding the Clinton campaign.”

“Was directed”? Naturally, you’re thinking, “was directed by whom?” By Trump? Could be . . . Stone says it was not, but who knows? The point, however, is not who did the directing but why it was thought necessary to reach out to Stone. The Trump campaign had to ask Stone because it was in the dark.

Plainly, the campaign was not involved in the hacking, so it did not know what the Russians gave Assange. And it had no involvement with WikiLeaks’ operations, so it turned to Stone, who had held himself out as a knowledgeable source. But Stone, too, was unsure. Mueller alleges: “STONE thereafter told the Trump campaign about potential future releases of damaging material by [WikiLeaks]” (emphasis added). The prosecutor has to say “potential” because Stone did not have solid knowledge of Assange’s intentions — he tried to find out from others (including Credico, who had contact with Assange), but they did not know for sure exactly what Assange had and whether or when he would publish it.

Mind you, it is not a crime to know that bad people have damaging information about your political opponent, nor to try to nudge them to publish it at the time most opportune for your political favorite. Here, the Trump campaign did not even know what WikiLeaks had. Its best source was Stone, but, like the campaign, he was pressing sources who might have the information about WikiLeaks that he lacked. No surprise, then, that Mueller does not even allege that Stone was in a criminal conspiracy with WikiLeaks, let alone that Trump conspired with WikiLeaks — much less with Putin.

Instead, Stone is charged with seven counts of obstructing congressional investigations — by giving misleading testimony, withholding and lying about the existence of records responsive to a congressional request, lying about his communications with Credico, and attempting to influence Credico to lie or refuse to testify. These are serious charges, and while Stone may have cards to play on the allegations that he made misrepresentations (more on that another time), the special counsel appears to have daunting evidence that Stone tampered with Credico’s testimony – a charge that involves Stone’s cheesy exhortations that Credico ape the stonewalling of both Stone hero Richard Nixon and “Frank Pentangeli” (the Michael V. Gazzo character who famously develops witness-stand amnesia in Godfather II).

Nevertheless, that’s secondary as far as the country is concerned. The salient fact is that the evidence-based narrative from which Mueller derives these obstruction charges underscores that the president and his campaign were not complicit in Russia’s hacking of Democratic accounts. That’s not new news. It is completely consistent with indictments Mueller has been filing for a year....

Stone Indictment Underscores: No Trump-Russia Conspiracy | National Review

Assange is a journalist who embarrassed the american power structure. Neither he nor wikileaks has ever had to retract anything they're ever published. How does your corporate state media machine stack up to that? "An inveterate anti-American" means nothing more that "revealed too much about how america operates".

Wikileaks is irrelevant. The Trump campaign did not collude with either Wikileaks or the Russians, as is quite clear in the Stone indictment.

Your copied material brought up Assange love, not me.

 

[Olde Europe]

/—-/ The Swamp is warning anyone who is thinking of working on Trumps re-election that they will be targeted and destroyed the same way.

That was supposed to be The Deep State - remember, FBI, law enforcement, intelligence services: Deep State? I mean, being paranoid is bad enough. Being confused about the enemies list on top of that, that's harsh.

/—-/ The only one confused is you. Trump promised to drain the swamp. Separating the Deep State from the Swamp is like the fine line between The Waffen SS and the Wehrmacht

Now there's a laugh. What we're discussing here is the Deep State arresting yet another Goober crook, full military gear and all, or, in your narrative, "warning anyone who is thinking of working on Trumps re-election that they will be targeted and destroyed the same way."

BTW, Trump IS The Swamp incarnate. He lied to you about draining it, and you swallowed and swallowed, and still swallow.

What I genuinely cannot understand is, Trump and his midgets lie to you on a daily basis. They humiliate you. Then you proceed to believe him, against common sense and all available evidence, and humiliate yourself even more. Really, do you never tire of that, ever?

 

[H B Lowrie]

They should really reserve all that nonsense for genuinely dangerous criminals, there's no need to burst out all the military hardware for a guy who has no record of violence who is being arrested for non-violent process crimes.

The FBI will never recover it's reputation.

But I bet you think it's fine for cops to use MRAPs in rough neighborhoods huh.

It's highly unlikely the ghetto criminal is being arrested for process crimes ya dingbat.

And that has what to do with my question?

Good God you're an idiot!!!!
Who's is more likely to shoot it out with the cops?
A white collar criminal or a drug dealer?

So, cops are supposed to risk their lives based on "more likely"?

Hell no, cops are not even supposed to have to be scared, they can murder you if they are.

 

[Cellblock2429]

/—-/ The Swamp is warning anyone who is thinking of working on Trumps re-election that they will be targeted and destroyed the same way.

That was supposed to be The Deep State - remember, FBI, law enforcement, intelligence services: Deep State? I mean, being paranoid is bad enough. Being confused about the enemies list on top of that, that's harsh.

/—-/ The only one confused is you. Trump promised to drain the swamp. Separating the Deep State from the Swamp is like the fine line between The Waffen SS and the Wehrmacht

Now there's a laugh. What we're discussing here is the Deep State arresting yet another Goober crook, full military gear and all, or, in your narrative, "warning anyone who is thinking of working on Trumps re-election that they will be targeted and destroyed the same way."

BTW, Trump IS The Swamp incarnate. He lied to you about draining it, and you swallowed and swallowed, and still swallow.

What I genuinely cannot understand is, Trump and his midgets lie to you on a daily basis. They humiliate you. Then you proceed to believe him, against common sense and all available evidence, and humiliate yourself even more. Really, do you never tire of that, ever?

/----/ Because you say so. OK Spunky.

 

[Polishprince]

They should really reserve all that nonsense for genuinely dangerous criminals, there's no need to burst out all the military hardware for a guy who has no record of violence who is being arrested for non-violent process crimes.

The FBI will never recover it's reputation.

Maybe the FBI had information to show that Mr. Stone was extraordinarily dangerous?

If I was serving time with Stone, I would consider the amount of caution and deference the FBI showed toward him and decide not to **** with him, regardless of how un-tough he may look.

 

[boedicca]

I read it. It doesn't say what you wish it did

It says precisely what I said it does. And the raid was to arrest him and get his devices, so that they can get his encrypted messages.

I'd suggest you read the entire excellent analysis by Andrew McCarthy, but that would be futile. Instead, I quote and link to if for the intellectually honest posters on the board.

That is, it’s a clown show. A despicable one, at that. Assange is an inveterate anti-American who has done incalculable damage to U.S. intelligence operations. How interesting that Robert Mueller led the FBI during those debacles and has special incentive to dig into the WikiLeaks–Kremlin connection. And how interesting that Assange was a heroic figure to the Left, and the bane of the national-security Right, before his apparent distaste for Hillary flipped the script (at least for blind Trump and Clinton partisans). In any event, we have Stone and Corsi racking their brains about how to ferret out what Assange has got, and to understand the timeline in which he might release it — hoping against hope that it will kill off the Clinton bid. And we have Credico, Stone’s radio-host pal, dealing directly with Assange (mainly by interviewing him), then passing information along to Stone while imploring Stone to keep his (Credico’s) name out of it.

Meanwhile, Stone tells his friends in the Trump campaign that he has heard WikiLeaks may have information that would damage Hillary Clinton’s campaign. After the hacked DNC emails are published in July 2016, a “senior Trump campaign official was directed to contact Stone about any additional releases and what other damaging information [WikiLeaks] had regarding the Clinton campaign.”

“Was directed”? Naturally, you’re thinking, “was directed by whom?” By Trump? Could be . . . Stone says it was not, but who knows? The point, however, is not who did the directing but why it was thought necessary to reach out to Stone. The Trump campaign had to ask Stone because it was in the dark.

Plainly, the campaign was not involved in the hacking, so it did not know what the Russians gave Assange. And it had no involvement with WikiLeaks’ operations, so it turned to Stone, who had held himself out as a knowledgeable source. But Stone, too, was unsure. Mueller alleges: “STONE thereafter told the Trump campaign about potential future releases of damaging material by [WikiLeaks]” (emphasis added). The prosecutor has to say “potential” because Stone did not have solid knowledge of Assange’s intentions — he tried to find out from others (including Credico, who had contact with Assange), but they did not know for sure exactly what Assange had and whether or when he would publish it.

Mind you, it is not a crime to know that bad people have damaging information about your political opponent, nor to try to nudge them to publish it at the time most opportune for your political favorite. Here, the Trump campaign did not even know what WikiLeaks had. Its best source was Stone, but, like the campaign, he was pressing sources who might have the information about WikiLeaks that he lacked. No surprise, then, that Mueller does not even allege that Stone was in a criminal conspiracy with WikiLeaks, let alone that Trump conspired with WikiLeaks — much less with Putin.

Instead, Stone is charged with seven counts of obstructing congressional investigations — by giving misleading testimony, withholding and lying about the existence of records responsive to a congressional request, lying about his communications with Credico, and attempting to influence Credico to lie or refuse to testify. These are serious charges, and while Stone may have cards to play on the allegations that he made misrepresentations (more on that another time), the special counsel appears to have daunting evidence that Stone tampered with Credico’s testimony – a charge that involves Stone’s cheesy exhortations that Credico ape the stonewalling of both Stone hero Richard Nixon and “Frank Pentangeli” (the Michael V. Gazzo character who famously develops witness-stand amnesia in Godfather II).

Nevertheless, that’s secondary as far as the country is concerned. The salient fact is that the evidence-based narrative from which Mueller derives these obstruction charges underscores that the president and his campaign were not complicit in Russia’s hacking of Democratic accounts. That’s not new news. It is completely consistent with indictments Mueller has been filing for a year....

Stone Indictment Underscores: No Trump-Russia Conspiracy | National Review

Assange is a journalist who embarrassed the american power structure. Neither he nor wikileaks has ever had to retract anything they're ever published. How does your corporate state media machine stack up to that? "An inveterate anti-American" means nothing more that "revealed too much about how america operates".

Wikileaks is irrelevant. The Trump campaign did not collude with either Wikileaks or the Russians, as is quite clear in the Stone indictment.

Your copied material brought up Assange love, not me.

Condolences on your dual lack of reading comprehension and critical thinking abilities. For those who possess both, Clinton Pollster Mark Penn has quite an astute assessment of the Stone Cold Political Hit:

Robert Mueller has, once again, found the man first and then the crimes created by the investigation. It looks to me like this is likely just about the final piece of his investigation, but only Mueller knows that for sure.

The indictment reveals that Stone knew absolutely nothing before the initial public drops about what was going on with WikiLeaks. In fact, afterward, he was trying to find out through two of his connections whether WikiLeaks had more material it was going to leak and when it was going to leak that. For reasons that are unclear, Stone hid the name of his second source. Maybe he just promised anonymity to Jerome Corsi, a well-known conspiracy theorist, and was trying to keep that promise. Maybe Stone thought Corsi was so discredited (he is banned from most media) that he did not want to admit he was relying on someone no one believes about anything.

(snip)

Stone will have an opportunity in court, as a matter of law, to win or lose on the specifics of how material his omissions were and why he was trying to keep Corsi out of his testimony. He is a first-time offender with no criminal record, and it appears after an extensive investigation of his personal, business and family ties, that this is all the Mueller team came up with.

This does not in any way prove collusion, any more than Hillary’s team colluded by seeking damaging information on Trump. And, because Stone broadcast everything publicly, this is far less material than something like the secret origins and undercover press briefings of the Steele dossier that influenced the FBI.

But it is another in a series of events that questions whether our legal system has devolved to that of Venezuela’s — one in which opposition political leaders are targeted for takedown and, if you’re on the “good” side, you simply smile your way through as the criminal legal referrals against you are tossed into the garbage can.

Mueller’s selective prosecution of Stone, Venezuelan-style

 

[bodecea]

The FBI has become a joke.

It use to be beyond reproach for the most part but ever since Obama was President it has become a major part of The Swamp.

Hopefully before he gets out of office Trump can get control of those sonofabitches.

I think we need to cut the FBI's budget by 90%. They need to stick to prosecuting actual law breakers, not persecuting political opponents of the administration.

I'm sure Putin would approve your message.

 

[bodecea]

Oh no.

There is also the Trump Tower in Moscow.

Money laundering.

Giving the Russian classified material.

Funny that Republicans constantly insist it's the Democrats who work with the Russians.

Now we know that was a diversion. A distraction. It was actually Trump and the GOP working with the Russians, no, not "with them", "FOR them".

It's fascinating the way you paranoid morons jump from a perfectly legal activity to assume criminality. Assumptions are all you have.

To a Russian spy, anti America and damaging this nation is perfectly legal activity. That much is clear.
It even makes sense.

Well, I have to admit it hasn't become illegal to be a Democrat yet.

Not for lack of trying.

The Dims have been trying to make being a Republican illegal, you ******* dumbass.

 

[bodecea]

I'm one myself so no

Would you take on two cops in their thirties?

not even one but then again I'm not insane

And you think Stone is?

I think the substantial people should be dealt with by the law just like "nobodies" are.

/——-/ Crimials by reason of being Republican

Victims....always victims.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

They should really reserve all that nonsense for genuinely dangerous criminals, there's no need to burst out all the military hardware for a guy who has no record of violence who is being arrested for non-violent process crimes.

The FBI will never recover it's reputation.

But I bet you think it's fine for cops to use MRAPs in rough neighborhoods huh.

It's highly unlikely the ghetto criminal is being arrested for process crimes ya dingbat.

And that has what to do with my question?

Good God you're an idiot!!!!
Who's is more likely to shoot it out with the cops?
A white collar criminal or a drug dealer?

So, cops are supposed to risk their lives based on "more likely"?

You really believe a geriatric politician is going to resort to gun play with the police over some minor bullshit?
Holy shit!!!! Being a dyke certainly is a mental disorder!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

over some minor bullshit?

Well, allow me to correct you here, since these charges could easily put him in prison for the rest of his life.

 

[bodecea]

That was supposed to be The Deep State - remember, FBI, law enforcement, intelligence services: Deep State? I mean, being paranoid is bad enough. Being confused about the enemies list on top of that, that's harsh.

/—-/ The only one confused is you. Trump promised to drain the swamp. Separating the Deep State from the Swamp is like the fine line between The Waffen SS and the Wehrmacht

Trump’s Watered-Down Ethics Rules Let a Lobbyist Help Run an Agency He Lobbied — ProPublica


Trump Campaigned Against Lobbyists, but Now They’re on His Transition Team


Is Donald Trump Draining the Swamp?


Donors and lobbyists already shaping Trump’s ‘drain the swamp’ administration - The Washington Post


https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-...ry-lobbyist-to-hud-transition-team-1480453288


Donald Trump Puts Coal Lobbyist in Charge of Prosecuting Environmental Crimes


Only Lobbyists Can Help Trump ‘Drain the Swamp’




Another of Don’s Swamp Rats Bails …


... just before publication of this New Yorker article. Must be "fake" n shit.


Icahn’s role was novel. He would be an adviser with a formal title, but he would not receive a salary, and he would not be required to divest himself of any of his holdings, or to make any disclosures about potential conflicts of interest. “Carl Icahn will be advising the President in his individual capacity,” Trump’s transition team asserted.


In the months after the election, the stock price of CVR, Icahn’s refiner, nearly doubled—a surge that is difficult to explain without acknowledging the appointment of the company’s lead shareholder to a White House position. The rally meant a personal benefit for Icahn, at least on paper, of half a billion dollars. There was an expectation in the market—an expectation created, in part, by Icahn’s own remarks—that, with Trump in the White House and Icahn playing consigliere, the rules were about to change, and not just at the E.P.A. Icahn’s empire ranges across many economic sectors, from energy to pharmaceuticals to auto supplies to mining, and all of them are governed by the types of regulations about which he would now potentially be advising Trump.


Janet McCabe, who left the E.P.A. in January, and now works at the Environmental Law and Policy Center, told me, “I’m not naïve. People in business try to influence the government. But the job of the government is to serve the American people, not the specific business interests of the President’s friends. To think that you have somebody with that kind of agenda bending the President’s ear is troubling.”


Conflicts of interest have been a defining trait of the Trump Administration. The President has not only refused to release his tax returns; he has declined to divest from his companies, instead putting them in a trust managed by his children. Questions have emerged about the ongoing business ties of his daughter and son-in-law, Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner, who, since Trump took office, have reaped nearly two hundred million dollars from the Trump hotel in Washington, D.C., and from other investments. Although Trump promised to “drain the swamp,” he has assembled a Cabinet of ultra-rich Americans, including two billionaires: Betsy DeVos, the Secretary of Education, and Wilbur Ross, the Secretary of Commerce.


But Icahn is worth more than the Trump family and all the members of the Cabinet combined—and, with no constraint on his license to counsel the President on regulations that might help his businesses, he was poised to become much richer. Robert Weissman, who runs the watchdog group Public Citizen, told me, “This kind of self-enrichment and influence over decision-making by an individual mogul who is simultaneously inside and outside the Administration is unprecedented. In terms of corruption, there’s nothing like it. Maybe ever.” In conversations with me, financiers who have worked with Icahn described his appointment as a kind of corporate raid on Washington. One said, “It’s the cheapest takeover Carl’s ever done.”


Carl Icahn’s Failed Raid on Washington

/—-/ I read every word and link. You forgot Area 51, the Grassy Knoll shooter, and the Tri Lateral Commission Plus steel don’t melt.

You're a phony hack, that's all. No swamp draining, merely restocked it like they all do. Same as it ever was. Count the Goldman Sachs operatives in the white house. Nothing but typical.

/——/ And my favorite libtard comeback: “Count all da votes -Gore winds.”

winds?

 

[bodecea]

They should really reserve all that nonsense for genuinely dangerous criminals, there's no need to burst out all the military hardware for a guy who has no record of violence who is being arrested for non-violent process crimes.

The FBI will never recover it's reputation.

The Feds lost my trust a long time ago.

I guess you don't believe in fathers' rights.

 

[bodecea]

We are here to serve and to protect!

Trust us!

I remember one conservative republican triggered by that.......

 

[H B Lowrie]

But I bet you think it's fine for cops to use MRAPs in rough neighborhoods huh.

It's highly unlikely the ghetto criminal is being arrested for process crimes ya dingbat.

And that has what to do with my question?

Good God you're an idiot!!!!
Who's is more likely to shoot it out with the cops?
A white collar criminal or a drug dealer?

So, cops are supposed to risk their lives based on "more likely"?

You really believe a geriatric politician is going to resort to gun play with the police over some minor bullshit?
Holy shit!!!! Being a dyke certainly is a mental disorder!

Doesn't matter. Poor folk get killed by the police all the time in those situations.

Make a decision. Either the aristocracy is subject to the same legal treatment as everyone else, or we are simply NOT a "nation of laws".

 

[bodecea]

You believe it's proper because you're a Trump hating douchebag, and for no other reason. If they had executed him on the spot, you have have approved of it. There is no violation of our Constitutional rights you wouldn't approve of so long as Republicans are the victims.

There was no violation of anyone's constitution rights. Don't you know anything about standard operating procedure? Are you really the same age as your avatar? Would you approve of a wanted individual being given time to destroy evidence?
Oh, gee. Call a drug dealer and tell him that you are coming to arrest him, but give him time to flush his drugs down the toilet. Grow up.

I think the complaint was that was a whole lot of agents in riot gear with guns dripping off them for one guy in his pj's.

Must agree but on the other side,,, better safe than sorry Who knows what that nut is capable of?

Chairman Mao called. He wants you to join his Red Guard.

better red than dead ,,,,,lol

Seems to be the conservative republican mantra now.

 

[Polishprince]

They should really reserve all that nonsense for genuinely dangerous criminals, there's no need to burst out all the military hardware for a guy who has no record of violence who is being arrested for non-violent process crimes.

The FBI will never recover it's reputation.

The Feds lost my trust a long time ago.

I guess you don't believe in fathers' rights.

Does a Father have the right to subject his children to Hell on Earth in a Shithole like Cuba? Especially when another alternative is available.