Thread by @dfriedman33

Still in the very long line outside the courthouse as the Roger Stone trial resumes.

Rick Gates is likely to testify today. He is expected to detail instance, mentioned in the Mueller report, when he overheard Trump and a person whose name is redacted, most likely Stone, about WikiLeaks.

Gates’ testimony that Stone was on that call with Trump would further undermine Trump’s claims to Mueller that he had no recollection of talking to Stone about WikiLeaks and hacked Democratic emails during the campaign. It’s hard to believe that. motherjones.com/politics/2019/…

After prosecutors led Gates through a lot of disclaimers - ie. that he cut a deal with the government to get leniency - Gates is testifying about his communications with Stone during the 2016 campaign.

Gates says Stone's main contact on the Trump campaign was Manafort, but Gates and later Bannon also talked to him. And: "Mr. Stone indicated that he had information that WikiLeaks would be submitting or dropping information."

Defense objected when prosecutors asked Gates to describe the attitude on the Trump campaign toward WikiLeaks' plans to release hacked emails. Result is an ongoing bench conference.

Zelinsky, noting Gates was in touch with senior campaign officials, asks: What was the reaction of the campaign to Julian Assange's announcement? Gates: "One of happiness...It was in a way a gift that we had not sought."

Gates said he had heard from April that information would be coming out via WikiLeaks. "Who was that information from," Zelinsky asks. "Mr. Stone," Gates says.

Gates is saying here that Stone claimed to have inside information on WikiLeaks in April, long before Aug. 2, when Stone supposedly got information from Corsi on WikiLeaks' plans to release Podesta's emails.

On June 15, 2016, the day after the DNC said it was hacked by Russia, Gates spoke to Stone on the phone. Gates: "At that point [Stone] said that more information would be coming out of the DNC hack."

Also on 6/5/16, Stone asked Gates for contact information for Jared Kushner and another campaign staffer "to debrief them" on the DNC hack.

On July 22, 2016 when WikiLeaks released DNC emails, Gates says, the Trump campaign "was in a state of happiness."

In late July, Gates says: "Manafort asked me to follow up with Mr. Stone to find out when additional information might be coming out."

And "Manafort indicated that he was going to be updating additional people on the campaign including the candidate."

Gates just described a 7/31 call he overheard between Trump and Stone. Zelinsky asked: "After the phone call with Mr. Stone ended, what did Mr. Trump say to you?"

Defense objects. Bench conference.

This sounds like phone call that Gates overheard between Trump and Stone that is mentioned, but heavily redacted, in the Mueller report.

Trump told Mueller he didn't recall any conversations with Stone or anyone else about WikiLeaks between 6/1/16 and election day. motherjones.com/politics/2019/…

Gates answers the question. After Trump got off the phone on 7/31/16, Trump: "indicated that more information would be coming."

Gates: "Mr. Stone never indicated where he go the information, but I did not believe it was public information."

The prosecution has no more witnesses. They are about to rest their case v. Stone, it seems.

"The government rests."

Defense is not going to call Stone, or do much else.
Judge Jackson: "I don't see why we wouldn't close tomorrow."

The defense has filed a motion for acquittal, which in effect argues that since Credico wasn't really Stone's intermediary, Stone can't have made a false statements to the HPSCI about his intermediary.

Jackson cuts the legs out of defense's acquittal argument, noting that Stone is the one who said Credico was his intermediary. And Stone made false statements to the committee about the person Stone claimed he was talking about.

"You certainly don't need the person to have been an actual intermediary," the judge says. She's clearly unconvinced. Stone's lawyer Bushel, seems to despair. "The court will either accept this or not."

Defense still arguing the government's failure to produce evidence of Russia hacking is relevant. Jackson is not having it. "If at the end of the day it wasn't the Russians, why wasn't that as important to their investigation as that it was?"

Prosecution notes Stone, in his opening statement to HPSCI, brought up WikiLeaks himself and made various statements about his efforts to get information on them. So, while Stone's lawyers say the committee's probe wasn't focused on WikiLeaks, Stone clearly knew it was relevant.

Jackson said earlier that plan is for both sides will offer closing arguments tomorrow afternoon. Then the jury will start deliberating.

Court hears part of Stone's HPSCI interview where Stone was asked about calling @RVAwonk "you stupid, stupid bitch" in a tweet.

Stone he can't recall but may have deleted that tweet because "you stupid, stupid bitch was intemperate and I may have reconsidered it."

@RVAwonk The defense is playing large portions of the audio of Stone's HPSCI interview. They're doing this I guess to argue Stone understood the parameters of the committee's probe to be quite limited. But they are also playing answers in which Stone made what seem to be false statements.

@RVAwonk For instance the court just heard Stone tell the committee that he talked to Trump during the campaign about electoral politics, and not about WikiLeaks. Gates testifies this morning that he heard Stone talking to Trump in July 2016 about forthcoming WikiLeaks releases.

@RVAwonk We also just heard Stone tell the committee that his super PAC was called the Committee to Restore America's Sovereignty and NOT, that he recalled, the Committee to Restore America's Greatness. Stone was wrong. It was the the second one. fec.gov/data/committee…

@RVAwonk Defense finishes playing long. clips from Stone's HPSCI interview. And..."Mr. Stone rests."

Government also rests. Closing arguments tomorrow at 1pm, Judge Jackson says.

@RVAwonk If, as seems likely, Stone is convicted on most of these charges, his defense team's performance will probably face criticism. They seem inert. On the other hand, they have a tough case. Stone made statements to HPSCI seem to be false, and which he presumably knew were false.