Probable Strzok, Page and Comey. Anyway, he goes on trial today. In laymen's terms, what are the charges? He tried to get the "hacked" emails from Assange? He didn't steal them. Doesn't seem like a crime. Doesn't even seem like a crime for Assange. Guccifer might have supplied the emails to Assange.
I don't know how to do that. (old school) Anyway, the story can be found on any of the major news sites. Was looking for someone who understands the case, and to share his or her opinion in laymen's terms.
Care to offer up a link from any one of the major news sites? Bonus points if you can back up your claim that he was framed or that any of the people you accused has something to do with it.
Its on CNN, the politics section. The charge is he tried to obtain info from WikiLeaks. Why is that a crime. No partisanship here, just wondering.
So provide a link. The least you can do since you’ve opened a thread in current events is provide an article for the basis of discussion.
On January 25, 2019, Stone was arrested at his Fort Lauderdale, Florida, home in connection with Robert Mueller's Special Counsel investigation and charged in an indictment with witness tampering, obstructing an official proceeding, and five counts of making false statements.
Here is the desired link - Roger Stone Is Innocent – Caught In The Path Of A Runaway Corrupt Special Prosecutor http://newswithviews.com/roger-ston...path-of-a-runaway-corrupt-special-prosecutor/ Unjustly criminally charged ! Charge Stacking - a typical Kangaroo tactic. Obscene actions Lives ruined - why ? because in third world puppet kangaroo justice systems the Gov't can get away with such tactics - in order to force people to say what they want.
Welcome to the forums. Enjoy the "banter" with some of our paid public union and media matters/CTR/Soros shills. To the topic? I can't find a crime.
Click on the address line (top of screen) to highlight it. Copy the highlighted address and paste it to your post.
Surely you can backup such a claim about your fellow posters. One would hate to think you’re just talking out your ass.
Yeah...if you knowingly buy stolen merchandise, you become part of the crime. Stone's indictment is available on the Internet...the public record. I believe one of the charges against him is that he told people that he had contacts with Assange and then denied it in FBI interviews. The importance of his trial is that if the prosecution can prove he lied and that he DID have contacts between Assange and the campaign, in regard to the timing of the release of the "stolen material," it becomes problematic for those in the campaign to whom he talked...that may have been Manafort or even "The Don" himself. The people who supplied the e-mails to Assange, I believe have already been indicted, with warrants for their arrest (the Russians).
Doesn't seem like it should be a crime. But prosecutors can make all sorts of things out to be a crime that shouldn't be. There are some Constitutional issues with the federal branch of government prosecuting someone for lying when the alleged false statement is not directly related to a crime. Also when you talk about information as "stolen merchandise", you are talking about criminalizing information, a very slippery slope.
I believe knowingly using stolen goods is a felony. Not sure which jurisdiction it would fall under. Isn't he being tried in the District of Columbia?
Not when those "goods" are information. How can you "own" information? Where does the First Amendment and publicising government abuse fit into this?
It is against federal law to steal people's e-mails (they are included in the category of "mail") or anyone who knowingly uses such stolen mail. See Title 18 U.S. Code Paragraph 1708. Felony, punishable by up to five years in prison. I believe I've read all of the charges against Stone could add up to 20 years, which at his age, would be pretty much the rest of his life.
Surely you can back on up to the hand gesture I'm making right now. There are about 20 LW posters here who are pros, and obviously so. Mostly post on political opinions and beliefs, but some here too. There was -one- RW years ago who might have been a "pay to post" but they don't post any more. Shills start multiple threads a day based on crap straight from an NEA, SEIU or other public union newsletter, or a media matters/CTR/foreign special interest group etc. daily "hit list." If you can't discern such obvious shilling, well sucks to be you. This place is a backwater, so the real shilling takes place on places like the reddit politics forum, where it would be obvious to a bright sixth grader. As much as I rant about it and question why it's allowed, it's probably counterproductive in the long run, so shills keep on shilling!
If you're not too old school to read an article on the net, you're not too old school to copy & paste the contents of the address bar into your OP. It's not our job to go fishing for it, it's your job to provide a direct link to what the hell you're talking about.
It’s one thing to claim that posters are citing questionable sources, but that’s not what you’re saying. You’re claiming they are paid to spread misinformation, which your post does not back up. I think it’s clear you’re talking out your ass.