Was CNN Tipped Off About FBI Raid Of Roger Stone?

[esmith]

Seems that there is some questions about how CNN was the only news(?) source that knew(?) about the FBI raid at Roger Stone's house at 4AM.
CNN says it was the reporters instinct that allowed the camera crew to be at Stone's house for the early morning raid:
CNN says it wasn't tipped off about Roger Stone arrest: 'It's reporter's instinct'
CNN Pushes Back It Was 'Tipped Off' by FBI About Roger Stone's Arrest

Other sources are wondering if CNN was tipped off about the raid by someone within the DOJ.
Congressman Demands Probe into CNN's Presence at Roger Stone Raid
Andy Biggs pushes DOJ to probe whether CNN was tipped off to Roger Stone arrest
Mueller leaked pre-dawn raid on Roger Stone to CNN – set up crew an hour before raid – Pacific Pundit

 

[metis]

And this is important because ...?

 

[Revoltingest]

And this is important because ...?

It suggests a corrupt relationship between leftish news media & the justice system.
The latter did go a teensie bit overboard using a military style assault to arrest a
guy who has publicly said he expected to be indicted. When government abuses
people for political gain, we have a real problem. Perhaps you'd care if they'd
done the same to one of your party's own, eh?

 

[Willamena]

CNN had staked out the house since Robert Mueller requested transcripts from the House Intelligence Committee five weeks ago. Probably not the only ones.

Can you imagine it, reporters sitting, bored for weeks, others had left, but... suddenly this happens.

 

[esmith]

And this is important because ...?

If the arrest was so important and so dangerous that it had to be done at 4AM it obviously was important enough to keep the operation under wraps.
Who knows what would have happened if somehow the details became known to the arrestee. He could have barricaded himself in the house and met the FBI opposed with one of those nasty looking semi-automatic rifles.

 

[Revoltingest]

If the arrest was so important and so dangerous that it had to be done at 4AM it obviously was important enough to keep the operation under wraps.
Who knows what would have happened if somehow the details became known to the arrestee. He could have barricaded himself in the house and met the FBI opposed with one of those nasty looking semi-automatic rifles.

If indeed CNN had a continual presence there,
the cops would've known that.
The show would've been staged for that venue.

 

[lukethethird]

Maybe it was CNN that tipped off the FBI.

 

[Revoltingest]

Maybe in was CNN that tipped off the FBI.

I'm sure the FBI already had his address, & knew that he lived there.
(They're capable in that way.)

 

[metis]

If the arrest was so important and so dangerous that it had to be done at 4AM it obviously was important enough to keep the operation under wraps.
Who knows what would have happened if somehow the details became known to the arrestee. He could have barricaded himself in the house and met the FBI opposed with one of those nasty looking semi-automatic rifles.

This is exactly how the FBI conducts such raids with those who they feel could flee, could have weapons, or who could destroy evidence. However, leaking it is almost always a no-no.

I knew about a major drug raid in Detroit a few decades ago because there was a FBI agent that I used to bring into my poli si course, and he told me to watch the local news that evening. Since he worked in conjunction with the DEA, I figured it was about drugs and was right. Since I knew the agent quite well, I figured that he knew I wouldn't leak anything.

It is possible that someone trusted at CNN may have been forewarned, but even if that was the case, so what? If that were to be a breach, then go after that agent if it were to be true. However, is it that maybe CNN was notified by an agent versus Fox that's the real m.o. for you on this?

BTW, do you really sympathize with Stone?

 

[Sunstone]

I'm absolutely certain that it is the unofficial policy of our leftist government to leak information to the media in cases like this one. There's probably a deep state document on it somewhere declaring it's the thing to do. Can't possibly have been one lone guy acting alone -- assuming there was a real tip off anyway.

 

[esmith]

. However, is it that maybe CNN was notified by an agent versus Fox that's the real m.o. for you on this?

BTW, do you really sympathize with Stone?

If CNN was notified by an agent I don't give a rat's *** what media outlet was not notified, what I have a problem with is if there was a "leak".
I don't give a rat's *** about Stone.

What I would sympathize with is if charges are brought about for political reasons of anyone. Matter of fact I would go beyond sympathize.

 

[columbus]

If CNN was notified by an agent I don't give a rat's *** what media outlet was not notified, what I have a problem with is if there was a "leak".

The problem here is the vagueness of "leak".
Somebody could have called their child care provider and asked them to stay with the kids overnight that day. The well informed babysitter puts 2 and 2 together and scores a hundred bucks with a phone call.

Anything could happen.
Tom

 

[BSM1]

This is exactly how the FBI conducts such raids with those who they feel could flee, could have weapons, or who could destroy evidence. However, leaking it is almost always a no-no.

I knew about a major drug raid in Detroit a few decades ago because there was a FBI agent that I used to bring into my poli si course, and he told me to watch the local news that evening. Since he worked in conjunction with the DEA, I figured it was about drugs and was right. Since I knew the agent quite well, I figured that he knew I wouldn't leak anything.

It is possible that someone trusted at CNN may have been forewarned, but even if that was the case, so what? If that were to be a breach, then go after that agent if it were to be true. However, is it that maybe CNN was notified by an agent versus Fox that's the real m.o. for you on this?

BTW, do you really sympathize with Stone?

Soooo...you think Stone was/is a hardened criminal?

 

[columbus]

Soooo...you think Stone was/is a hardened criminal?

Well, Trump does seem to like that sort of compadre.

He hired Manafort to run his campaign while Manafort was under investigation.

I believe that Trump prefers the kind of criminals that are "too smart to get caught", though. Like he prefers war heros who don't get captured. Roger Stone is probably not his favorite person right now.
Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

This is exactly how the FBI conducts such raids with those who they feel could flee, could have weapons, or who could destroy evidence. However, leaking it is almost always a no-no.

I knew about a major drug raid in Detroit a few decades ago because there was a FBI agent that I used to bring into my poli si course, and he told me to watch the local news that evening. Since he worked in conjunction with the DEA, I figured it was about drugs and was right. Since I knew the agent quite well, I figured that he knew I wouldn't leak anything.

It is possible that someone trusted at CNN may have been forewarned, but even if that was the case, so what? If that were to be a breach, then go after that agent if it were to be true. However, is it that maybe CNN was notified by an agent versus Fox that's the real m.o. for you on this?

BTW, do you really sympathize with Stone?

Here's the thing about security theater....
An intimidating over-reaction designed to threaten, punish, or serve PR
can always be justified by claiming such threats. (How often do we hear
of It can always be claimed to be standard procedure. But I've seen
them conduct raids where far far less force, manpower, & theater were
used.
Stone wasn't a threat like your Detroit drug dealers. For the FBI to claim
fears that he was....I'm skeptical. "Feign" rather than "claim".

 

[metis]

What I would sympathize with is if charges are brought about for political reasons of anyone. Matter of fact I would go beyond sympathize.

Are you assuming they are? Does this also apply to those in Trump's camp who already have pleaded guilty?

I don't know if Stone is guilty of anything, but I do know that the conviction rate for the FBI overall if charges are made is roughly 95%. And Stone and Trump have long been "two peas in a pod", plus Trump's overall behavior indicates that Putin seems to have something on him that Trump is afraid of. Heck, Trump is far harder on many members of his own party that he is on Russia and especially Putin. Why do you think that is? And why is it that so many members of Trump's team denied having any contacts with any Russians, which we now know were bogus claims that they made? Doesn't these get you at least a wee bit suspicious?

BTW, the leaks coming out of Trump's White House put together are larger and longer than the Mississippi River, but he did say he was going to hire "the best", did he not? So, if you are so worried about a possible FBI leak, which I am at least somewhat concerned about as well, why do you still support the Trump camp since Trump said he'd hire "the best" and hired "the Swamp" instead?

 

[Augustus]

Seems that there is some questions about how CNN was the only news(?) source that knew(?) about the FBI raid at Roger Stone's house at 4AM.
CNN says it was the reporters instinct that allowed the camera crew to be at Stone's house for the early morning raid:
CNN says it wasn't tipped off about Roger Stone arrest: 'It's reporter's instinct'
CNN Pushes Back It Was 'Tipped Off' by FBI About Roger Stone's Arrest

Other sources are wondering if CNN was tipped off about the raid by someone within the DOJ.
Congressman Demands Probe into CNN's Presence at Roger Stone Raid
Andy Biggs pushes DOJ to probe whether CNN was tipped off to Roger Stone arrest
Mueller leaked pre-dawn raid on Roger Stone to CNN – set up crew an hour before raid – Pacific Pundit

Maybe they did, maybe they didn't.

No one here has any way of knowing, which usually means the answer will depend on one's partisan allegiance.

 

[esmith]

Are you assuming they are? Does this also apply to those in Trump's camp who already have pleaded guilty?

I don't know if Stone is guilty of anything, but I do know that the conviction rate for the FBI overall if charges are made is roughly 95%. And Stone and Trump have long been "two peas in a pod", plus Trump's overall behavior indicates that Putin seems to have something on him that Trump is afraid of. Heck, Trump is far harder on many members of his own party that he is on Russia and especially Putin. Why do you think that is? And why is it that so many members of Trump's team denied having any contacts with any Russians, which we now know were bogus claims that they made? Doesn't these get you at least a wee bit suspicious?

BTW, the leaks coming out of Trump's White House put together are larger and longer than the Mississippi River, but he did say he was going to hire "the best", did he not? So, if you are so worried about a possible FBI leak, which I am at least somewhat concerned about as well, why do you still support the Trump camp since Trump said he'd hire "the best" and hired "the Swamp" instead?

No, what I'm saying is that to bring legal charges against anyone for political reasons only is despicable.

 

[Shaul]

This is rank speculation. However the question shouldn’t simply be dismissed. CNN has had story, after story, after story related to the Mueller investigation which relied on “anonymous sources”. Are supposed to believe that all those sources suddenly went silent? Two words, “Deep State”.

 

[Nous]

If CNN was notified by an agent I don't give a rat's *** what media outlet was not notified, what I have a problem with is if there was a "leak".
I don't give a rat's *** about Stone.

Obviously there is no law that forbids the DOJ from tipping off a news outlet about an upcoming raid or arrest. Therefore, if that's what happened in the instant case, I see no reason to be upset by it.