The Washington Post (Page 9): She was not convicted of insider trading, do not make that mistake, she was convicted of lying to the FBI. "Ultimately, these unique facts surrounding the...

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

chrisscholbe wrote:

I don't disagree, but, Martha Stewart was convicted of Insider Trading.

It wouldn't have mattered if she talked with or without a lawyer.
Guilty is guilty.

She was not convicted of insider trading, do not make that mistake, she was convicted of lying to the FBI.

"Ultimately, these unique facts surrounding the case against Stewart led to prosecutors to focus on the series of lies Stewart told to cover the facts surrounding her trade. Stewart was sentenced to 5 months of prison time for obstruction of justice and conspiracy after the insider trading charges were dropped and securities fraud charges dismissed. "

https://www.thoughtco.com/martha-stewarts-insider-trading-case-1146196

chrisscholbe Loc: Kansas City, MO

Blurryeyed wrote:

She was not convicted of insider trading, do not make that mistake, she was convicted of lying to the FBI.

I stand/sit corrected.

pendennis

I downloaded the report, and I've now "speed read" it. If I had written a report like this one when I was in college, I'd be taking the course over again, and my professor would have "red lined" it to death. I well understand the complexity of legal reports, but this one is nearly incoherent.

I'm aware of the fact that it's a work product, and that no central editor was assigned to insure coherence, etc., but there was enough straight "cut and paste" to keep scissors and glue factories busy for years.

The DOJ is is the business of "Guilty and Not Guilty", not "exoneration". If there's a crime, it's either prosecuted, or not (In the case of the President, delayed until he leaves office). Exoneration isn't even a legal term in this instance.

Parts of the report are a straight out sop to the Dems in Congress. Nadler, et al, will have enough trash to continue his crusade until he dies (not fast enough for me).

AG Barr has already advised that Congressional leaders may see the report, unredacted, "in camera". However, this will be the same as publishing it.

btbg

chrisscholbe wrote:

Conservatives are "in power", so, why aren't you/they inirtiating an investigation.

Stop crying about why Dems didn't do this or that (it;s just an attempt at mis direction).

If it's so darn important...what are the conservatives doing about it.

I don't care if there is another investigation or not. I am also not trying to cause a distraction. I am only saying that your comment about liberals welcoming investigations of anyone believed to have committed a crime does not appear to be factual.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

pendennis wrote:

I downloaded the report, and I've now "speed ... (show quote)

Where did you find a downloadable copy? As of yesterday the one at the DOJ was not downloadable.

btbg

Kmgw9v wrote:

It is incumbent for a governing body to investigate allegations, especially serious ones; like a foreign country destroying the integrity of our e******ns. That is why the Mueller investigation was appropriate and fair. Those whose lies are uncovered by any investigation is such investigations are strictly accountable.

Then why didn't we investigate the Ukranian involvement since they have publicly admitted that they tried to help Hillary?

You forget that under Obama we tried to influence the Israeli e******n. Yes, it is a problem when a foreign government tries to influence an e******n. The thing is Russia isn't the only country that did this. Obama's administration is guilty of exactly the same thing. Ukraine is also guilty, as is probably China.

Yet you liberals are only interested in the one case. I'm fine with investigating the irregularities, but if that's what you are going to do then go after all of them equally.

Angmo

chrisscholbe wrote:

I don't disagree, but, Martha Stewart was convicted of Insider Trading.

It wouldn't have mattered if she talked with or without a lawyer.
Guilty is guilty.

Stewart was not convicted for criminal insider trading charges. More process crime and cover up. That she spoke was a problem.

The best advice for anyone. Anyone.

Don’t talk. Ever. Here’s an excellent video. For all Righties and lefties. Invest the time and watch.

https://youtu.be/d-7o9xYp7eE

chrisscholbe Loc: Kansas City, MO

btbg wrote:

I don't care if there is another investigation or not. I am also not trying to cause a distraction. I am only saying that your comment about liberals welcoming investigations of anyone believed to have committed a crime does not appear to be factual.

Sorry...I was and always only speak for myself.

I let other speak for themselves.

Cykdelic Loc: Now outside of Chiraq & Santa Fe, NM

Kmgw9v wrote:

It is not in dispute that a foreign country engaged in disrupting the 2016 e******n with the intent to make Trump our President.
What is anyone, especially the current President, doing to address that, and protect the e*******l process in the future?
The Meuller report is not a win for Trump, it is the exposure of an unfit Constitutional "leader" who still thinks Putin is his buddy.
Maybe he is.
This country is in trouble.

The REAL question is why the incumbent Obama administration did NOTHING about Russian interference.

Cykdelic Loc: Now outside of Chiraq & Santa Fe, NM

pendennis wrote:

The indictments, trials, and guilty pleas were all "process crimes", those which arose as a result of the investigation, but not directly tied to it.

Probably the most famous is Martha Stewart, lying to the FBI.

It's also why you should NEVER talk to the cops without a lawyer.

Also remember that 25 DOJ personnel from the Obama administration have been fired, demoted, or quit before being fired in this affair.

More will be following them.

Cykdelic Loc: Now outside of Chiraq & Santa Fe, NM

chrisscholbe wrote:

I don't disagree, but, Martha Stewart was convicted of Insider Trading.

It wouldn't have mattered if she talked with or without a lawyer.
Guilty is guilty.

Wrong again.....sadly!

A jury found Martha Stewart guilty Friday on all four counts of obstructing justice and lying to investigators about a well-timed stock sale.

chrisscholbe Loc: Kansas City, MO

Cykdelic wrote:

Wrong again.....sadly!

A jury found Martha Stewart guilty Friday on all four counts of obstructing justice and lying to investigators about a well-timed stock sale.

I'd already been corrected on this, but, thanks for sharing.

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

pendennis wrote:

I downloaded the report, and I've now "speed ... (show quote)

"I downloaded the report, and I've now "speed read" it. If I had written a report like this one when I was in college, I'd be taking the course over again, and my professor would have "red lined" it to death. I well understand the complexity of legal reports, but this one is nearly incoherent."

You are talented enough to write legal reports more coherently than Mueller and his team. That is impressive. You send send a resume to Trump.

Cykdelic Loc: Now outside of Chiraq & Santa Fe, NM

chrisscholbe wrote:

I'd already been corrected on this, but, thanks for sharing.

I posted before going through the entire thread.....my bad!

Cykdelic Loc: Now outside of Chiraq & Santa Fe, NM

Kmgw9v wrote:

"I downloaded the report, and I've now "speed read" it. If I had written a report like this one when I was in college, I'd be taking the course over again, and my professor would have "red lined" it to death. I well understand the complexity of legal reports, but this one is nearly incoherent."

You are talented enough to write legal reports more coherently than Mueller and his team. That is impressive. You send send a resume to Trump.

You can be smarmy all you want but his post was on point.....why not address his post???L