As I noted before today's news firehose started in earnest, SSCI didn't consider RU hacks of election vendors (as opposed to states). Yet we know RU did hack some vendors. https://www.emptywheel.net/2018/05/09/the-gaping-holes-in-the-ssci-voting-security-report/ …
-
-
I can see that, but if I were the prosecutor, I wouldn't want that to be my keystone charge on Stone. There's no bad case law on using the charge that way, but there's also not a lot of great case law. And for various reasons, DOJ hates dealing with staged conspiracy charges.
-
What do you mean by "staged conspiracy theories"?
-
Conspiracy charges. DOJ guidelines, IIRC, recommend charging all members of a conspiracy simultaneously, because later-charged conspirators gain an an advantage over earlier-charged conspirators -- something you don't want if you're ladder-climbing.
-
What is the advantage in this case? I could explain what structure I expect they'll use but I need to understand what you're saying first.
-
No, exactly. Because of the two-headed management structure of the hypothetical conspiracy, and the fact that no RU-side conspirators are expected to testify, there are fewer disadvantages in this case.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Would ConFrUS go something like: Stone ran disinfo ops (esp Seth Rich conspiracies) to aid actively conceal Russia's material support for Trump, & generate cover (via disinfo) for Trump's QPQ..? Would Stone need to have had consciousness of all above to be liable in conspiracy?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.