Shortly after Roger Stone’s arrest on a seven-count indictment charging lying and obstruction, Prof. Bowman appeared on the Canadian news network, CTV, to comment on the case. His interview appears here.
arrested, Collusion, Conspiracy, cooperation, DNC, donald trump, Emails, hillary clinton, indicted, investigation, president, Putin, Randy Credico, Robert Mueller, roger stone, russia, russian hackers, Special Counsel, wikileak
Roger Stone was arrested and received a seven count indictment this morning which included charges of misleading lawmakers about his communications with Wikileaks, the organization that released the emails which scandalized Hillary Clinton’s campaign, and intimidating fellow witness Randy Credico, who was also in contact with Wikileaks. Credico ultimately pleaded the 5th at Stone’s urging.
The emails released by Wikileaks were stolen by Russian hackers, and Stone is a long time friend and supporter of President Trump. If Stone chooses to cooperate with Special Counsel Mueller, he could provide the evidence need to finally establish collusion between Russia and the Trump Campaign. However, if Stone’s past comments are to be believed, he will not be cooperating. Much is yet to be seen.
Alex Wong/Getty Images
Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigators are looking into comments Roger Stone, an adviser to President Trump and self-proclaimed “ultimate political insider,” made to those who called on his political insight. Stone said he knew of WikiLeak’s plans to release information which would affect the 2016 election, apparently referring to the Democratic National Convention emails which were hacked by Russian Intelligence Officials. Roger Stone also claimed to have a relationship with the founder of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange. The natural conclusion to be drawn here, is that a connection between Stone and WikiLeaks is a connection between Stone and Russia, which is ultimately a connection between Trump and Russia. Though Stone has yet to be indicted, he did admit in August that such a thing is possible. The possibility now is greater than it was then, and with Stone’s indictment may come a plea deal and cooperation.
ANDREW HARNIK/ASSOCIATED PRESS/FILE
Andrew Milller, donald trump, Impeachment, investigation, marine medvin, Mueller, Obstruction of Justice, paul kamenar, president, robert muelller, roger stone, russian collusion, Special Counsel, Washington D.C.
Marina Medvin, a contributor to Forbes.com, wrote today about a constitutional challenge which has been brought against the authority of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. The challenge was brought by counsel for Andrew Miller, an aide to Roger Stone, who was subpoenaed by Mueller. It comes in three parts: 1) that according to the Constitution, short of a presidential appointment, Congress must create a law empowering the Attorney General to appoint a special counsel and no such law exists; 2) even if such a law does exist, Attorney General Sessions’ recusal is not sufficient to empower Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein to make such an appointment; and 3) the powers which Mueller has utilized are far beyond those appropriate for a Special Counsel and are equivalent to those of a “super U.S. attorney.”
Miller’s argument lost in the district court and he has taken it up on appeal. Mueller filed a brief in response (interested readers can find it here). It is unclear what would happen to Mueller’s investigative findings should his powers be invalidated. The searches and subpoenas he has executed so far, if not backed by constitutional authority, are sure to equate to violations of the 4th amendment rights of his subjects. That being said, the invalidation of his power seems an unlikely result. As Mueller pointed out himself, there is strong precedent for his power, dating back to 1870.
agent, campaign, Collusion, Conspiracy, D.C., democratic national convention, dismissed, DNC, elleb, Emails, hacked, huvelle, judge, lawsuit, personal jurisdiction, president, roger stone, Russian, suit, trump, venue, washington, wikileaks
U.S. District Court Judge Ellen Huvelle, of Washington, D.C., decided yesterday that her court lacks personal jurisdiction, or alternatively that it constitutes improper venue, to entertain a suit brought against the Trump Campaign and Roger Stone by members of the Democratic National Convention (“DNC”). The suit alleged that Stone and the Campaign conspired with unidentified Russian Agents and Wikileaks to hack the DNC’s emails, a tort amounting to conspiracy to violate their privacy rights, to inflict emotional harm, and to interfere with their right to support the candidate of their choice. The judge ruled that D.C. lacked sufficient contacts with the allegations to make it a viable place for suit, but avoided making any ruling on the sufficiency of the Plaintiff’s evidence.
So what’s this result mean? We keep holding our breath, while hoping they can find a place to bring their suit. Should these Plaintiffs manage to find a court willing to entertain their action, then they will be able to bring the power of liberal civil discovery procedure against the Trump campaign, and perhaps expedite the collusion investigation. Fingers crossed. Interested readers can find the opinion here.
Judge Ellen Huvelle, Picture taken from lawmagazine.bc.edu
Click here to read about how Roger Stone has predicted a violent reaction should President Trump be impeached. Though likely an overaction, this artile has an interesting interplay with one previously posted here, which predicted that President Trump would have more influence even after his impeachment. Regardless of the effects, however, one must concede that impeachment is becoming a possibility even in the minds of Trump’s supporters.