Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 24, 2020 - Rudy Giuliani

37:41

Roger Stone and Rudy Giuliani, EXCLUSIVE Interview | Ep. 56, Part One

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	It's our purpose to bring to bear the principle of common sense and rational discussion to the issues of our day.
	America was created at a time of great turmoil, tremendous disagreements, anger, hatred.
	There was a book written in 1776 that guided much of the discipline of thinking that brought us to the discovery of our freedoms, of our God-given freedoms.
	It was Thomas Paine's Common Sense, written in 1776, one of the first American bestsellers in which Thomas Paine explained by rational principles the reason why these small colonies felt the necessity to separate from the powerful Kingdom of England and the King of England.
	He explained their inherent desire for liberty, freedom, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and he explained it in ways that were understandable to the people, to all of the people.
	A great deal of the reason for America's constant ability to self-improve is because we are able to reason, we're able to talk to each other, we're able to listen to each other, and we're able to analyze.
	We are able to apply our God-given common sense.
	So let's do it.
	Welcome to Rudy Giuliani's Common Sense.
	Today we have a very, very interesting guest.
	I think you're all going to be really very interested to hear what he has to say.
	Probably get an insight into really how bad things are in Washington right now.
	But unfortunately, he had to live through it.
	We're just learning about it.
	And that's Roger Stone, who you all know, and I think you all lived through what he went through, and we're going to get right to it.
	I mean, Roger has been in the business of politics since back in the Nixon era.
	He's worked on many presidential campaigns, just about every Republican one.
	He's worked on local governor's campaigns.
	He's probably one of the most knowledgeable people about politics and government, called upon for advice by many, many people, including Donald Trump, who was and is a personal friend of his.
	And we're going to see how that came close to ruining his life, which should not have been the case.
	Roger, how are you?
	Thanks for having me.
	I really appreciate the opportunity to be here, particularly since, as you know, I was unconstitutionally gagged I know you do.
	You always have had a lot to say, and it's always very, very prescient and very much on point.
	But I guess—I actually don't know how to begin other than to say, in all of the experience that you've had—and you're one of the, you know, four or five most experienced people in Washington.
	You've been through administrations going back to Nixon.
	Did you ever think something like this could happen in America?
	What happened to you?
	There must be a sense, even now, of it being surreal.
	It's very hard to believe because, look, I lived through Watergate.
	Right.
	And Watergate, as an abuse of power, was nothing compared to what we have seen here.
	Recognize that I was politically targeted by the Trump Justice Department.
	Think about that for a moment.
	And that for a year and a half, almost two years, I had to Rodger Stone will be indicted for treason.
	Rodger Stone will be indicted for espionage.
	Rodger Stone will be indicted for conspiracy against the United States.
	Rodger Stone will be indicted for laundering millions of rubles into American dollars in violation of the Foreign Campaign Contributions Ban.
	Rodger Stone will be charged with mail fraud, wire fraud, aiding and abetting a Russian conspiracy.
	Cybercrimes, including unauthorized access to a protected computer.
	Cybercrimes such as receipt and dissemination of stolen data.
	Week after week after week.
	And I knew, of course, that none of these things were even remotely true.
	And then to learn after the fact, after Mueller's dirty cops basically defrauded multiple judges and magistrates into giving them a search warrant, So they could conduct a legal proctological examination of every corner of my life.
	They could find no evidence of any of those crimes.
	So then Andrew Weissman put together a very cleverly fabricated, very, very convoluted indictment for lying to Congress.
	The problem with that is that violation of the False Statements Act requires not only that the statement be untrue, but that it be material, that it be relevant, that it be significant, say hiding some other illegal activity, and that you had the intent to lie, which in my case was not true.
	I was basically charged with misremembering things that I had said that did not hide any underlying or even interesting
	political crime of any kind.
	It was very contrived, but then I had the naive view that I was gonna get a fair trial.
	I had the naive view that I could prove the truth.
	And that did not turn out to be the case.
	So let's go back and put this together so people can understand it.
	You were part of, well, first of all, you've been an advisor to then Donald Trump, now President Trump, and probably, as far as I can tell, maybe the first person to really seriously recommend that he run for president.
	Well, actually, it's interesting.
	The very first person to come up with that idea, Was former President Richard Nixon.
	In his retirement years, Nixon was invited to George Steinbrenner's box on a day in which Donald was also a guest.
	It was the first time they met.
	And I was doing some work for Donald Trump.
	I was also doing some work for the former president, basically vetting invitations and working on his schedule, occasionally traveling with him when he made speeches.
	So Nixon called me the next morning and he said, well, I met your man.
	I said, what did you think?
	He said, I'm telling you, this guy could go all the way.
	I said, well, do you think he should run for governor?
	He said, no, no, no.
	I mean all the way.
	If this guy ever decided he wants to be president, I'm telling you he hasn't.
	Which is a pretty good testimony for a guy who was on six national tickets.
	I think I first put the idea forward on a serious basis in 1988.
	And Donald Trump was intrigued, but not really interested.
	This was before 1988, the conversation with Nixon, would you say?
	Happened about the year before.
	And 1988 would be around the time that Donald was doing the Wollman Rink, with one of his bold moves that made him very popular, where he challenged Koch Koch couldn't get the Wallman rink done, corruption, all kinds of other things.
	And Donald said, I can do it in a year or six months or eight months or whatever it was.
	And then he got it done in even less time.
	And under budget, as I recall.
	And under budget, right.
	So I first put it forward as a serious idea in 1988.
	I was able to convince him to make a trip to New Hampshire and just give a speech to the Portsmouth Chamber of Commerce.
	Classic Donald Trump speech.
	And that day I remember like it was yesterday.
	Here's what he talked about.
	Why are we getting ripped off in all these trade deals?
	Why aren't our trade deals better?
	Why aren't our NATO partners, now that they're wealthy, why aren't they paying their fair share?
	Why should we continue to pay for all their defense?
	And that the people in Washington are idiots.
	They don't know how to make a good deal for the taxpayers.
	It's kind of vintage Trump.
	Now, the Chamber of Commerce luncheon the week before had been Vice President George Bush.
	He had a great crowd of about 500, but Donald Trump had 1,500.
	And there were 2,000-plus people who went out just to see the helicopter link.
	This was the first time I saw the Trump magic in a political context.
	And believe me, the place was on fire.
	So he enjoyed himself, but it was too early, I think.
	Real estate mountains to climb yet.
	He loves what he does, he did.
	But I think the idea began to take root.
	I tried again in 2000 to get him to run.
	He was a good friend of Ross Perot.
	He was also friendly with Jesse Ventura, who was then the governor of Minnesota because Jesse had wrestled at the Trump Plaza in Atlantic City.
	Because of the federal election law at that time, because Perot had run twice so strongly, The reform party candidate was automatically entitled to a check for $40 million.
	And Donald Trump understands the value of other people's money.
	So I think he thought about it.
	But then after a couple of exploratory forays, he came back to me and said, you know, Roger, you either got to be a Republican or a Democrat in this country to get elected president.
	You can't get elected as a third party candidate.
	And what if I just take enough votes away from the Republican, and then I inadvertently elect Al Gore.
	I couldn't live with myself if I did that.
	So he correctly decided the time was not right.
	Wanted him to run in 2012.
	Again, I saw Mitt Romney as a weak candidate, as a loser.
	This would be an ideal time to take a short break.
	When your life is in chaos, your home is your safe haven, your most valuable asset.
	Imagine losing your home to some online scammer.
	In an instant, you have no place to live, and your home, your security, your nest egg in an emergency isn't yours anymore.
	Is this even possible?
	In a word, yes.
	It's called home title theft.
	And the FBI calls it one of the fastest growing crimes.
	My friends at Home Title Log demonstrated how quickly and easily online scammers can steal our homes.
	This is a legal title to a home in California.
	All home titles, yours and mine, are vulnerable.
	They're kept online, where thieves, foreign and domestic, hunt them.
	They simply print your home's title, Forge your signature stating you sold your home, put a fake notary seal on it, and refile it as the new owner.
	In an instant, your home is theirs.
	Then they can borrow against it and you'd be responsible for the payments.
	Or they could try to evict you.
	I'm serious.
	Your bank doesn't cover you and neither does your homeowner's insurance.
	Home title lock does.
	For pennies a day, Home Title Lock puts a virtual firewall around your home's title.
	If some cyber thief tampers with your home's title, they're on it, helping to shut it down before you lose your home.
	Here's what I want you to do.
	Go to HomeTitleLock.com and register your address to see if you're already a victim and don't know it.
	You will receive 30 days of free Home Title Lock protection using the promo code RUDY.
	You need to do this now.
	Get 30 days of free protection with promo code Rudy at hometitlelock.com.
	Welcome back and we'll continue our interview with Roger Stone.
	Let's replay that one time.
	It's always interesting to say if history had changed.
	You know it better than I do, but I had the feeling that if he had run in 2012, that he might have won in 2012.
	Well, I think it may have been yet premature.
	I think maybe we need eight years of Obama, recognizing that I think I actually voted for you in the Florida primary now that I think about it.
	But we never had a president who wasn't in public service, who wasn't a governor, senator, general, a congressman.
	Right.
	And the country had to get had to go through a great deal before they were prepared to think of something entirely different, something new.
	I think by 2016, Americans were so disgusted with both parties With all political institutions, with the media, that the time was right for an outsider.
	Those who look at politics in Washington today and try to try to size it up as Democrats versus Republicans really don't get it.
	It's insiders versus an outsider.
	It's members of the political establishment versus a reformer.
	And they don't take kindly in Washington to people who come in and upset the status quo.
	I think the political establishment took Donald Trump, they didn't take him seriously enough.
	They wrote him off as some kind of caricature.
	They had no idea how determined and how tough he is, and how committed he was.
	And he pulled off the most improbable political upset in American history against a vaunted machine that had been through multiple national presidential elections.
	Donald Trump having never run for anything in his life, He outworked them.
	He outfoxed them.
	He outstrategized them.
	It really was an audacious, bold campaign.
	And you and I both know this.
	It was all him.
	Right.
	It was all him.
	Absolutely.
	There is no Karl Rove in Trump land.
	Donald Trump is the master of his own fate.
	That doesn't mean that he won't listen to advice.
	If you have good advice, he may take it.
	He may not take it.
	He may completely disregard it.
	But at the end of the day, he's his own man.
	He makes all of his own decisions, and it's worked out pretty darn well.
	I think it's what the American people certainly wanted in 2016.
	I think they still appreciate that.
	I think what I didn't anticipate, I'm not sure he did, I anticipated he would have the enemies that we saw during the campaign, but I didn't anticipate the unbelievable effort to basically overthrow the government.
	He frightened them so much that I have no doubt, and I know I'll be accused of being a conspiracy theorist, but basically this was an attempt to overthrow the government and by illegal means.
	There's no question about that.
	So I think Donald Trump expected what has always been the tradition in our country that a loser graciously concedes You can resent it, but you don't try to take down the government.
	I mean, I was not happy with the election of Clinton or Obama.
	I thought Republicans were foolish to try to impeach Bill Clinton over private, distasteful, but consensual sexual activity in the Oval Office.
	If you were going to remove Bill Clinton, why didn't you take him out for selling military secrets to the Chinese for illegal campaign contributions?
	There was plenty there, but I disagreed with impeachment.
	This was The largest single abuse of power in American history, in which Barack Obama and Joe Biden and their CIA director, their FBI director, their NSA director, their DNI director, their UN ambassador, and the rest of the high-level members of their administration, including the many at the FBI, abused the full legal authority of the U.S.
	government and the extraordinary capability of our intelligence agencies for surveillance to spy on the
	Republican candidate for president, to defraud the FISA courts, to use documentation they knew
	was fraudulent in an illegal coup to undo the 2016 election. And that's not a speculation. That's
	not a conspiracy theory.
	We now have declassified documents, thanks to the heroic efforts of Rick Grinnell,
	that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that this whole thing was a political hit job.
	And all of the documents aren't out yet.
	I can assure you.
	It's even clearer than you're saying that somewhere in 2015, 2016, they decided that they had to have a plan for Trump.
	I can trace it back to a meeting of the Obama National Security Council in January of 2016,
	when four Ukrainian prosecutors were told by the Biden and Obama people on the National Security Council
	that they wanted them to dig up all the dirt they could, particularly on Manafort, because they believed that they
	could make Manafort the link with Russia.
	And it was as clear as that. It was as clear as they were going to frame him.
	But the whole situation with Brennan and what was going to happen in Europe had already been set in motion.
	So it was going on in 2015.
	There's now evidence of that, that they were planning it, and it was being reported directly to Obama, because you would get conversations like, we have to get his permission, he wants to know about it, I don't think we know the full scope of it yet, but there was a great fear of him above and beyond any of the other candidates.
	And then what I'd like you to do is explain to people, then how do you—this is a big, big plan.
	I guess you can simplify it with Strzok's phrase.
	It was a plan to prevent him from being president, because the original pursuit of Manafort was to get him in trouble.
	With that black book.
	And they actually believed that would take Trump out of the campaign.
	They believed that, not realizing that no matter what they did, they couldn't take Trump out of the campaign.
	But they believed that that whole setup in Ukraine, in August or September, it was going to be leaked and Trump would have to back down.
	That failed.
	So they had the plan to stop him.
	And then they had the insurance policy to take them out afterwards.
	We'll be back with you shortly.
	A good security system makes a family feel even more secure at home.
	SimpliSafe does just that.
	It creates a secure home and it's simple to operate.
	SimpliSafe reinvented the home security industry years ago when they introduced a wireless system using Wi-Fi signals instead of running wires all throughout your house.
	that eliminates the need and expense for an installation crew.
	SimpliSafe delivers you a pre-tested, pre-configured set of components that are easy to install.
	If you can remove crack and peel tape, you can install this system in less than one hour.
	Three million families and counting in America rely on SimpliSafe.
	Your doors and windows and rooms of your home will all be protected by the sensors and motion detectors.
	There are sound sensors and HD camera components as well.
	All of those parts are connected With wireless signals within your home, and once they're connected, you can activate SimpliSafe's 24-7 monitoring service.
	All of that costs you just $14.99 a month, with no contractor signed.
	That connects your system with the local police department for a fast response in the event of a home intrusion.
	It works in houses?
	Condos and apartments like mine.
	SimplySafe.com slash Rudy is the site.
	You'll get a 60-day money-back guarantee and a free HD camera with your purchase.
	Just go to simplysafe.com slash Rudy and order it today.
	Don't wait.
	Thank you.
	Welcome back to our very interesting interview with Roger Stone.
	So now, how does Roger Stone end up getting involved in it.
	We know how Manafort did and Papadopoulos and Carter.
	I mean, there are so many victims here of horrible government abuse.
	But how did you get so lucky as to be focused on?
	It's an excellent question because although I was formally involved in the president's campaign very early
	in the set up phase, I left the campaign to publish my book, The War on Women, which is still the definitive
	opposition research dump on the epic corruption of both Bill and Hillary Clinton.
	Bill Clinton's serial sexual assaults on dozens, if not hundreds of women.
	Hillary's role in silencing those women.
	She's the one who hires the heavy handed private detectives and the nasty lawyers to try to intimidate all of these women.
	Remember, the mainstream media Was very monolithic in the 80s.
	Many of these stories had been suppressed.
	Only the story of Juanita Broderick had come out.
	And even then, NBC sat on it for six months and didn't broadcast it until Lisa Myers threatened to resign and go public.
	So there was much about the Clintons to revisit, and the reason it was still germane was because of Hillary's role in covering up various criminal actions.
	She was running for president.
	So those who said, well, Bill isn't running, why does it matter?
	It mattered because of her role in covering up.
	So I left to write my book, publish my book.
	I continued to keep in touch with the candidate.
	I spoke, I wrote, I did surrogate speaking, I did a lot of television interviews because I've known him for 40 years.
	I knew both of his parents very well.
	I went to their wakes and their funerals.
	I helped in the effort to make his sister a federal judge when I worked For one of our greatest presidents, Ronald Reagan.
	She was a great federal judge.
	She was, as you know, a very highly regarded federal judge.
	I knew Donald's brother-in-law, John Barry, was a great lawyer, was a close friend of my client, Governor Tom Kaine of New Jersey.
	So I had this long association.
	Donald Trump and his wife, then Marla Maples, actually his fiancee, attended my wedding when my wife and I got married.
	I was there when he married Melania.
	We were we were honored guests there.
	So I have a great affection for Donald Trump and his family.
	I don't know his children that well, because they were they were very young when I was more deeply involved with them.
	But I like I like everything that I see.
	I particularly like Don Jr.
	because he's got huge courage.
	He's out there.
	Yeah.
	You know, and I like that style.
	So what's interesting is when Ron Rosenstein testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee just a couple weeks ago, he specifically said that he did not approve the investigation into Roger Stone.
	First of all, that's not true.
	He did exactly that.
	He signed the scope memo on October 26, 2017, which is three months after Robert Mueller already knew there was no Russian collusion.
	So I think I was gratuitously targeted initially.
	They were this prosecutor, Aaron Zelinsky,
	who tries to pass himself off as a non-political career line prosecutor, but who was in fact
	deputy counselor to Hillary Clinton at the State Department.
	The guy is an epic bully in the Weissman mold.
	He's pompous, arrogant.
	They dragged 19 of my current or former associates He not only threatened them, but he threatened their lawyers.
	At one point, Dennis Vako, who you know well, was representing Michael Caputo.
	And when Vako objected to the form of a question, Zelinsky shouted at him, I am the government.
	I will ask any question I want.
	This guy is not mentally well.
	In any event, he was like Ahab with the white whale.
	He was convinced that I had advance copies of the WikiLeaks disclosures.
	He was convinced I knew about the source and content of them, which of course I didn't.
	There was never any scintilla of evidence to the contrary.
	I teased the WikiLeaks disclosures on my Twitter feed because I didn't want the mainstream media to sweep them under the carpet and for no other reason.
	But he was absolutely convinced that I had them somewhere and I was hiding them.
	And when that didn't turn out to be true, when they could find no Russian collusion, no WikiLeaks collaboration, that's when Weissman essentially put together this contrived lie to Congress charge.
	And then to make it sound nefarious, they added a witness tampering charge when the guy who I'm accused of witness tampering with had, in fact, told other exculpatory witnesses in my case that he would shoot them in the head if they contradicted him in front of the grand jury.
	He, of course, was not charged with witness tampering.
	They ignored multiple exculpatory witnesses.
	They ignored 30 pages of text messages that proved That Randy Credico was my source on a very limited basis.
	Mayor, all I knew was that Assange had already announced that he had information on Hillary, and I was told it was significant, that it was controversial, that it would really have an impact, and that it would come in October.
	Not exactly a state secret.
	Every reporter in America knew this.
	Every political in the country was anticipating it.
	But in the end, I was convicted of misleading Congress about the Trump campaign's interest in WikiLeaks, which is, of course, not only not illegal, but candidate Trump himself talked about it on 142 occasions in September and October.
	Of course you'd be interested in it.
	You're running against this person, the President of the United States, and there's this prospect that all this very damaging information is going to come out about her.
	Of course you're going to be interested in it.
	You would be not human.
	But I happen to know, Roger, and I don't know if you and your lawyers knew this, they were interested in you.
	At the time that they became interested in Manafort, because you had been a partner of Manafort's years ago and I think remained a good friend of his, and the way they—the way they saw it—this is back in February, January, February of 2016.
	The way they saw it, Manafort was not that close to Trump over the years, that somehow you were involved in the middle of that Trump-Manafort relationship.
	And either would know—because they were convinced that Manafort was his connection to the Russians, that you would know about that connection to the Russians or possibly have been part of it.
	So then when the WikiLeaks thing came about and their suspicion about that, they added that to the Manafort thing.
	But unlike a decent prosecutor, after having run that theory down and finding out that it didn't go anywhere, it wasn't true, They decided they were going to create a process crime to get you, which is about all they did.
	This is a special counsel who created crimes.
	The background on this issue I think is important to understand is that Donald Trump had gone through the primaries and caucuses and a few places, state conventions, and rolled up more than enough delegates to be nominated on the first ballot.
	But because this was a grassroots insurgent campaign and there weren't that many experienced people involved, nobody had been paying attention to who the various state chairmen or state committees were placing on the credentials, rules, and platform committees, which as you know, govern the conduct of the convention.
	In 1952, Senator Robert Taft showed up at the convention in Chicago with more than enough votes to be nominated on the first ballot.
	And the Eisenhower people outmaneuvered the Taft forces on the credentials committee and stole the nomination from Bob Taft and nominated Dwight Eisenhower, who went on to be one of our greatest presidents.
	Paul Manafort's expertise, because he and I are both from Connecticut, The last state in the country that nominates their statewide candidates for state and federal office by convention.
	The same convention rules as the Republican National Convention.
	By the way, the same convention rules as the young Republican National Convention.
	Manafort had a niche expertise.
	He had done it before for Ronald Reagan.
	And I was beginning to be concerned because George Bush, And Ted Cruz and John Kasich had formed this alliance to try to stop Donald Trump.
	And I remember very distinctly on a Sunday afternoon, the candidate called me and he said, you know, I've won all these primaries and caucuses big.
	Can they really steal the nomination from me?
	I said, not only could they, but they're going to try.
	And he said, well, what do I do?
	And I said, you have to get an experienced convention manager.
	Because nobody's been paying attention to this and it needs it can be handled.
	But you need to head you need a vote count, you need to find out who on the committee jurors who's hostile and so on.
	He said, Well, who would you recommend?
	And I said, Well, you've met Paul Manafort, you know, Paul, this is his specific area of expertise.
	And I'll say, Well, you know, Tom Barrett suggested that as well.
	And I said, Well, Paul and Tom are very good friends.
	I think Paul would I know he supports you.
	I've talked to him.
	He's a supporter of yours.
	I think he would jump at the opportunity.
	But the idea here was a limited role for Manafort that went with the convention.
	I think that candidate Trump was so impressed with Paul's kind of crisp efficiency that he asked him to stay.
	Now, I know firsthand from from a number of reporters who happened to be at our favorite newspaper, The New York Times, that The Clinton people were petrified about Manafort's competence.
	He is a highly capable individual, regardless what you think of him in any other way.
	He's not a very good dresser in my opinion, but this is his area of expertise.
	He's very disciplined and he's a great political organizer and manager.
	They wanted Paul Manafort out of there for a second reason.
	They thought that taking on an insurgent grassroots campaign Which, let's face it, there were many, many people attracted to Donald Trump's candidacy who'd never been in politics before.
	So they wanted Manafort gone.
	I think this is one of the reasons why they cooked up the phony ledger and put it on page one of the New York Times.
	I've never seen their retraction on that story, by the way.
	But to get him out of there.
	The only Russians I met in 2016 Was the FBI informant that they sent to see me to try to entrap me?
	In a very odd sequence of events, a man calling himself Henry Greenberg contacts one of my longest friends, Michael Caputo, and says, I have information of great value to Donald Trump, and I want to get it to him.
	I want to meet Roger Stone.
	Caputo kept bugging me about this.
	As you know, Mayor, in a presidential campaign, a lot of stuff comes in over the transom.
	Much of it's worthless.
	Some is valuable.
	You just never know.
	So I agreed to meet this fellow, Greenberg, not his real name, in a cafe in Sunny Isles, Florida.
	It was a 12-minute meeting because he told me he had this information.
	He was wearing a Trump t-shirt, a Make America Great Again cap.
	So if he was undercover, he was not doing a very good job of hiding it.
	I think this was an effort to convince me he was a supporter.
	And he told me that he had access to information about Hillary Clinton that would be devastating.
	I said, okay, well, I don't know if it has any value.
	I said, I'd have to see it.
	He said, well, that is going to cost you $2 million.
	And I laughed and I said, well, I don't have $2 million.
	And if I did have $2 million, I wouldn't spend it on that.
	And he said, no, you don't understand.
	It's not your money I want.
	It's Donald Trump's money I want.
	And then I said, no, you don't understand.
	Donald Trump will never pay $2 million for opposition research.
	And then we can't even get him to pay for polling.
	I said, you know, in all honesty, I really, I really have no interest.
	I have no interest.
	It was nice to meet you.
	Good luck and God bless.
	And I left.
	Only later did I find out that he was an ethnic Russian.
	I knew he was.
	Eastern European.
	He was a formidable guy.
	Big, tall guy with a mustache.
	Only later did I find out that he was in the country on an informants visa signed by the head of the FBI in the Miami office.
	One of nine such informants visas that he had because back in Russia he had been convicted of a violent crime with a gun.
	You'll find this nowhere in the Mueller report.
	They talk about the meeting, but they conclude that it could not be ascertained, it could not be proven that Greenberg was in cahoots with the Russian government.
	First of all, they know his real name.
	They didn't use it.
	Why don't they use his real name?
	Because his real name would trace back to the fact that at the same time they were approaching George Papadopoulos, and at the same time they were approaching Carter Page, May of 2016, prior to the formal opening of an investigation, these are human assets, they made this pass at me.
	And I turned it down flatly.
	And then we later learned who he really was.
	Mueller had no interest in this at all, for some strange reason.
	Well, there's many, many things that he had no interest in that would have been entirely exculpatory.
	Roger Stone's story, as you can see, is very important and very complex.
	It's very important because it illustrates probably, as well or better than any other case, a real, real problem for our country today.
	And that is a double standard.
	The way he was treated, as opposed to the way the witnesses in the Hillary Clinton investigation were treated, all of whom were given immunity, never were questioned, never were pressured, certainly were never persecuted, and were never prosecuted.
	And why was he singled out for this kind of treatment?
	Only because of the difference in the way the corrupt Justice Department handles Republicans and Democrats, and we've gotten some of it, but it will require another episode to get the rest of it, as well as taking advantage of what is his substantial expertise in politics and see where he thinks things are right now.
	I mean, after all, this is the man who recognized 20 years earlier That Donald Trump could be the president of the United States, and I never really lost confidence in that.
	It would be really interesting to see what he thinks the president's chances of re-election are and how he would see the president maximizing that in the weeks that remain before the election.
	So we'll be back with a second episode very shortly of the interview with Roger Stone.

▲