Roger Stone challenges DOJ to prove Russia hacked the DNC

Roger Stone has challenged the predicate that Russia hacked the DNC and the admissibility of evidence using that predicate.

Roger Stone Questions DOJ on Predicate of Russia DNC Hack…
Posted on May 11, 2019 by sundance

In two separate court filings Roger Stone is challenging the DOJ to produce evidence of their predicate claim the Russians “hacked” the DNC servers.

The first filing is a motion to compel [SEE HERE] and requests the DOJ provide unredacted documents to support their framework of evidence that Russian’s “hacked” the DNC. The second filing is a motion to suppress [SEE HERE] any downstream evidence, extracted by the use of search warrants, built upon upon the predicate claim of Russians “hacking” the DNC.

In essence Roger Stone is challenging the U.S. government to prove the DNC was hacked by Russians; and further he is refuting the validity of the FBI using a private organization, Crowdstrike, as a valid investigative and determinative body.

The suppress motion argues it was the responsibility of the FBI to secure and investigate the hacking evidence and not rely upon the word of a private party hired by the DNC (an opposing political entity). If the government cannot prove the Russian’s hacked the DNC, and subsequently attempted to work with Wikileaks for the distribution therein, then the basis for government claims about Stone seeking to engage with Wikileaks diminishes.

If the DOJ and FBI are independently certain Russian’s hacked the DNC servers, there should be no issue in providing the evidence toward that claim. It will be interesting to see how the DOJ responds; and how the judge rules on the responsibilities of the FBI.

Blockbuster: Roger Stone Swings For The Fences; Court Filing Challenges Russiagate's Original Premise, Seeks To Prove That The Russians Did Not Hack The DNC

By Barbara Boyd
Saturday, May 11, 2019

… Now, it appears Mueller's team is adding to the malfeasance. It has produced redacted copies of CrowdStrike's forensics as part of the discovery to which Stone is entitled in the case. Why the government is redacting reports from the DNC's vendor, a private company, in its productions to Stone's defense, is a mystery.

0 users have voted.


edg's picture

It would be very fulfilling to see the whole "Russia hacked the DNC" house of cards crumble to dust.

0 users have voted.

We would all love to see it.

0 users have voted.

"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

snoopydawg's picture

I've never understood why people wouldn't have asked to see more evidence that it happened. Or asked why the FBI itself never looked at the computers. Don't people remember how many times they have lied to them? The whole damn country has been pushed upside down on a lie.

0 users have voted.

"I will be the best, the best, you know, you know the thing!”
- Joe Biden

Grope and Hope

wendy davis's picture

explain to me what this means:

"The second filing is a motion to suppress [SEE HERE] any downstream evidence, extracted by the use of search warrants, built upon upon the predicate claim of Russians “hacking” the DNC."

the other part that baffled me in the piece was that it was roger stone himself who'd claimed he had a back channel to wikileaks, or perhaps stronger, that HE was a back channel to wikileaks. you all will know how to correct my memory.

but wasn't one of the CNN names list the court wanted to hear from re: julian alleged employee of stone's?

0 users have voted.
wendy davis's picture

@wendy davis

randy credico, bingled and found this at cnn:

"The interviews between Stone and comedian Randy Credico took place between August 2016 and April 2017 on Credico's radio show, which aired on local New York station WBAI. Stone has claimed that Credico served as his intermediary to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange during the 2016 presidential election. Credico has denied the claim.
The special counsel's office is currently investigating Stone's possible involvement in Russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 election and questions about the nature of his supposed back channel to WikiLeaks.

CNN's KFile has obtained audio of the interviews, in which Stone and Credico repeatedly discuss WikiLeaks. In the interviews, you hear Credico ask Stone about the back channel and also cast doubt that the back channel exists.

While the interviews do not rule out the possibility Credico served as the back channel, the former radio host told CNN he believes the content of the interviews back up his denials.

"What you heard is what you heard because the radio doesn't lie," Credico told CNN.
Credico is a progressive activist in New York and outspoken supporter of Assange and WikiLeaks."

hint hint: so he'd lie, right? anyhoo, i'm curious because a friend of the café sent me a rather inflammatory email about 'new evidence'. i'll keep checking, maybe right it up so folks here who know all the names, players, dates...can fill in the blanks.

0 users have voted.