Everything that is left would have been true had he been found guilty.
He did lied either to the FBI or congress, cause he stated 2 different things to be true.
1.It was for a client
2. It was not for a client.
So either way he lied to someone. And the evidence seems to point awefully strong that it was the FBI he lied to, for which he was just found innocent.
He told the truth to congress, so there is nothing they will do.
Im not dooming, its just facts. He did lie to the FBI, there was evidence to prove it, and he walked. Not on a plea, not on a technicality, on an actual verdict.
Now, was there tampering? Was there comminication between the jury and the outaide? Or was all this just there to get evidence into the court? No one knows.
But he should have been found guilty, because he was.
Everything that is left would have been true had he been found guilty.
He did lied either to the FBI or congress, cause he stated 2 different things to be true.
1.It was for a client 2. It was not for a client.
So either way he lied to someone. And the evidence seems to point awefully strong that it was the FBI he lied to, for which he was just found innocent.
He told the truth to congress, so there is nothing they will do.
Im not dooming, its just facts. He did lie to the FBI, there was evidence to prove it, and he walked. Not on a plea, not on a technicality, on an actual verdict.
Now, was there tampering? Was there comminication between the jury and the outaide? Or was all this just there to get evidence into the court? No one knows.
But he should have been found guilty, because he was.