ittall seems possible they re building a case in hopes to move forward while the president is still unoffice. they could put forward a conspiracy indictment. one of the things i think really comes true real a came clear out of michael cohen s testimony yesterday is this is looking more and more like racketeering prosecution. the racketeering investigation, a rico case. you have an overlapping group of players. an overlapping group of conspiracies, an overlapping set of crimes. this is not individual instances this is an organization that was involved in corrupt practices from top to bottom on a wide variety of fronts. and there s no office in the country that s better at rico racketeering prosecution than the southern district of new
they will come back to haunt both the president and roger stone. why? why is that extremely unwise? because, look, when we look at these indictments, the stone indictment for example, i ll tell you, chris, 30 years as a fer federal prosecutor, i ve drafted more indictments than i can recall. but one thing i can tell you, when we indict one person, roger stone, we do a relatively modest indictment. so, for example, if roger was roger stone was indicted for a witness tampering charge, the indictment on that count would read something like, you know, on january 1st, 2019, in the district of columbia, defendant roger stone tampered with a witness by trying to interfere with the witness truthful testimony before a proceeding. period. right. what we have the roger stone indictment, chris, is a conspiracy indictment. there is no conspiracy charge contained in it, but it sets out the misconduct and the complicity of so many other people, of corsi, of credico,
why is that extremely unwise? when we look at indictments, the stone indictment. 30 years as a federal prosecutor, i ve drafted more indictments than i can call. when we indict one person, roger stone, we do a relatively modnist indictment. so roger stone was indicted for a witness tampering charge. the indictment would read something like on january 1st 2019, roger stone tampered with a witness by trying to interfere with the witness s truthful testimony before a proceeding. period. what we have, the roger stone indictment is a conspiracy indictment. there s no conspiracy charge contained in it. but it sets out the misconduct and the complicity of so many other people. of corsi, of cred co, of julian
does the special counsel have enough information about roger stone s conduct with wikileaks or whatever that organization is, to charge hip or do they not yet have it and they re waiting until they get an air-tight case to charge him, because then and only then when those dots connect, will we have evidence of russian collusion. glenn, what do you think about this i have a different view. i think that roger stone knew damn well it was coming from russia because everyone on the planet knew it was coming from russia and he knew what he was doing, being a link in the mandate of this probe, get all the links between russia government people and the trump campaign he clearly is a link your thoughts? chris, this is an incremental step toward a bigger conspiracy indictment that is absolutely coming it s funny because this indictment reads like a conspiracy indictment, it has the building blocks of a conspiracy indictment. but it doesn t yet charge the conspiracy
stone s multidecades relationship with trump. but you know, when you read it carefully, you can see that there are co-conspirators named, just not charged yet corsi appears to be a co-conspirator with stone, assange seems to be a co-conspirator with stone. these unnamed senior trump campaign officials, plural, and mueller makes it clear there are multiple officials, he uses the plural, have all been involved in sort of coordinating, acquiring these e-mails and timing the release for maximum damage to the clinton campaign so i think the next step is going to be a conspiracy indictment it will include stone if he doesn t cooperate or if he doesn t cooperate, it will include stone. if he does cooperate, it won t include him. he will be a cooperating witness. there is a conspiracy card somewhere in the deck when it is played we ll all be watching.