Another Arrest

The FBI raided and arrested another member of the dontard's campaign for obstruction of justice.

Roger Stone is accused of seven counts of obstruction and while an arrest is not a conviction, it is pretty likely that they have significant evidence and corroborating testimony.

This is the 34the arrest to date in the investigation, not all of whom were directly associated with the campaign.

There is video of the arrest which in all honesty seems more appropriate for someone who might resist, but I'm sure the FBI had their reasons.

One source indicates that Watergate resulted in 40 indictments (not all resulted in jail) and of course one Presidential resignation.

This still exceeds the current count, but the investigation is not over.

I would like to point out that while the Watergate break-in was done before we were so digital, the crimes are pretty much the same, both designed to infiltrate and steal information about the opponents campaign.

What is definitively different is that the Watergate was an operation that did not include a foreign power while the current Russian probe clearly does.

In addition to the Russians we have Wikileaks, an international group.

Its hard to imagine Nixon, the fiery anti-communist collaborating with the Soviet Union for something like this, but of course times have changed.

Its also very difficult for the dontard to ever accept responsibility for these actions and I still very much doubt that impeachment is feasible.

Consider how close we got to impeaching Bill Clinton for lying about his interaction with a white house intern.

Did not involve any foreign governments.  Don't think anyone was indicted for what happened, and of course the current dontard has very likely lied consistently about similar activities and the payoffs associated with those activities.

He just hasn't done it to congress officially.

He still has time now that we have a democratic house.

Crimes?

We are likely to see the first arrest today from the special investigator and it should tell us a bit more about at least the appearance of illegal activity by accused.

Trump and some of his supporters are trying to deflect and accuse the democrats and Hillary of certain offenses but they have problems distinguishing between normal legal behavior and crimes.

I don't know for sure if anyone in the dotard's campaign did something illegal, the courts get to decide that, but getting indicted is an indication they might have.

Being in charge of a department that was one of several that approved the sale of a Canadian company to a Russian firm is not a crime, unless of course someone could prove a bribe was involved, which unrelated donations to the Clinton Foundation aren't.

It doesn't even seem like the Secretary was directly involved in the approval process.

Also hiring a firm to do research on your opponent is perfectly legal.

The desperation is such that some are trying to accuse the campaign of mischaracterizing the payments since they were characterized as legal expenses because the actual money went to their lawyer.

The lawyer was the one who funded the research and maybe should have disclosed this to the campaign for reporting purposes, but since the difference between spending the money on legal costs or opposition research is meaningless legally, they are both acceptable, the booking error is hardly a significant offense.  It certainly isn't indictable.

I'm pretty sure that if you examine the books of any large campaign there will be some mistakes, and let's be clear, funding this research was pretty routine at the time.

Our dotard has no idea of the difference between criminal and meaningless accusations, maybe someone will explain it to him soon.