Breaking development in Roger Stone Case.

quote:

---

The specific challenge to the truthfulness of all the warrants is the unproven claim that the Russian state transferred the DNC and DCCC, and other campaign officials’ data to WikiLeaks. Or, said a different way, WikiLeaks received the data from the Russian state. The government should not have represented this as a fact to the various district judges and magistrates in order to obtain the search warrants.

The government has never had to prove its case. The series of misrepresentations is foundational.

The government does not dispute in its opposition: “The Office cannot rule out that stolen documents were transferred to WikiLeaks through intermediaries who visited during the summer of 2016.” Robert S. Mueller, Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election, 47 (2019) (emphasis added) (hereinafter “Mueller Report”). Declarations from William Binney and Peter Clay, experts in this field concur that WikiLeaks did not receive the stolen data from Russia. (Doc. 100-1; Doc. 100-3). This evidence was discoverable to the government simply by analyzing the documents from the WikiLeaks database. It required no warrant of any entity or person at all.

Because the Russian state did not transfer the data to WikiLeaks, all other allegations, including communications with Assange or WikiLeaks are irrelevant and immaterial to investigation about Russian interference with 2016 election.

---

quote:

---

Defendant, Roger J. Stone respectfully moves to compel discovery of the unredacted copies of the CrowdStrike Reports. In light of the government’s representation that it does not have the unredacted reports.

---