Featured News

Guest View: Stone indictment is political payback for Hillary Clinton and friends

By Clueless in the Dark

Roger Stone and two associates — conservative writer, Jerry Corsi, and left wing-comedian-turned-radio-host, Randy Credico, respectively named “Person 1” and “Person 2” in the Stone indictment — were on a quest to find out what WikiLeaks had on Hillary Clinton.

The indictment is just the latest, blatant demonstration that Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s office, the Department of Justice, and the FBI have known for many months – that there was no RUSSIA conspiracy.

Yet, fully aware that the Obama administration, the Justice Department, and the FBI had assiduously crafted a public narrative that Trump may have been in cahoots with the Russian regime, they have allowed that cloud of suspicion to hover over the presidency — over the Trump administration’s efforts to govern — heedless of the damage to the country.

Not only was the suggestion of a Trump-Russia conspiracy not founded on fact, the officials calling the shots had reason to know that the premise was factually false.

Investigators were not just content to let the country believe there was a Trump-Russia criminal conspiracy; they affirmatively encouraged the public to believe it was true. Even as they indicted people for providing misleading information and then failing to correct the record, they never themselves corrected the impression they had gratuitously created in public statements.

So now we have the Stone indictment.

It alleges no involvement — by Stone or the Trump campaign — in Russia’s hacking. The indictment’s focus, instead, is WikiLeaks.

Sounds like payback to me for all the trouble those leaked Podesta/DNC emails caused Hillary Clinton and friends

About the author

Frank Parlato


Click here to post a comment
  • wow, a conspiracy theorist. Please explain to us how Obama, who is not in office can ensure this goes through?

    And how do you know that there was no collusion? Did Mueller publish his results already? I did not hear of that. Unlike Agolf Twittler, he does not spill out the daily hatred, but does his job. Just because he did not publish his findings does not mean he did not find anything. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

    • Exactly Anonymous.
      Also, I’ve seen Credico’s tweets where he claims to have evidence that shows Stone was covering for Trump. Credico could have been lying about that to stir up some extra drama (who knows) but the fact is that right now all the evidence is not available public.

      Right now everyone is just guessing and making assumptions. However, some guesses have more evidence behind them than others do.

  • Good story. OR how about FBI payback over Comey’s discharge? …Naw, must be a deeper political motive than that for sure.

%d bloggers like this: