BASED ON STONE'S APPARENT LACK OF KNOWLEDGE OF SPECIFIC WIKILEAKS REVELATIONS, IT IS SAFE TO PRESUME THAT HE WAS BASICALLY MISREPRESENTING HIMSELF AS A WIKILEAKS INSIDER..
IF HE WAS A TRUE WIKILEAKS INSIDER THEN, BASED ON THE CONTENT OF HIS BRAGGING AND ON HIS NEED TO SUBSTANTIATE IT, HE WOULD HAVE DISCLOSED AT LEAST SOMETHING FROM WIKILEAKS IN ORDER TO CONVINCE THE ONES THAT HE WAS APPARENTLY ONLY TRYING TO IMPRESS..BUT, AND AS MULLER'S REPETITIVE USE OF THE WORDS "EVIDENCE SUGGEST OR IMPLY" PROVE, THE ONLY THING THAT MULLER CAN ACTUALLY PROVE IS THAT STONE WAS BRAGGING....AND THAT DOES NOT HELP MULLER IN ANYTHING..NOR DOES IT CRIMINALIZE STONE IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM..!!
http://time.com/5442721/roger-stone-wikileaks-emails/
http://time.com/5442721/roger-stone-wikileaks-emails/
No comments:
Post a Comment