So, why only "process" indictments, as SHS, Fox and Rudy call them?
Sanders, Giuliani and Fox News are particularly inept apologists for the Trump administration, but that doesn't mean that what they're trying to say should be dismissed out of hand.
Specifically, the fact that Stone was not indicted for directly violating any election related law or conspiring with others to violate any election-related law is interesting.
One possible explanation -- the one the Trumpsters want everyone to believe -- is that the reason no one connected to the campaign has been charged with any violation of election related law is that there isn't evidence sufficient to support such a charge.
On the other hand, it may simply be a matter of timing. Mueller may not be ready to move forward with a conspiracy indictment that names not only Stone, but others. His indictment of Stone, like the other process indictments, may be designed to squeeze Stone into giving up more information Thus, the fact that Stone was indicted on other charges doesn't rule out the possibility that Mueller could in the future seek and obtain a separate conspiracy indictment that names not only Stone, but Bannon and heaven knows who else as part of a conspiracy to defraud the United States by interfering in the election and/or other election violations.
= new reply since forum marked as read
I think prosecutors just call them charges for crimes.
I mean, if that's the best they can do, I'll just sit and watch the fireworks...
