Mueller’s last stand… Roger Stone

The article below appeared on May 20, 2018 in ArtVoice

With news that more of Roger Stone associates have been subpoenaed, it is beginning to look as if Special Counsel Robert Mueller is desperate.

The Mueller probe was supposed to be about Trump-Russian collusion during the last presidential election. Yet a CBS News poll this month found 53% believed the case is politically motivated.

Mueller now needs a legitimizing target, since his last big target, Paul Manafort’s alleged criminal activity did not demonstrate a Trump-Russia nexus. The alleged crimes of Manafort are based on acts dating back to 2005, and not relevant to the Trump campaign whatsoever.

In addition to Manafort, Mueller managed to scoop up a few run-of-the-mill process crimes when he was otherwise empty-handed with General Flynn and Rick Gates.

Process crimes [like lying to the FBI] are fish in a barrel for even mediocre federal prosecutors, and scarcely satisfy an interested public. You don’t need a special prosecutor for this. So now we turn to Stone. For Mueller’s urgent need for legitimization, Stone is his best last hope.

But consider also the unhappy perspective of Mueller. The eyes of the nation are on him. He hired a phalanx of Democrat lawyers to dig up Russian spooks bedding with Republican candidate Trump and came up with nothing. Mueller’s a failure. A dud. He’s spent lots of taxpayer money to take out Trump. He is taking an awful long time to do it. But it’s not always easy to fabricate crimes – even for a pro like Mueller. Blame the internet. Blame Alex Jones. Blame the fact the MSM does not control the dialog anymore. Blame it on Trump getting elected.

So Mueller, of course, needs a pretext. Russian collusion was chosen before the election was even over. But the main hope for Russian collusion lies in Wikileaks receiving “hacked” documents from Russian hackers. Take that away and what you have is the nagging voice of common sense.

Consider, the best witness of Russian collusion: The often-wrong and always agenda-driven Intelligence Community [I always laugh at the word “Intelligence” when used in connection with that group of spooks and shills for the repressive, anti-freedom, deep and globalist state].

The ‘Intelligence” Community says Russian “fingerprints” are on “hacked” files which prove hacking was done by Russians. Common sense dictates the opposite. Those who are able to hack are able to not leave fingerprints. It’s like a hitman leaving his fingerprints at a murder scene. No he doesn’t. He wears gloves.

Russian fingerprints left at a hacking scene is no proof Russia hacked DNC computers. Somebody put them there to create a Russian hacking narrative – that’s what it suggests. Maybe it was Russia seeking to deliberately get caught for their crime. Maybe it was a false flag. Maybe the DNC servers were never hacked.

Every rational assessment points to the probability that the DNC material was leaked. Start with the fact that the DNC would not allow the FBI to do a forensic investigation of their computers to determine if they were really ‘hacked’ and by whom.

A group of former NSA experts, The Veteran Intelligence Professionals For Sanity (VIPS), in a memo to Obama, wrote that the DNC “hack” was no hack, but a leak. Their assessment cited forensic studies that challenged the claim of the “Intelligence” Community assessment that Russia hacked Democratic emails: “[D]ata was leaked (not hacked) by a person with physical access to DNC computer…. forensics show that the copying was performed on the East Coast of the U.S.”

So why then is Stone the target? Because Mueller is out of targets. Stone, an ally of Trump, made TV, radio, and internet appearances praising Assange: If he was involved in a Russian conspiracy – he announced the manner and means of it to the world.

According to the theory, with Obama’s deep state sniffing deeply during the election for Russian spooking, Stone announced his own conspiracy crime to the world.

Here is the backdrop: By October 2016, voters had been assaulted by MSM with incessant negative coverage of Trump, with polls showing he would lose, and Hillary scandals being downplayed. Amid this, Wikileaks and Assange occupied a niche for anti-Hillary news, that MSM was unwilling to cover. Wikileaks was releasing Hillary-related documents periodically, with Assange promising to release thousands more in October.

Stone hyping the best hope to snag undecided voters, made all sorts of pronouncements, some right, some wrong – bluffing and posturing like many a campaigner – seeking to promote the fact that Wikileaks had huge dirt on an incontrovertibly corrupt Hillary Clinton.

Roger Stone is not shy about confronting that which he does not see as truthful despite it being somewhat impolite to those who really own America.

On October 2, for example, Stone said on Alex Jones’ Infowars, “I am assured that the mother lode is coming Wednesday. It wouldn’t be an October surprise if I told you what it was, but I have reason to believe that it is devastating because people with political judgment who are aware of the subject matter tell me this.”

Just days later, Clinton campaign chairman, John Podesta’s emails were released on Wikileaks [showing what a scoundrel Hillary Clinton is.] Although it sounds suspicious, there is a problem for Mueller in his theory of a criminally colluding Stone: The hacking of Podesta’s computers occurred in March 2016. Stone’s twitter and public predictions were made after Assange’s announcement that leaked releases were coming. Not only Stone, but millions of Americans were praying that a payload on Clinton would be released prior to the election showing undecided voters that a vote for her was a vote for corruption.

But to commit a crime relative to Russian hacking of Podesta’s emails, Stone would have had to have joined a conspiracy, aid and abet the crime, or actively conceal the crime. Conspiracy is a legal term for an agreement to commit a crime. You aid and abet a crime if you know about criminal activity and actively try to make it succeed. There is also a crime called “misprision of felony”. It means you know a felony has been committed and work to conceal the crime. Stone would have had to work with a Russian to commit the crime, aid a Russian in committing a crime, or conceal a crime committed by a Russian.

Stone’s tweeting and public discussions of Podesta [assuming he was referring to John Podesta and not, as Stone says, the Podesta brothers], and Clinton email leaks, annihilates misprision of felony, because his announcements does the opposite of concealing a felony.

Nor does public discussion aid and abet a crime. For Stone to have aided and abetted a hacker of DNC or Podesta, Stone would have needed to coordinate the hack with the hacker prior to the hacking. [Podesta’s email was hacked in March]. Stone’s egging on Assange to publish or having a discussion with Wikileaks personnel six months after the hack does not aid and abet, nor does it suggest he joined in an already existing conspiracy— the hacking having already occurred. Stone merely urged a journalist to publish the material.

Without evidence of Stone’s involvement in hacking, there is no conspiracy, just as the New York Times was not guilty of conspiring to commit a crime by publishing Trump’s 1995 tax returns [which may have been provided to the Times by Russians, for all we know].

As to the DNC emails published by Wikileaks, whether hacked by a Russian, by Guccifer 2.0, who claimed credit, or leaked by murdered Seth Rich, under any scenario, no facts alleged suggest Stone’s criminal liability. If it was the late Mr. Rich who caused the leak, then case closed. If a Russian hacker, conspiracy ex ante needs to be alleged, and nothing is alleged outside of Stone’s public statements hyping the Trump campaign and attacking Clinton – which, again, was after the fact.

What about the act in itself – of Wikileaks publishing illegally hacked material? It’s not illegal. Under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a website that provides a forum where ‘third parties can post information’ is not liable for posted information – even when the website performs ‘editorial functions’ ‘such as deciding whether to publish.’ WikiLeaks provides a forum for third party (in this case unnamed Russians, or the late Seth Rich, or whomever) to publish content developed by a third party (hacked emails, for instance). There is nothing illegal about Wikileaks posting hacked material. The crime is hacking. And this hacking – if it occurred – is significant – in the Mueller probe – only if it was done by Russians [or some other foreign entity or person]. And can be tied to Trump or associates conspiring, aiding and abetting or hiding the crime.

Stone, in fact, could legally wine and dine with Assange in London [even if he were a Russian asset -something which is entirely unproven] or with Guccifer 2.0, or Putin himself and freely discuss the publication of leaks without committing a crime. The same is true of Trump or the New York Times.

What this really boils down to is not what happened in October 2016, but in November. Democrats lost. They made plans based on an utter overconfidence of winning. Such upsets are heartbreaking and devastating financially too. Clinton could be depended on to obey orders of the men who really control things. Too bad she was such a buffoon.

Still, a loss is not always a loss, if you can either by hook or by crook undo it. With the help of deep-statesmen like James Comey, Robert Mueller, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, John Brennan – with the generous assistance of Democrat-aligned MSM, Democrat donors, men who stood to gain from government largess, Democrat puppets, certain foreign nationals like George Soros, a deep stately influenced DOJ and an entire underbelly of the Executive Branch – known also in some circles as the swamp – there was hope [and still is] that combined they can undo the will of the people under the laws of the US Constitution and reverse this bitter loss and get installed a proper puppet president instead.

But what’s taking so long? Why cannot the brilliant men and women who are above the law get Donald out quicker? What’s wrong with Mueller anyway? Let it be stated for the record that it is patently unfair to blame Mueller. Yes, he got the assignment to take out Trump, but you can’t shoot ‘em in their convertibles like the old days. True, his investigations resulted in nothing. But then again, why should they? No votes were changed in 2016 as a result of any criminal activity [unless you consider Clinton’s crimes drew votes from her].

Now Mueller is at that terrible stage where he will soon have to produce or get off the pot. His masters have always been willing to put innocent people in prison. So – for the good of the united deep state nation – why can’t he just fabricate crimes like they do in Russia? or America.

Blame it on Alex Jones or Trump’s Twitter. All people do not get their news from corporate media anymore. There might be a revolution and they haven’t taken every gun away from ever person.

Poor Mueller – you gotta feel sympathy for him. He is driven by the whip. Get Trump. Get Trump. People are getting impatient. He can’t stop at Manafort. Manafort is a dud. The deep-statesmen’s plan to legitimize the investigation of the Trump campaign has so far turned into unrelated financial crimes concerning Manafort that no one cares about. And General Flynn – nothing. He was hit with a process crime, as was Gates.

As for Stone, theory after theory against him has been debunked. Now they are calling in all kinds of people in last ditch effort to find something. Anything will do. They know it’s not Russian. They are trying to take out another Trump associate. Keep headlines going. Keep Russia alive in the news. Make it look like Mueller’s doing something. He’s not. He’s done. He’s toast. There was no Russian collusion.

But we hate Trump. More than we hate the truth. We want him unelected. It does not matter if we use truth or lies to get him. We do not care if we prop up the deep state to ruin us. For we are worse than Trump. The problem is, Mueller’s a clod. He may not even get Stone.

Sure Mueller has the ability to create perjury traps and root out unrelated crimes – the proper subject of appointed U.S. Attorneys [not a special prosecutor]. But these justify nothing, is uninspiring, unnecessary, and only delights partisans who care nothing for the Constitution.

Eventually, the citizens of Salem lost patience with the imaginative accusations that random people were witches. In time, and probably sooner rather than later, Americans will lose patience with this investigation that will turn up in the end zero evidence of “collusion” between Trump and Russia and then they might put an end to this threat to American democracy: Robert Mueller and his tribe.

Unless of course they could persuade Trump to ride in a convertible.