|
Re: Appellate issue?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Agreed. You missed my point.
Berman is saying Stone covered something up for Trump. That assumes there was something to cover up. She doesn't know that. What she does know is that Stone lied in a manner that delayed and compromised Congress's investigation of whether Trump did something wrong. She jumped ahead and assumed the investigation would have found something that needed to be covered up, and that Stone knew what that something was.
In assuming Trump was guilty of doing something that needed to be covered up, and that Stone knew something that needed to be covered up, Berman betrays bias.
All that was proven at trial was that Stone lied to Congress. Why he did it and what he knew beyond the limited facts he misrepresented weren't part of the case against him. You correctly assessed that all that needed to be proven was that he lied. Yet she assumed he was covering something up. Why leave her slip showing like that? To send a message to Trump and Barr?
|
She didn't jump ahead and assume anything. Amazing that you would suggest she is biased for describing the evidence (even if not part of the prima facie elements of the time) in a case that she presided over.
__________________
“It was fortunate that so few men acted according to moral principle, because it was so easy to get principles wrong, and a determined person acting on mistaken principles could really do some damage." - Larissa MacFarquhar
|
