Bannon says Stone was Trump campaign link to WikiLeaks

Associated Press

In reluctant testimony, former campaign CEO Steve Bannon told a federal court that Stone, on trial for lying to Congress and witness tampering, had boasted about his ties to WikiLeaks and its founder Julian Assange, alerting them to pending new batches of damaging emails.

“The campaign had no official access to WikiLeaks or to Julian Assange,” Bannon told the court. “But Roger would be considered if we needed an access point.”

It was the first time that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign acknowledged in court that they had actively sought material from WikiLeaks, which released emails that U.S. intelligence agencies determined had been hacked by the Russian government in order to damage Clinton.

The White House had no immediate comment.

Bannon is back with a vengeance!

Stone is on trial as we speak for lying to Congress and this sure won't help him. It also won't help others who have denied knowing anyone in contact with WikiLeaks, or conspiring in any way regarding the leaks.

Read the rest of the article for some real colorful language and also if you want to get a lesson info mafia style tactics and witness tampering from Roger Stone.

Only the best people.

a reply to: Oraculi

I am looking into my Crystal Balls(TM) and I see that soon there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth “You can’t believe Bannon, Trump fired him!!!! Arf arf.”

The sound of dominoes falling will soon be deafening.

Good post, S&F!

a reply to: Oraculi

“The campaign had no official access to WikiLeaks or to Julian Assange,” Bannon told the court. “But Roger would be considered if we needed an access point.” 

It's quite a leap to go from that to this :

that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign acknowledged in court that they had actively sought material from WikiLeaks, which released emails that U.S. intelligence agencies determined had been hacked by the Russian government in order to damage Clinton. 

Anything to push a narrative though, I guess.

So what ?

That in no way is a crime .

So, Trump bad?..

Not Trump good?..

This argument is new and strange.

Stone has claimed that radio show host Randy Credico passed him information about WikiLeaks



Roger Stone, the longtime Trump confidant, has asserted that Credico passed him information about WikiLeaks’ pre-election plans from activist lawyer Margaret Ratner Kunstler.

Kunstler has been described as an attorney for WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange, as well as for Credico, a New York-based comedian and radio host. Despite those links, Credico has denied in at least one interview that he knew any of WikiLeaks’ American lawyers.

Stone’s claim that Credico was his source for information about WikiLeaks’ plans to release information that would damage the Clinton campaign.

Kunstler

William Kunstler was survived by his wife Margaret Ratner Kunstler (who was previously married to Kunstler's close friend Michael Ratner

Wiki leaks Sideshow with Margaret Ratner Kunstler, Randy Credico and Roger Stone



I’m best friends with [Assange’s] lawyer and leave it at that and leave it alone,” he wrote.

Roger Stone twitter exchange with Guccifer 2.0


Guccifer 2.0’s Twitter account had been reinstated after being suspended.

Guccifer wrote to Stone, referring to an article Stone wrote for Breitbart on Aug. 5.
....do u find anything interesting in the docs i posted?”


Guccifer 2.0

Roger Stone tweets The Moon Landing Was A "Hoax” and filmed in a warehouse in New Jersey

originally posted by: Oraculi

Associated Press

In reluctant testimony, former campaign CEO Steve Bannon told a federal court that Stone, on trial for lying to Congress and witness tampering, had boasted about his ties to WikiLeaks and its founder Julian Assange, alerting them to pending new batches of damaging emails.

“The campaign had no official access to WikiLeaks or to Julian Assange,” Bannon told the court. “But Roger would be considered if we needed an access point.”

It was the first time that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign acknowledged in court that they had actively sought material from WikiLeaks, which released emails that U.S. intelligence agencies determined had been hacked by the Russian government in order to damage Clinton.

The White House had no immediate comment.

Bannon is back with a vengeance!

Stone is on trial as we speak for lying to Congress and this sure won't help him. It also won't help others who have denied knowing anyone in contact with WikiLeaks, or conspiring in any way regarding the leaks.

Read the rest of the article for some real colorful language and also if you want to get a lesson info mafia style tactics and witness tampering from Roger Stone.

Only the best people.

So what is so bad about wikileaks? You think they are bad because they exposed a few democrats? They exposed all kinds of corruption in many different countries especially the USA.

Julian Assange is one of the last true journalists willing to expose ALL corruption wherever it originates.

The only "Mafia" tactics the world has seen is the main stream corrupt media and their supporters.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Oraculi

I am looking into my Crystal Balls(TM) and I see that soon there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth “You can’t believe Bannon, Trump fired him!!!! Arf arf.”

The sound of dominoes falling will soon be deafening.

Good post, S&F!

Why? Over information everyone already knew and was at total peace with?
www.cnn.com...

Roger Stone was in communication with at least one senior Trump campaign official about upcoming WikiLeaks disclosures during the 2016 presidential race, Stone revealed Thursday.

In an opinion piece for the right-wing Daily Caller, Stone published an exchange he had with Steve Bannon, then the chief executive of the Trump campaign. The emails are among the documents in special counsel Robert Mueller's possession as he investigates whether Stone had an inside-track with WikiLeaks and whether he shared any of that information with then-candidate Trump or Trump's inner circle.
"What was that this morning???" Bannon wrote to Stone on October 4, 2016. Earlier that day, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange had delivered a speech billed as an "October surprise" announcement and had promised additional Clinton-related leaks. But the event turned out to be a publicity stunt where Assange touted his organization's 10th anniversary. All Assange offered was another promise of more materials before the election, angering some Trump supporters who were hoping for a bombshell.
Roger Stone beefs up his legal team
Roger Stone beefs up his legal team
Stone replied to Bannon that Assange didn't release any documents out of security concerns. Then Stone wrote, "However -- a load every week going forward."

From 1 year ago, direct from Roger Stone's own article in the Daily Caller. Bannon's testimony just confirmed what Stone already told the world... ooooh, bombshell!

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Oraculi

I am looking into my Crystal Balls(TM) and I see that soon there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth “You can’t believe Bannon, Trump fired him!!!! Arf arf.”

The sound of dominoes falling will soon be deafening.

Good post, S&F!

Why would Trump need to go to Wikileaks to get the emails?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Oraculi

I am looking into my Crystal Balls(TM) and I see that soon there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth “You can’t believe Bannon, Trump fired him!!!! Arf arf.”

The sound of dominoes falling will soon be deafening.

Good post, S&F!

I think you need a new crystal ball.

Everyone with a few brain cells to rub together knew this over a year ago.

~wavin~

a reply to: Oraculi

Sothe Russians did hack Hillary ? And this hack did occure from a criminal neglect of operational security?

originally posted by: Fallingdown
So what ?

That in no way is a crime .

Opposition research happens every day!

Why is this worthy of posting?

Stone said he had someone communicating with him affiliated to wikileaks several times on video during the time the leaks were supposed to be coming out. This is not news, and it's not a story.

Nor is it illegal, nor is anything wikileaks has done illegal.

Publishing leaked documents is not a crime - if it was the NY Times would have ceased to exist decades ago.

I don't even understand what you are trying to imply - Is it that Stone somehow got wikileaks to steal the documents for the Trump campaign??

That's not how it worked - stone was told leaks were going to be coming out. The Mueller investigation I am positive tried to somehow show stone was involved in getting those docs and could not.

I will say once again - Assange has said numerous times the leaks came from an inside source at the DNC - STRONGLY Hinting at Seth Rich - because he only said this after he was murdered and brought up he did not appreciate leakers being killed basically. Why would he do this if it was not true? Do you believe the Russians killed Seth Rich just for a cover story?

No - the far more likely answer is the emails did come from Seth Rich - because they detailed what he was pissed about - Bernie being screwed in the Democratic primaries, and he was a Bernie fanatic.

So any witness that said something confirming your narrative is good, otherwise he is not credible?
Sometimes Bannon is credible, sometimes not.
It seems to be a partisan thing...
I don’t care about all the BS headlines. I care about the indictments and facts that may or may not come.
Just stick to the f***ing facts. Just wait until they come out. All these opinions are just what they are: opinions... even if they come from f***ing Bannon (who I normally like).

a reply to: proximo

Because the OP ignorantly believes it hurts Trump is some strange and wierd way.

Only way Stone could be guilty of something is if he himself hacked her emails. He didn't do that so there is nothing to charge him with. This went to the Supreme Court years ago. It's not illegal to report on documents illegally obtained by another party. If it was, most of the media would be in jail by now.

Replace that one tax record Maddow got of Trump with the word email. Where did she get the tax return? We'll we don't know. Trump didn't release it to her.

Duh. She's not in jail and she never released where she got it.

a reply to: carewemust

Yup

I don’t remember the exact details. But when they went through this with the Mueller investigation. The consensus was that whenever Stone gave POTUS a heads up everyone else in the country already knew a WikiLeaks drop was coming because the media was already reporting it .

The main stream media isn’t only fake news it’s also repetitive meaningless nonsense . Headlines is all they’re going for .

Yellow journalism .

a reply to: Oraculi

to date, I have yet to get an answer to this. Why is what Wiki Leaks published not looked at for WHAT was put out and instead for WHO put it out? The data was true, the information correct. When Billy Bush tapes came out, they showed Trump talking about grabbing kitties. Was that OK?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Oraculi

I am looking into my Crystal Balls(TM) and I see that soon there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth “You can’t believe Bannon, Trump fired him!!!! Arf arf.”

The sound of dominoes falling will soon be deafening.

Good post, S&F!

windex. And paper towels. Use them.

So you admit that you only like some whistleblowers.