More Mueller news: Whitaker, Treason, and Farage.

[GrosseAdmiralFox]

[youtube]http://youtu.be/eTqnAvwisaY[/youtube]
Yeah...

[GrosseAdmiralFox]

Michael Cohen subpoenaed by Senate Intelligence committee - CNN, January 24, 2019, 11:27 AM EST, updated 11:54 AM EST

President Donald Trump's former personal lawyer Michael Cohen was subpoenaed Thursday to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee in mid-February, according to a source close to Cohen.



It is not clear how Cohen will respond. The source said that Cohen has the same concerns regarding the safety of his family that led him to postpone his scheduled public appearance before the House Oversight Committee next month.

...

House Oversight Chairman Elijah Cummings of Maryland and House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff of California both said this week that they expect Cohen to testify before their panels — House Oversight in public and House Intelligence behind closed doors.

Well, it has begun ladies and gents.

[The Romulan Republic]

The most significant thing here is that Cohen is basically alleging that Trump and Giuliani threatened his family (specifically, Trump threatened investigations into his father in law) in order to intimidating him. As a number of media pundits/commentators have noted, this is basically the President publicly behaving like a mob boss (which is, ultimately, exactly what this President is).

Also... Trump may (arguably) be immune to indictment while in office, but Rudi Giuliani sure as fuck isn't.

[Crazedwraith]

Breaking: Trump ally Stone faces seven charges

Long-time Trump ally and former campaign adviser Roger Stone has been arrested in Florida, charged with seven counts in the Mueller probe.

Mr Stone will appear in court later in the city of Fort Lauderdale.

The indictment includes one count of obstruction of an official proceeding, five counts of false statements, and one count of witness-tampering.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller is investigating alleged collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign.

[Crossroads Inc.]

A pretty in-depth article from NPR, linking the first part here.

Updated at 8:13 a.m. ET

Roger Stone, the longtime Republican political operator and confidant of President Trump, has been arrested in Florida after being indicted on seven counts including obstruction, witness tampering and making false statements in connection with the Russian attack on the 2016 election.

Stone is scheduled to make an initial appearance at 11 a.m. at the federal courthouse in Fort Lauderdale, Fla.

The indictment, returned by a grand jury impaneled by Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller, is the first to charge an American in connection with one of the best-known aspects of Russia's attack on the 2016 election: the theft and release of emails that embarrassed political targets including significant figures in the Democratic Party.

In the indictment, the special counsel's office alleges that Stone was in regular contact both with WikiLeaks, listed as "Organization 1," and the Trump campaign during critical times around the release of emails stolen from the Democratic National Committee and a top Clinton campaign official.

"After the July 22, 2016 release of stolen DNC emails by Organization 1, a senior Trump Campaign official was directed to contact Stone about any additional releases and what other damaging information Organization 1 had regarding the Clinton Campaign," the indictment says.

"Stone thereafter told the Trump Campaign about potential future releases of damaging material by Organization 1," the indictment also says.

In other words: Stone told the Trump campaign that WikiLeaks had more ammunition for use against Democrats, prosecutors allege.

On October 4, 2016, WikiLeaks was set to make a major announcement that wound up being a bust. The indictment describes people connected with the Trump campaign — including a senior official — reaching out to Stone to ask what happened.

Stone reassured them that WikiLeaks would come through and the material it released next would be damaging to Hillary Clinton, prosecutors write. Then, three days later, at a particularly dark moment for the Trump campaign, WikiLeaks released the first of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta's emails.

"On or about October 7, 2016, Organization 1 released the first set of emails stolen from the Clinton campaign chairman. Shortly after Organization 1's release, an associate of the high-ranking Trump campaign official sent a text message to STONE that read 'well done,' " the indictment says.

Continued prosecutors: "In subsequent conversations with senior Trump Campaign officials, Stone claimed credit for having correctly predicted the October 7, 2016 release."

The Stone indictment is also important because it shows Mueller wants to try to prove that at least one person in the Trump campaign's orbit colluded with Russian's election interference. In 2016, WikiLeaks was fencing material stolen by Russian cyber-operatives, according to earlier charges brought by the special counsel's office in its investigation of the attack on the presidential election.

WikiLeaks has denied it obtained the material it released from the Russian government. And prior to his arrest and indictment this week, Stone has repeatedly denied that he conspired with the Russians who attacked the 2016 election.

Listening to NPR this morning, they made it very clear that Stone represents, if not the "Highest" level officer, he is by far the "Closest" to Trump of anyone else so far indicted. The two have been business partners for DECADES and have had countless business deal together NPR reported. Basically Stone is someone that, even if Trump TRIED to dismiss as "Hardly knew him" there is 30 years worth of deals to say other wise.
Depending on what else comes out in terms of who in the Trump Campaign was in contact with Stone after he (cough) "Left the Campaign" this indictment is so far about as close as you can get to straight up showing that, Not just the camping has been doing collusion, but that Russia has been colluding with the campaign via WikiLeaks.

[GrosseAdmiralFox]

A pretty in-depth article from NPR, linking the first part here.

Updated at 8:13 a.m. ET

Roger Stone, the longtime Republican political operator and confidant of President Trump, has been arrested in Florida after being indicted on seven counts including obstruction, witness tampering and making false statements in connection with the Russian attack on the 2016 election.

Stone is scheduled to make an initial appearance at 11 a.m. at the federal courthouse in Fort Lauderdale, Fla.

The indictment, returned by a grand jury impaneled by Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller, is the first to charge an American in connection with one of the best-known aspects of Russia's attack on the 2016 election: the theft and release of emails that embarrassed political targets including significant figures in the Democratic Party.

In the indictment, the special counsel's office alleges that Stone was in regular contact both with WikiLeaks, listed as "Organization 1," and the Trump campaign during critical times around the release of emails stolen from the Democratic National Committee and a top Clinton campaign official.

"After the July 22, 2016 release of stolen DNC emails by Organization 1, a senior Trump Campaign official was directed to contact Stone about any additional releases and what other damaging information Organization 1 had regarding the Clinton Campaign," the indictment says.

"Stone thereafter told the Trump Campaign about potential future releases of damaging material by Organization 1," the indictment also says.

In other words: Stone told the Trump campaign that WikiLeaks had more ammunition for use against Democrats, prosecutors allege.

On October 4, 2016, WikiLeaks was set to make a major announcement that wound up being a bust. The indictment describes people connected with the Trump campaign — including a senior official — reaching out to Stone to ask what happened.

Stone reassured them that WikiLeaks would come through and the material it released next would be damaging to Hillary Clinton, prosecutors write. Then, three days later, at a particularly dark moment for the Trump campaign, WikiLeaks released the first of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta's emails.

"On or about October 7, 2016, Organization 1 released the first set of emails stolen from the Clinton campaign chairman. Shortly after Organization 1's release, an associate of the high-ranking Trump campaign official sent a text message to STONE that read 'well done,' " the indictment says.

Continued prosecutors: "In subsequent conversations with senior Trump Campaign officials, Stone claimed credit for having correctly predicted the October 7, 2016 release."

The Stone indictment is also important because it shows Mueller wants to try to prove that at least one person in the Trump campaign's orbit colluded with Russian's election interference. In 2016, WikiLeaks was fencing material stolen by Russian cyber-operatives, according to earlier charges brought by the special counsel's office in its investigation of the attack on the presidential election.

WikiLeaks has denied it obtained the material it released from the Russian government. And prior to his arrest and indictment this week, Stone has repeatedly denied that he conspired with the Russians who attacked the 2016 election.

Listening to NPR this morning, they made it very clear that Stone represents, if not the "Highest" level officer, he is by far the "Closest" to Trump of anyone else so far indicted. The two have been business partners for DECADES and have had countless business deal together NPR reported. Basically Stone is someone that, even if Trump TRIED to dismiss as "Hardly knew him" there is 30 years worth of deals to say other wise.
Depending on what else comes out in terms of who in the Trump Campaign was in contact with Stone after he (cough) "Left the Campaign" this indictment is so far about as close as you can get to straight up showing that, Not just the camping has been doing collusion, but that Russia has been colluding with the campaign via WikiLeaks.

Yeah, and people have been assuming that this investigation is treated anything other than a mob takedown. That and Stone has been taken into custody before dawn, which happened to Cohen.

[The Romulan Republic]

Mueller continues to show how deep and extensive the ties between the Trump campaign, Wikileaks, and Russia really were.

[GrosseAdmiralFox]

Mueller continues to show how deep and extensive the ties between the Trump campaign, Wikileaks, and Russia really were.

Yeah, but he'll have to get a good portion of the GOP under arrest for sedition and conspiracy and somehow neuter/eliminate FOX news and friends.

[GrosseAdmiralFox]

Early this morning at 6 AM Eastern Standard Time, Roger Stone was indicted by Mueller and arrested by the FBI. Also, it has become something of a meme...

Roger Stone indicted on charges brought by special counsel - CNN, January 25, 2019, 6:34 AM EST

Longtime Donald Trump associate Roger Stone has been indicted by a grand jury on charges brought by special counsel Robert Mueller. He was arrested by the FBI Friday morning, his lawyer tells CNN.



Stone is indicted on seven counts, including one count of obstruction of an official proceeding, five counts of false statements, and one count of witness tampering.



Law enforcement raided Stone's house, and CNN witnessed uniformed and armed law enforcement approach his house just after 6 a.m. ET in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.



Pounding on his door, one agent said: "FBI. Open the door."



Stone opened the door.

[The Romulan Republic]

Mueller continues to show how deep and extensive the ties between the Trump campaign, Wikileaks, and Russia really were.

Yeah, but he'll have to get a good portion of the GOP under arrest for sedition and conspiracy and somehow neuter/eliminate FOX news and friends.

Remember, Mueller's job is not to eliminate the GOP- its to investigate specific crimes. I have no doubt he will bring charges wherever he feels that it is warranted, with strong evidence to back them up, but he's not a magical cure all to defeat conservatism forever. That's a social problem, ultimately, not a legal one.

[GrosseAdmiralFox]

Remember, Mueller's job is not to eliminate the GOP- its to investigate specific crimes. I have no doubt he will bring charges wherever he feels that it is warranted, with strong evidence to back them up, but he's not a magical cure all to defeat conservatism forever. That's a social problem, ultimately, not a legal one.

The problem is that the GOP being itself is a self-propagating one thanks to FOX News and friends, as long as they continue to air, we will not get any rest. FOX News and friends are propaganda outlets and have created media bubbles. You'll have to burst those bubbles by dismantling the GOP propaganda machine and take as many of the GOP leadership along with it.

[The Romulan Republic]

Remember, Mueller's job is not to eliminate the GOP- its to investigate specific crimes. I have no doubt he will bring charges wherever he feels that it is warranted, with strong evidence to back them up, but he's not a magical cure all to defeat conservatism forever. That's a social problem, ultimately, not a legal one.

The problem is that the GOP being itself is a self-propagating one thanks to FOX News and friends, as long as they continue to air, we will not get any rest. FOX News and friends are propaganda outlets and have created media bubbles. You'll have to burst those bubbles by dismantling the GOP propaganda machine and take as many of the GOP leadership along with it.

Are you suggesting that Fox News and other Right-wing media should be banned from the air? Because as much as I loath them, that would be flagrantly unconstitutional on a level even Trump hasn't really managed to reach yet.

[Jub]

Are you suggesting that Fox News and other Right-wing media should be banned from the air? Because as much as I loath them, that would be flagrantly unconstitutional on a level even Trump hasn't really managed to reach yet.

We could ban opinion from the news and only allow a factual and, likely very dry, reporting of known facts. That would probably kill both FOX and CNN and I wouldn't mourn the loss of either.

[The Romulan Republic]

Are you suggesting that Fox News and other Right-wing media should be banned from the air? Because as much as I loath them, that would be flagrantly unconstitutional on a level even Trump hasn't really managed to reach yet.

We could ban opinion from the news and only allow a factual and, likely very dry, reporting of known facts. That would probably kill both FOX and CNN and I wouldn't mourn the loss of either.

You and I both know that what is "known facts" can be a very contentious topic. All that would happen is that the "facts" would end up being determined by whoever was currently in power.

[Jub]

You and I both know that what is "known facts" can be a very contentious topic. All that would happen is that the "facts" would end up being determined by whoever was currently in power.

Yeah, but a 1% haircut to your gross income every time your broadcast a D next to somebody disgraced who should have an R next to their name will still help. The same could go for having to state the number of scientists polled as well as airing their full statements everytime you want to report on something like climate change. Just make them tell the whole news, no sound bites if you want to show somebody speaking you have to show at least 60 seconds of uncut speech. Slow everything down and force people to watch and absorb or tune out.

[GrosseAdmiralFox]

Are you suggesting that Fox News and other Right-wing media should be banned from the air? Because as much as I loath them, that would be flagrantly unconstitutional on a level even Trump hasn't really managed to reach yet.

Here's the thing, our technological context has shown us that if we allow this to fester (and we have for a long time), then we'll continue to return to this again and again.

Things like rights and freedoms are fluid in definition and rely on the technological context we have. Assumptions and preconceptions that we meatbags have are only designed to be annihilated or shattered by the technological context. With our technological context, what is freedom of the press, freedom of information, privacy, among others have changed their definitions and we haven't shifted our definitions to match because of assuming that rights and freedoms are solid social-political constructs.

We could ban opinion from the news and only allow a factual and, likely very dry, reporting of known facts. That would probably kill both FOX and CNN and I wouldn't mourn the loss of either.

CNN won't die because it's far more factual than most, that's FOX New's and associates propaganda talking.

[Imperial528]

There is always the FCC Fairness Doctrine. Fox News' more propaganda based shows rely on being able to set up strawmen by selecting opposing view guests who are unable to effectively counter the view Fox wants to push, thereby giving their viewers the impression that there is in fact a decided right and wrong that aligns with what Fox says when really it was rigged from the start.

The original Fairness Doctrine would already be a good start at neutralizing that, as it would allow adequately informed persons to challenge shows like Fox News. It would also help against broadcasting groups like Sinclair, who are known for pushing conservative-slant news programs. May even do a number on the talk shows like Limbaugh. But I suspect it would need a level of updating to get around some of the more insidious stuff.

[U.P. Cinnabar]

Except the Fairness Doctrine hasn't been law, since at least the mid-1980s. And, was opposed by neo-conservatives.

[Imperial528]

That's why I brought it up. Fox News owes much of its existence to the removal of the Doctrine.

[U.P. Cinnabar]

That's why I brought it up. Fox News owes much of its existence to the removal of the Doctrine.

Okay. Your last post confused me there; I thought you thought it was still a thing. Apologies.

[The Romulan Republic]

By mutual agreement, Vympel and I are taking this discussion reg. Collusion Denialism and Whataboutism over here:

Since you seemed determine to debate it, contrary to Resistance delusions, not a single of the 'numerous detailed indictments' issued in this on-going farce have involved Americans being indicted for conspiring with Russians in relation to the election.

Not a single. Solitary. One. That's simply an objective fact, sorry.

No American has been indicted yet for conspiring with Russia in the election, and no one has claimed otherwise (at least not here), your despicable and dishonest attempts to discredit the entire opposition to Trump* by ad hominem not withstanding.

They have, however:

-Indicted dozens of Russian nationals and companies tied to the Russian government and Russian intelligence for election interference. Something which you and your fellow defenders of Putin also previously denied occurred, until the evidence became so overwhelming that you had to shift your tack to "okay maybe Russia interfered, but there was no collusion"- which incidentally also proves that this isn't even about defending Russia against the big bad West any more. At this point, the only people your arguments are defending is the Trumpers, presumably because you're too stubborn to admit that you were wrong.

-Referenced unnamed Americans who assisted the GRU in its money laundering and election interference (I can only presume that more indictments will likely be forthcoming).

-In the case of the Roger Stone indictment, directly described Roger Stone's coordination with Wikileaks at the instruction of high up Trump Campaign officials (Wikileaks was at the time acting as a tool for the GRU to disseminate hacked dirt on the Clinton campaign).

-Indicted several members of the Trump campaign/transition team for their efforts to interfere with the investigation.

Do you deny any of these things?

Appeals to nebulous 'leaked quotes'

There's nothing "nebulous" about it. Don Jr.'s emails about the Trump Tower meeting, among other sources, make it quite clear that high-level campaign members were meeting with Russians in the hopes of acquiring material to use against Clinton. Do you deny this?

and the dumbass 'ties' that the Resistance draws on its Glenn Beck blackboards while spitting and raving like clowns - that's not actually a real thing.

"The Resistance" is just like Glenn Beck! Both Sides! Both Sides!


*For someone who claims he's not a Trumper, you sure do a bang-up job of echoing their propaganda and targetting their opponents on a lot of key points.

[Vympel]

No American has been indicted yet for conspiring with Russia in the election, and no one has claimed otherwise (at least not here), your despicable and dishonest attempts to discredit the entire opposition to Trump* by ad hominem not withstanding.

No, not the entire opposition to Trump, just the totally useless section of the opposition who think they live in a fucking Clive Cussler novel.

They have, however:

-Indicted dozens of Russian nationals and companies tied to the Russian government and Russian intelligence for election interference. Something which you and your fellow defenders of Putin also previously denied occurred, until the evidence became so overwhelming that you had to shift your tack to "okay maybe Russia interfered, but there was no collusion"- which incidentally also proves that this isn't even about defending Russia against the big bad West any more. At this point, the only people your arguments are defending is the Trumpers, presumably because you're too stubborn to admit that you were wrong.

This is a nonsensical claim. Indictments aren't evidence, they're mere assertions. US indictments will actually lead to a trial or a guilty / not guilty plea. These indictments are inherently political because they will never be tested in court. So no, your fantasy "evidence became so overwhelming so you shifted" assertion is not a thing that has happened?

-Referenced unnamed Americans who assisted the GRU in its money laundering and election interference (I can only presume that more indictments will likely be forthcoming).

The 'election interference' they can't even prove occurred, you mean.

-In the case of the Roger Stone indictment, directly described Roger Stone's coordination with Wikileaks at the instruction of high up Trump Campaign officials (Wikileaks was at the time acting as a tool for the GRU to disseminate hacked dirt on the Clinton campaign).

First of all, the assertion that Wikileaks is a tool of the GRU is totally unproven. There's zero evidence that this is true. None. It's just the US establishment seeking to an organisation that repeatedly exposes their dirty laundry. Second, even if it was true, for this to get you anywhere you'd have to show that Stone 'knew' that wikileaks was a GRU front.

Further, even if hypothetically Donald Trump was to directly ask Roger Stone to get information on wikileaks releases, that is not a criminal act, because no involvement in any underlying crime (noting of course that if Wikileaks was merely provided information by a third party it didn't commit a crime, either) is alleged in the indictment.

-Indicted several members of the Trump campaign/transition team for their efforts to interfere with the investigation.

You mean those mere process crimes, i.e. the meaningless 'lying to investigators' charges? So? No one ever said that the Trump campaign/transition team was smart. That goes precisely nowhere to buttressing your fantasy 'collusion' narrative.

There's nothing "nebulous" about it. Don Jr.'s emails about the Trump Tower meeting, among other sources, make it quite clear that high-level campaign members were meeting with Russians in the hopes of acquiring material to use against Clinton. Do you deny this?

So what? That's not a criminal act.

"The Resistance" is just like Glenn Beck! Both Sides! Both Sides!

No, just your side at the moment. Glenn Beck doesn't do that blackboard schtick anymore.

*For someone who claims he's not a Trumper, you sure do a bang-up job of echoing their propaganda and targetting their opponents on a lot of key points.

"You must love Saddam!"

[GrosseAdmiralFox]

Yeah... it tells you something...

[aerius]

-Indicted several members of the Trump campaign/transition team for their efforts to interfere with the investigation.

You mean those mere process crimes, i.e. the meaningless 'lying to investigators' charges? So? No one ever said that the Trump campaign/transition team was smart. That goes precisely nowhere to buttressing your fantasy 'collusion' narrative.

I briefly went through the indictment for Roger Stone, which is available here.
https://www.justice.gov/file/1124706/download

24 pages of "OMG this is a giant Russian conspiracy of unprecedented proportions!", and then all they can come up with is some process crimes. I'm looking at this and thinking what the fuck is this Mickey Mouse bullshit? They spend 24 pages talking like he's deep inside some elaborate Russian collusion scheme and they can't even come up with a charge for it? Are you fucking serious? Everyone involved in this indictment needs to be fired for gross incompetence.

[The Romulan Republic]

You understand that this is an ONGOING INVESTIGATION and that more charges are likely forthcoming that what we've seen so far? It seems like every single time Mueller has indicted anyone, we've seen Republicans and their allies come out and gleefully crow about how is this all there is, and how incompetent/corrupt it proves Mueller is, completely ignoring the fact that the investigation isn't finished yet. Then a few weeks or months later something more damning comes out, and again its treated like its the sum of the entire investigation, and we do this same dishonest song and dance all over again. And its all so pointless, because we all know that even if Mueller's final report calls for indicting the entire Trump family, cabinet, and the RNC for treason and backs it up with iron-clad evidence, you'll still say its "Fake News" created by the evil American imperialists.

Also, are you saying that the allegations regarding Stone's involvement with Russia are a lie fabricated by Mueller? Because if so, I'd like you to provide some evidence for that claim. Or are you saying that you think they're valid, and that Stone should be charged for them? Because in that case, I'd actually be inclined to agree with you. But I don't think that's what you meant. Or are you just repeating Dickless's talking points and shilling for Putin? Again.

Personally, I think that part of the reason Stone wasn't charged for conspiring with Russia is because he was dealing (at least from what we've seen so far) mainly with Wikileaks, not with Russia directly, and Mueller probably doesn't want to get bogged down in the fight over whether Wikileaks is a hostile foreign intelligence organization or a journalistic organization with free speech rights. I can see why Mueller wouldn't want that fight when he can go with other charges that will be less controversial.

Mind you, Wikileaks coordinating with the Trump campaign is still all kinds of illegal, as it violates campaign finance laws prohibiting a foreign organization from providing support to a US candidate (them reporting favorably on Trump, or negatively on his opponents, would not be illegal, but actively coordinating with his campaign to release stories that will benefit them would be, as I understand it).