All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 17, 2023 - The StoneZONE - Roger Stone
59:22
Roger Stone Fires Back at the Fake News MSNBC Smears LIVE on The StoneZONE
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
and pundit Roger Stone.
Stone has served as a senior campaign aide to three Republican presidents.
He is a New York Times bestselling author and a long time friend and advisor of President Donald Trump.
As an outspoken libertarian, Stone has appeared on thousands of broadcasts, spoken at countless venues, and lectured before the prestigious Oxford Political Union and the Cambridge Union Society.
Due to his four plus decades in the political and cultural arena, Stone has become a pop culture icon And now, here's your host, Roger Stone!
Welcome, I'm Roger Stone, and yes, you are back in the Stone Zone.
Among my favorite of Stone's rules, that's a book I published in 2015, is this rule.
The only thing worse than being talked about is, well, not being talked about.
That doesn't seem to be a problem today.
Yesterday, at about the time that this show ended, right here at the Stone Zone, MSNBC breathtakingly broke a story that they had an exclusive video that showed me plotting to force the seating of fake electors.
Unfortunately, the video that they aired showed no such thing.
Here's a precisely direct transcript of my constitutionally protected free speech in that video.
What I said was, although state officials in all 50 states must ultimately certify the results of the voting in their state to the final decision as to who the state legislatures Authorized being sent to the Electoral College, a decision is made solely by the legislature.
Any legislative body may decide on the basis of overwhelming evidence of fraud to send electors to the electoral college to accurately reflect and and reflect the president's illegitimate victory in the state if it was illegally denied through him through fraud.
We must be prepared to lobby our Republican legislatures by personal contact and by demonstrating the overwhelming will of the people in their state in each state.
This may need to happen.
Some have said since this was recorded and not for public consumption prior to the election that I must have anticipated that President Trump was going to lose.
These are the same people who inaccurately claim that I said in a video that if Trump lost, he should declare victory.
I said nothing of the kind.
What I did say was that if the result was in dispute, if it was up in the air, that he should declare victory.
This is of course the exact same advice that former Secretary of State James A. Baker gave to George W. Bush in 2000.
It's also the same exact advice that Ambassador Joseph P. Kennedy, John Kennedy's father, gave to President John F. Kennedy in 1960.
It is a political piece of advice.
Nowhere did I say if Donald Trump lost, he should declare victory.
Why would I anticipate that there might be fraud in the 2020 election?
Well, here's why.
Because Joe Biden himself announced it.
Let's roll that video.
We seem to have a technical issue there.
In any event, Joe Biden, just to quote him directly, said, we have put together the most comprehensive voter fraud operation in American history.
We will hopefully roll that for you in a second.
But there it is.
That is why one might suspect that there would be widespread fraud.
I made, we have it now?
Okay, let's roll it.
We have put together, I think, the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics.
There you have it.
Is that a reasonable reason to expect that there may well be fraud in the 2024 election?
This is how the media works.
You see, you throw out a story and then you wrap it in a fake narrative calling it something it's not.
Get trolls and others, bots, to repeat it ad nauseum on Twitter until, well, yes, for two days now I have been trending.
Then the fake news outlets move in with their interpretation of what you said.
Let me read from Newsweek, a piece by Ewan Palmer.
New footage has emerged of longtime Donald Trump ally Roger Stone discussing a plot, no plot, To overturn the 2020 election results before Joe Biden had officially been declared the winner.
The footage, which was obtained by MSNBC, having been captured by Danish filmmaker Christopher Gilbranson for his documentary, shows Stone dictating to an associate a plan to install a group of electors who, quote, accurately reflect, close quote, that Trump had won in states where the results had been illegally denied to him through voter fraud.
Correct.
And quite legal.
The clip of Stone discussing ways to overturn the election results was recorded on November 5th, 2020, two days before Biden was declared the winner.
I just explained why that was a reasonable expectation.
MSNBC's chief legal correspondent, Ari Melber.
Now, Ari Melber is not a journalist.
He's not a legal analyst.
He's a distortionist.
He's a propagandist.
He's several other things, but I won't mention them because, well, this is a family-based show.
Said the footage disproves suggestions from Trump and his aides that the plan to overturn the election results was based on a good faith belief that they had won.
No, that's false.
It is based on an assumption that there would be cheating based on Joe Biden's own comments.
Also on the widespread changes in election law.
Opening the door to mail ballots, mail-in ballots, which in a number of states I still believe to be illegal.
Stone has already discussed a plot to install fake electors, never use the word fake elector at any time, to falsify, to falsely name the former president as the winner in several key states before Biden had even won the last election.
Stone had discussed the need to lobby Republican figures to support the plan.
None of that's true.
I never mentioned any specific states.
I never talked about installing fake electors.
And I said that people would lobby Republican legislators.
That would be a fully public and transparent operation, consistent with law.
Although state officials in all 50 states must ultimately certify the results of the voting in their state, the final decision as to who the state legislatures authorize is to be sent to the electoral college is a decision made solely by the legislature.
That is correct, legally and historically correct.
Any legislative body may decide on the basis of overwhelming evidence of fraud to send electors to the electoral college who accurately reflect and reflect the president's legitimate victory in their states, which was illegally denied him through fraud.
Technically, once again, entirely accurate and Constitutionally protected free speech.
We must be prepared to lobby our Republican legislatures, that would be a public process, by personal contact and by demonstrating the overwhelming will of the people in their state and each state, this may need to happen.
The fake electoral plot, again, that is all hyperbole.
I never advocated the seeding of fake electors and the word plot is pejorative and married to this story.
Uh, is an inquiry of special, pardon me, is the key focus of inquiry in special counsel Jack Smith's federal investigation into attempts to overturn the 2020 election in which Trump has pled not guilty to four charges, as well as a Fulton County district attorney, Fannie Will's election interference probe, where the former president and 18 others have been indicted.
Uh, to respond to a question from the Daily Beast.
No, I am not among those unindicted co-conspirators in Georgia.
Thank you for your question.
In July 16th, Republicans were charged by Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel's office in connection with a fake elector scheme to declare Trump the winner in that state in 2020.
I know nothing whatsoever about that.
Stone so far has not been officially implicated in any criminal investigation into the fake electoral plots in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin during the last election.
That's because I was not involved directly in any of those states in anything having to do with the electors.
Stone is also not one of six co-conspirators who were listed in Smith's federal election indictment against Trump, but he may be one of the 30 unnamed but not indicted co-conspirators who were mentioned in the sprawling 98-page indictment from Willis's office.
I am not.
Thank you.
Speaking to MSNBC, former federal prosecutor John Flannery said he absolutely considers the newly obtained footage incriminating for Stone and Trump's inner circle.
Well, Mr. Flannery, are you a registered Democrat?
See, this is a very common ruse of using some former prosecutor who is in fact a rabid partisan.
Incriminating.
What is the crime?
There is no crime here.
Everything I said was historically and legally accurate.
Footage played by the panel showed the veteran political consultant.
This is another just a fraud that where I is alleged that I said F the voting.
Let's get right to the violence.
This is this is a manipulated video.
There's no video of me saying that this was put together by Mr. Gil Branson.
It is it's a MacGuffin.
It's a fugazi.
It's a fraud.
Stone was also recorded in November 1st, 2021, 2020, suggesting Trump should declare the winner of the election, even if it hadn't been decided yet.
Technically accurate.
I really do suspect it will be up in the air when that happens.
The key thing is to claim victory.
Possession is nine tenths of the law.
No, we won, Stone said.
As I've said previously, that is accurate.
It reflects the exact same advice that was given to George W. Bush by former Secretary of State James A. Baker, and also the same advice given to John F. Kennedy by his father, Ambassador Joseph Kennedy.
Newsweek notes that they had reached out to me for comment, when in fact they did not reach out to me for comment.
Now, I'm familiar with the law, and there is some historical background here.
First of all, I'm fully familiar with the election of 1800 But since I'm not a lawyer, let's let Mark Levin, who is a lawyer, break this down for you in a video.
There are really four candidates for President, as it turned out.
There were supposed to be two.
John Adams was running as a Federalist, of course, seeking re-election.
And his main opponent was Thomas Jefferson, running as a Republican.
Jefferson was running with Aaron Burr.
That was the ticket.
Jefferson Burr as the Vice President.
But back then, before the 12th Amendment, whoever got the most electoral votes would be the president.
And for reasons I don't need to get into, although it's very exciting, Aaron Burr decided that he had a shot at being president.
Given the fact that the Federalists were playing games, they knew that Adams couldn't get the presidency, and having decided that, they then decided to try and stop Thomas Jefferson.
They had a problem, though, even though Hamilton despised both Jefferson and Burr.
He despised Burr more.
They were both New Yorkers, and he had very, very bad experiences with Burr.
Jefferson was furious about all of this.
He was furious that the Federalists were playing games.
He was furious that Burr had stabbed him in the back.
And in the end, as pointed out in the Smithsonian, a piece written on November 1, 2004, an excellent piece, as a matter of fact, by John Furling, The Federalists decided to back Burr.
Hearing of their decision, Thomas Jefferson told John Adams that any attempt, quote, to defeat the presidential election would produce resistance by force and incalculable consequences.
Unquote.
That's Thomas Jefferson.
Hmm.
What else?
Burr's was not the only intrigue.
Given the high stakes, every conceivable pressure was applied to change votes.
Every conceivable pressure.
Those in the deadlocked delegations recorded daily, but no one was lobbied more aggressively than James Bayard, Delaware's lone congressman, who held in his hands the sole determination of how his state would vote.
This was the guy that would make all the difference in the world.
He was pressured.
He was lobbied.
Bribes were even offered.
For weeks, warnings had circulated of drastic consequences if Republicans were denied the presidency.
Now the danger seemed palpable.
A shaken President Adams was certain the two sides had come to the precipice of disaster and that, quote, a civil war was expected, unquote.
There was talk that Virginia would secede if Jefferson were not elected.
Some Republicans declared they would convene another constitutional convention to restructure the federal government so that it reflected, quote, democratical spirit of America.
It was rumored, quote, that a mob had stormed the arsenal in Philadelphia and was preparing to march on Washington to drive the defeated Federalists from power.
Jefferson said he could not restrain those of his supporters who threatened, quote, a dissolution, unquote, of the Union.
He told Adams that many Republicans were prepared to use force to prevent the Federalists, quote, legislative usurpation, unquote, of the executive branch.
Wow.
I think Jefferson would be serving 50 years by about now.
In all likelihood, it was these threats that ultimately broke the deadlock.
The shift occurred sometime after Saturday's final ballot.
It was Delaware's Bayard who blinked, and he abstained.
So the state didn't go for either side, and that's how Jefferson won.
The final mystery of the election of 1800 is whether Jefferson and his backers would have sanctioned violence had he been denied the presidency.
Soon after taking office, Jefferson claimed that, quote, there was no idea of using force, unquote.
His remark proves little.
Yet during the ongoing battle in the House, he alternately spoke of acceding to the Federalists' misconduct in the hope that their behavior would ruin them, or of calling a second constitutional convention.
He probably would have chosen one or both of these courses before risking bloodshed in the end of the union.
Why do I tell you this?
Because Jefferson made statements.
Affirmative statements.
That Donald Trump never made.
The committee's trying to find ways to put those words in Trump's mouth.
He didn't talk about a civil war.
He didn't talk about any of that stuff.
He didn't talk about violence that he wouldn't be able to stop.
No, they're whining about 187 minutes where he put out a video and told people to stop.
So this is a big deal.
We have a piece in the Washington Post a couple of weeks back, and they're very excited, and it's titled, What Crimes Might the January 6th Committee Say Trump Committed by Amber Phillips?
Obstruction of an Official Proceeding of Congress is one of them, and in part, they talk about stopping lawmakers from certifying Biden's win.
They aim to show that the attack on the Capitol was not a spontaneous outburst, but that Trump and his allies specifically planned to disrupt the Congressional counting.
They have no evidence that Trump did that.
None whatsoever.
But what if the counting didn't go forward?
And what if there were legitimate concerns raised by Senators or House members?
See, here's the problem.
We have prosecutors in the U.S.
Attorney's Office in Washington.
We have an Attorney General.
We have a media.
We have politicians in Congress who don't understand how the Electoral College works.
All these electors' votes from the different states are sent to the Archivist of the United States, certified by the state.
The Archivist sends them to a joint meeting of Congress on January 6th by federal statute.
Why does he do that?
If the election is over, if the election is done, if the president has been chosen, why does he do that?
Because it's not done.
Until Congress says it's done.
Congress is the last check.
Not the courts.
Not the ballot boxes.
Congress.
Which is why Jamie Raskin, one of the members of the January 6th Committee, objected.
Objected to a Republican president at one time.
Why?
Why?
Because he wanted to prevent a Republican from being president, which is why the chairman of this committee, Benny Thompson, objected.
Objected once because he wanted to prevent a Republican from being a member of the presidency.
So this happens.
The system is built for objections.
The system is built not to rubber stamp.
Otherwise, why involve Congress at all?
Why is Congress voting on anything?
Why is Congress certifying anything?
Because it's not over until Congress says it's over.
So when people say that Trump was trying to reverse an election, it's not over until Congress says it's over.
And we've actually had situations like this one with Jefferson, where it wasn't over until Congress made the final decision.
And we've had other situations like that.
So he's not trying to stop lawmakers from certifying Biden's win, quote unquote.
Conspiracy to defraud the United States.
There's another nasty sounding criminal statute.
That's an agreement to obstruct a lawful function of the government by deceitful or dishonest means.
And they point out pressuring Vice President Pence to reject state's electoral results on January 6.
Pressuring Vice President Pence.
I just told you that members of Congress have objected to electors and state entire electors, right?
Number one, the Vice President of the United States is the President of the Senate.
So senators like Barbara Boxer, and she did in the past, can object.
But the President of the Senate, who's also the Vice President, he can't object.
Here's the dirty little secret that you're not hearing from the legal analysts, you're not hearing from the media, you're not hearing from anybody.
Now you'll hear it.
We're not 100% sure what the Vice President's role is.
Look at the Constitution.
Does it tell us?
No.
Look at the 12th Amendment.
Is it clear?
It's ambiguous.
Look at the federal statute they all rely on from the 1880s.
Is that clear?
No, it's convoluted, which is precisely why Republican and Democrat senators are now proposing a bill to clarify what the role of the vice president is when he oversees this process.
And they want it to be purely ministerial, where he has absolutely no ability to make any independent decisions.
So why are they doing that?
Because it's not clear.
If he did, I'll give you a perfect example.
What if we learn, after the quote-unquote election, that there was all kinds of bribery taking place, a bribery scheme in, let's say, a state, that turned out to affect the outcome of the election?
Now, is the Vice President of the United States overseeing the process of the President of the Senate?
Can he object?
Can he send it back to the states?
Or must he rubber-stamp and say, look, I know, but there's nothing I can do?
I gotta wait for one of my friends in the Senate to say something, and they're not really of the mind to do it, or the House, or whatever.
So he can't do anything?
Is that what the framers had in mind?
I seriously doubt it.
Well, what did they have in mind?
They didn't tell us.
How do you build a criminal case around that?
Oh, he pressured the Vice President, but the Vice President, he resisted.
So what?
That's exactly the way the system's supposed to work.
It's not supposed to be criminalized.
What other criminal statute do they have in mind?
The committee wants to try and tie Trump directly to the leaders of the mob that attacked the Capitol.
Seditious conspiracy.
Well, ladies and gentlemen, have you seen any of that?
Any of the emails?
Any of the texts?
Any of the first-hand testimony?
Anything on a graphic?
Anything on a video?
Anything by anybody, anywhere, despite the fact that this committee has free reign?
You haven't seen any!
There's been no conspiracy to defraud the United States.
There's been no obstruction.
There's been no seditious conspiracy.
Oh!
But what about these so-called fake electors?
That is to be resolved by the United States Congress.
That is not a crime either.
You might not like it.
You might think it's weird.
You might think it's unethical.
But it's not a crime.
So to criminalize politics, to criminalize many of these things that have gone on in this country through its history, to completely misunderstand what the Electoral College is all about, and when the election is finally over, which is why they meet on January 6th to make that decision, Is to take the criminal law process and project it on top of the Constitution.
To pervert it.
The Democrats are pushing hard.
They're pushing hard the Attorney General.
They're pushing hard the U.S.
Attorney.
The U.S.
Attorney, we're told, is now investigating Trump.
These are three of the crimes they're looking at.
They've gone after his lawyers.
They want to see the phone calls.
They want to see the texts.
They want to see what?
That a candidate Was fighting hard to win, challenging what was going on in the states.
And of course, many of these states don't have clean hands.
There is, you know, Article 2 of the Constitution, where only the state legislatures, the state legislatures can make the law through which electors are chosen.
Early in our history, the very earliest, the state legislatures selected the electors.
You didn't vote.
They selected the electors.
Well, some of them did, but most of them didn't.
And so the state legislatures had all the power today.
It could be a state Supreme Court, majority Democrat.
It could be a governor who's a Democrat.
You see that all occurred in the state of Pennsylvania and so forth and so on.
And all these cases, hundreds of them were brought by a law firm and other law firms in Washington, D.C., trying to change the election laws.
They were working their Democrat politicians in the in the courts, working them in the governor's offices and so forth.
And many of them succeeded.
Now, like it or not, they're free to do that, too.
They're free to do that, too.
But the other party's free to respond.
And the final say is in the Congress of the United States.
It's not in the U.S.
Attorney's Office.
It's not by the Attorney General of the United States.
It's not even in the courts.
The final say is Congress.
That's why it all winds up before a joint Meeting of Congress, where the Vice President oversees the process.
That's why a member or members of the House and the Senate can object.
Object to the election!
And they have!
Members of this committee!
And nobody's been arrested, nobody's been charged with obstruction, nobody's said that they're turning democracy on its head.
None of those things.
I'll be right back.
So Mark Levin there made several of the key points, but I'm also fully aware of the alternative elector situation in the state of Hawaii in 1960.
In 1960, on election night, it was thought that Vice President Richard Nixon carried the state, and the legislature went so far as to authorize that slate of electors.
President John F. Kennedy, then Senator John F. Kennedy, formed an alternative slate of selectors.
Ultimately, on the basis of absentee ballots, it was learned that JFK had carried Hawaii and the Kennedy electors were ultimately seated at the Electoral College and voted.
Now, I guess I should be honored that Joe Scarborough recycled this entire false narrative.
Once again, no plot alleged, no fake electors alleged.
I simply said that those duly elected legislatures could be approved by the legislature and that the legislatures had the authority to weigh legitimate evidence of voter fraud.
All of those things remain correct and it is all legally protected free speech.
But if you go on Twitter, the number of people calling for my indictment is ubiquitous.
Indicted for what?
First of all, to be very clear, I have no involvement whatsoever in the efforts to win a delay in the certification of the Electoral College in Washington, D.C.
on January 6th.
Speculation that I was in some war room at the Willard Hotel is categorically false.
Three different sources have confirmed to the Washington Post that I was not involved in that effort and certainly not in any war room.
I was also not involved in the efforts in Georgia.
No, I'm not an unindicted co-conspirator.
But seems to me there's a larger question here, which is why they have decided to make this an egregious crime questioning the outcome of the election.
If you're Donald Trump and you exercise your First Amendment right to question the outcome of an election based on anomalies and irregularities, it's an egregious crime for which you should be sent to prison.
But if you are Hillary Clinton or Kamala Harris or Nancy Pelosi or Congressman Jamie Raskin, Or Congressman Jerry Nadler.
Or Stacey Abrams.
Or any other Democrats.
In fact, any of the 100 plus Democrats who formally disputed the outcome of the 2016 election, well then it's perfectly alright.
We have a little video here of the Democrats doing exactly what they're trying to charge Donald Trump in doing now as a crime.
Let's run that.
How can you win with Russian interference though?
That's the real thing.
That's what I'm scared about in 2020.
But rightly.
Because I think he's an illegitimate president that didn't really win.
So how do you, you know, fight against that in 2020?
You are absolutely right.
He's an illegitimate president in my mind.
Would you be my vice presidential candidate?
Folks, look, I absolutely agree.
Trump didn't actually win the election in 2016.
He lost the election, and he was put in the office because the Russians interfered.
Trump knows he's an illegitimate president.
The president, although legally elected, is not legitimate.
I don't see this.
President-elect as a legitimate president.
You said you believe that Russia's interference altered the outcome of the election.
I do.
We have a president who, if in fact it is proven, has been assisted by the Russians and may in fact not be a legitimate president.
The one thing that Trump What Trump is fearful of when it comes to his being president is that finally we will see how illegitimate his victory actually was.
I have an objection.
I object to the 15 votes from the state of North Carolina.
I object because people are horrified.
He's an illegitimate president.
Do you believe Trump is a legitimate president?
What I believe is that there's no question that the outcome of this election was affected by the Russian interference.
There absolutely is a cloud of illegitimacy.
So that legitimacy is in question, yes.
So that was a very tainted election.
And in that sense, it's illegitimate.
Why do you think the president is going to such great lengths to essentially prove that he beat you?
Because he knows he didn't.
He knows he's an illegitimate president.
Stolen emails!
Stolen drone!
Stolen drone?
Stolen election!
Welcome to the world of unprecedented Trump!
So do you believe President Trump is an illegitimate president?
Based on what I just said, which I can't retract.
The Russian attempt to have the election, and frankly the FBI is weighing in on the election, I think makes his election illegitimate.
There was a widespread understanding that this election was not on the level.
We still don't know what really happened, Isaac.
I mean, there's just a lot that I think will be revealed.
History will discover.
But you don't win by three million votes and have all this other shenanigans stuff going on and not come away with an idea like, Whoa, something's not right here.
The outcome of the election was affected by their interference, and now we need to know to what degree, if any, the Trump campaign was actually in collusion with Russia.
He knows he's an illegitimate president, so of course he's obsessed with me, and I believe that it's a guilty conscience.
We actually won the last presidential election, folks!
They stole the last presidential election!
If Al Gore won that election, I think he won anyway.
Actually, I think I carried Florida.
Bush versus Gore.
A court took away a presidency.
If all the votes were cowering in Florida...
I come from Florida, where you and others participated in what I call the United States Coup d'Etat.
There's no doubt in my mind that Al Gore was elected president.
I rise to object to the fraudulent 25 Florida electoral votes.
I must object because of the overwhelming evidence of official misconduct.
Deliberate for all in an attempt to support the president.
It is signed by myself on behalf of my diverse constituents and the millions of Americans who have been disenfranchised by Florida's inaccurate vote count.
The Supreme Court, not the people of the United States, decided this election.
Speaking to a Democratic group in Chicago, he made it clear he thinks Al Gore was the winner.
By the time it was over, our candidate had won the popular vote, and the only way they could win the election was to stop the voting in Florida.
Catherine Harris, Jeb Bush, Jim Baker, and the Supreme Court hadn't tampered with the results.
Al Gore would be president.
The Supreme Court elected the president.
Al Gore won the state of Florida in 2000, although not the presidency.
But the Supreme Court tampered?
That's a large charge.
The Supreme Court stopped the counting of the votes, and if they let the count go on, The Supreme Court selected George W. Bush as the president.
He was not elected.
There is overwhelming evidence that George W. Bush did not win this election.
What I observed as a voter, as a citizen of Illinois four years ago, were troubling evidence of the fact that not every vote was being counted.
Don't think that George W. Bush won the election.
In 2000, I guess Al Gore, because I think that he probably lost Florida and also nationwide.
If you invite me back on this show in about eight weeks, I think you're going to learn that Al Gore actually did get all the votes there.
The court has been thwarting formation of the popular will.
The most spectacular example being Bush versus Gore, where the majority by a 5-4 vote enjoined the counting of more than 100,000 ballots in Florida and essentially gave America its first court-appointed president.
Absolutely.
I think in 2000, everybody thought, well, he did win the election, of course.
After the election, when you stole the election, you came back here and said, get over it.
No, we're not going to get over it.
You know it.
I know it.
They know it.
We won that election.
Constantly shifting vote tallies in Ohio.
And malfunctioning electronic machines, which may not have paper receipts, have led to additional loss of confidence by the public.
The right to vote has been stolen from qualified voters.
In 2004, the democratic process was thwarted.
The 2004 presidential election in Ohio was riddled with unnecessary problems.
Some machines malfunctioned, causing votes to be counted more than once.
Or not at all.
Based upon an inordinate number of allegations suggesting gross voting rights violations and misconduct, I join with my colleagues in objecting to counting the state of Ohio's electoral votes.
As in 2000, the votes of many who wanted to vote were not, in fact, counted.
This last Friday night, I arranged to meet Senator Kerry at a fundraiser to give him a copy of my book.
He told me he now thinks the election was stolen.
The wife of John Kerry said, She has lingering doubts about the legitimacy of the election.
Her theory goes like this.
Two brothers, which she calls hard right Republicans, own 80% of the voting machines in the U.S.
Therefore, it would be easy to hack into the mother machines that control the electronic voting.
There were numerous irregularities in Ohio, including large percentages of rejections of provisional balloting, problems with voting machines.
As we look at Our election system, I think it's fair to say that there are many legitimate questions.
About its accuracy, about its integrity.
There are still legitimate concerns over the integrity of our elections.
I agree with tens of billions of Americans who are very worried that when they cast the ballot on an electronic voting machine that there is no paper trail to record that vote.
The numerous irregularities That occurred with the electronic voting machines in Ohio on November the 2nd of last year point to an unresolved national crisis.
We cannot declare that the election of November 2nd 2004 was free and clear and transparent.
And real.
There must be independent testing of the voting machines used in Ohio.
I'm not confident that the election in Ohio was fairly decided.
We know that there was substantial voter suppression and the machines were not reliable.
The members of Congress who have brought this challenge are speaking up for their aggrieved constituents, many of whom may have been disenfranchised in this process.
Treating today's electoral vote count in Congress.
As a meaningless ritual would be an insult to our democracy unless we registered our own protest against the obviously flawed voting process that took place in so many of our states.
Voters who wish to cast a vote for president or vice president can't approach the polls with certainty that their vote will be counted.
One of the most significant problems in Ohio and in many other states was the lack of measures to ensure the integrity of electronic voting machines.
In 2004, They caused Democratic voters in Ohio to wait for eight hours before they could cast their ballot.
They turned the Department of Civil Rights and the Justice Department into the Voter Suppression Division with voter ID laws, voter purging, voter caging, voter intimidation.
There aren't going to be any more election stealings.
And despite the vitality and the inauguration and the situation we find ourselves in, I do have one very affirmative statement to make.
Without voter suppression, Stacey Abrams would be the governor of Georgia.
Andrew Gillum is the governor of Florida.
You refuse to concede and say that you lost.
Do you stand by that decision today?
Absolutely.
The election was not fair.
The process was not fair.
If Stacey Abrams doesn't win in Georgia, they stole it.
It's clear.
It's clear.
I think that Stacey Abrams' election is being stolen from her.
It was not a free and fair election.
Brian Kemp stole the gubernatorial election from Georgians and Stacey Abrams.
But will I say that this election was not tainted, was not a disinvestment and a disenfranchisement of thousands of voters?
I will not say that.
Well, there you have it.
Just to say it one more time to be clear, state legislators have the final say over choosing electors, not the Board of Elections, not the Secretary of State, not the governors, and not the courts.
The final say in the certification of electors to go to the Electoral College under Article 2 of the U.S.
Constitution lies with the state legislatures.
That is totally consistent with what I say in this non-bombshell video.
The two-tiered justice system is really beyond anything that I have seen in 45 years in American politics.
We just played you a 13-minute clip of Democrat after Democrat questioning the outcome of electoral results in 2000, in 2016, in 2018, yet none of them have been charged with a crime.
It is ironic that in both Georgia
And in the District of Columbia, the case against President Donald Trump relies on knowing fully his mental state, meaning whether he in his heart or his mind believed that he had lost the election and was entering with others into a conspiracy to cling to power, which I don't believe he believed then, and I don't believe he believes now, and therefore is a contrivance.
The Georgia matter really centers around the transcript and audio of a phone call between President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger.
I have listened to this lengthy conversation in which there were six attorneys on the line, some of them representing the President, some of them representing The state and it is abundantly clear that President Donald Trump does not tell Mr. Raffensperger to quote find 11,870 votes.
That is a bastardization of what he said.
What he does tell the Secretary of State is that he has already inadvertently or illegally counted that number of votes and then he breaks down the categories.
5,000 plus of them being convicted felons, Another roughly 1,300 being registered from post office addresses, which is illegal in the state of Georgia, and still others being deceased and so on.
Interestingly enough, Governor Brian Kemp says in a tweet that no election irregularities were brought to his attention in the most recent presidential election, but there are videos online that show people bringing certified Challenges to elections from across the state to his office and Governor Kemp's aides essentially laugh at those citizens.
In breaking news in Georgia, State Senator Colton Moore has called for a special session of the State Senate in which he proposes to examine the actions of Fannie Wills.
Now this is particularly interesting because Fannie Wills is the prosecutor bringing this unprecedented case against Donald Trump.
And there is new evidence surfacing that Fannie Wills herself benefited from voter fraud in her own election.
President Donald Trump has scheduled for Monday a press conference in which she promises to unveil undisputed evidence of election fraud in the state of Georgia, which, of course, would have the effect of making of course, would have the effect of making the indictment of Trump and others moot.
That does not mean, uh, that the, uh, that the media will of course accurately report whatever it is the president provides.
Why is any of this happening?
Well, here's the reason.
Uh, Interactive Polls today, uh, announces a poll by the Benenson Group.
These are the pollsters for Barack Obama and for Hillary Clinton.
Uh, and they show today.
A dead heat of 800 nationwide general election likely voters at Trump 46 and Biden 46.
So in other words, despite the extraordinary vituperation and attacks on Donald Trump, he continues to run into a dead heat in the general election.
Also, let's be very clear.
All of this is an attempted distraction from the growing evidence of corruption regarding the Biden crime family.
Again, to review, the appointment of a special counsel this last week really required a distraction.
That's because the Attorney General Merrick Garland violated Department of Justice regulations by appointing David Weiss The U.S.
attorney who has had the Hunter Biden investigation for five long years, and who worked hand in glove with Hunter Biden's lawyers to fashion a secret immunity deal in which Hunter Biden would plead guilty to two minor tax charges and also get and who worked hand in glove with Hunter Biden's lawyers to fashion a secret immunity deal in which Hunter Biden would plead guilty to two minor tax charges and also get essentially probation, or in this
Buried deep in that document was immunity for crimes such as extortion, bribery, money laundering, influence peddling, illegal lobbying, racketeering,
and prosecution in connection with the multi-million and prosecution in connection with the multi-million dollar wires from Ukraine, Russia, China, Romania, and elsewhere directly to Joe and Hunter Biden and other members of the Biden crime family.
God forbid that the American people be allowed to focus On any of that.
So Donald Trump poses an existential threat to the two-party duopoly that is running the country into the ground.
The attacks on me are born over bitterness, over the fact that thanks to my belief in Jesus Christ and thanks to my fervent prayer, Donald Trump had the strength and the courage in an election year to recognize that I had done nothing wrong.
I was subjected to a Soviet-style show trial in the District of Columbia.
It is important to note that the government never produced an iota of evidence of Russian collusion or WikiLeaks collaboration, or for that matter, any other crime.
On November 3rd, 2020, only by the order of a federal judge did the U.S.
Department of Justice, in a very rare midnight press release, admit that, as Mr. Mueller says in his long redacted and hidden report, which was withheld from my defense attorneys at trial, that he had found, quote, no factual basis to tie me to any conspiracy involving the Russians, WikiLeaks, Any other crime.
Shockingly, but unreported by the New York Times, the Washington Post, or the Wall Street Journal, was his admission that even if he had found such evidence, which he did not, it would not have been a crime.
Therefore, my wife and I were forced to endure two years of hell, unmitigated hell, simply to pressure me to lie against Donald Trump, to bear false witness against him, which I refused to do.
There are many, many people on the left who are very bitter about the fact that I did not die in a dank Georgia prison, having been railroaded in a Soviet-style show trial.
Now, these new attacks, engineered by MSNBC, completely mischaracterizing what I said, saying that I outlined a plot to seat fake electors, which anybody can read and see that's not at all what I said, This has stepped up the number of death threats, the personal threats against me, and yes, individual members of my family.
These liberals who are so very tolerant are not tolerant at all and therefore these people have put my life at risk.
This is a big nothing burger and there is nothing to investigate other than my expressing my own opinion Based on my knowledge of history and my understanding of the law.
I do want to remind you at this point that we are brought to you by two sponsors.
First and foremost, we have now recently completely revamped StoneZone.com.
StoneZone.com.
And by going to StoneZone.com, you can get my various books.
There it is, StoneZone.com.
We urge you to subscribe, which is absolutely free.
When you go to StoneZone.com, you can find a portal on page one for the Stone Defense Fund.
While it is not clear as to whether I may need your assistance, I put nothing beyond politically motivated prosecutors, even though I have quite famously done nothing wrong.
By going to StoneZone.com, you can also purchase my various books Let me recommend to you my favorite among them, The Man Who Killed Kennedy, The Case Against LBJ.
This is a barn burner.
This is a New York Times bestseller.
My first book, in my opinion, also my best book.
Let me also recommend to you The Myth of Russian Collusion.
This basically documents everything that was in John Durham's report.
Long, long before he wrote it.
You can also get that at StoneZone.com and also The Clinton's War on Women so we can do that without the shine.
There we go.
This is the book that most likely is responsible for my criminal indictment when I did absolutely nothing wrong.
The other sponsor I want to bring your attention to is the great folks at MyPillow.com.
MyPillow.com is, of course, the website of the number one capitalist entrepreneur, free speech advocate, and election integrity advocate in the country, Mike Lindell.
Mike Lindell, over the last two days, has conducted a symposium in Springfield, Missouri, to talk about plans to ensure that the next election is free, fair, and transparent.
Because of family obligations, while I was honored to be invited, I was not able to attend.
But the live streaming by Laura Loomer, my friend there, can be seen on her Rumble page.
I strongly recommend that you check it out.
Let me talk about some of the great products at MyPillow.com.
First and foremost is the revolutionary new MyPillow 2.0.
Now you may say, well I have all of the MyPillows I need.
Now we have an incredible bargain price.
You get four pillows, a four pack, that would normally cost $259.92 but with promo code STONE this is a low low $99.98.
$19.92, but with promo code STONE, this is a low, low $99.98.
Now, this is different than any pillow you may have gotten at MyPillow.com previously because it employs a patented cooling technology that is woven into the pillow so that the pillow is always cool to the touch.
Mike Lindell likes to say that a great night's sleep is based both on temperature and height.
This pillow is the exact right height and you don't have to flip it over through the night to maintain the cool temperature.
So let me recommend to you the new MyPillow 2.0.
The My Kitchen Towels.
This is a new product.
You can't have too many of these.
This is a utilitarian kitchen towel for your use at home.
Another product which I highly recommend.
Let's talk about some of the others.
There are the MyPillow Dog Beds.
We are animal lovers here at the Stone Zone.
My dogs Mimi and Pee Wee love their MyPillow dog beds.
The dog beds, there they are, Mimi and Peewee, brother and sister from the same litter.
These are the ninth Yorkshire Terriers that Mrs. Stone and I have had as members of our family.
They are much beloved and they love their MyPillow dog bed.
The dog beds come in small, medium, and large starting at $19.99.
The medium at $39.99 and the large a low low $69.99.
Let me recommend that you check those out.
Also if you're going to have the dog beds let me recommend the pet blankets.
The pet blankets keep your dog or your cat warm at night.
Now Mrs. Stone and I like to crank the temperature down with the air conditioning.
We like it pretty cold but we don't want our babies to freeze.
We don't want them to be cold so we cover them with their plush luxurious MyPillow pet blankets.
These are suitable for dogs or cats.
Let me also mention the men and women's bathrobes.
This is one of the great bargains at MyPillow.com.
Now as low as $59.98.
This is a plush luxurious Terry cloth with a broad shawl collar.
They're extraordinarily durable.
Mine is slate gray.
I've washed it a number of times.
It remains looking brand new.
This is a great price.
They come in both men's and women's sizes, and of course extra large, large, medium, and small.
Please use promo code STONE.
I'd be remiss if I didn't mention the six-piece towel set.
This is something I learned from Mike Lindell himself.
Most of the terrycloth cotton towels that you buy online or in a department store have cotton terrycloth that is treated with a special oil which makes the terrycloth more durable but far, far less absorbent.
Not so with the six-piece MyPillow towel set.
Once again, this is now on a clearance price.
It was a set of six for $49.99, now on clearance for a low, low $25.
Again, a very worthwhile product.
The Men and the Women's Moccasin Slippers.
This is another one of my favorite products.
Originally $149.98, now $25.
They come in multiple sizes and colors.
Obviously, at this low price, you can afford to buy more than one.
My good friend, Officer Salvatore Greco, swears by his moccasin slippers.
He wears them day-round.
Let me recommend those to you as well.
Then, of course, there are the famous Giza Dream Sheets.
The Giza Dream Sheets are made of the most luxurious Egyptian cotton available anywhere in the world.
It is grown in one particular region of Egypt and now you get a special price on that with promo code STONE.
So please folks go buy MyPillow.com.
If you don't want to go online you can go to 800-544-8939 I'm gonna give you a chance to grab a pen or a pencil to write that down.
It is 800-544-8939.
Remember when you buy any product at MyPillow.com, unless it is a sale item, it has a 60-day money-back guarantee should you be unlikely dissatisfied.
But sometimes I try to pick out the bargain products that I myself have used.
I know they are of the greatest quality, and you can get great, great savings by using promo code STONE.
There is a statement from the Fulton County Republican County Chairwoman that says, the manipulative tactives employed by left-leaning district attorneys who exploit fear and in intimidation while weaponizing our legal system pose a deadly threat the manipulative tactives employed by left-leaning district attorneys who exploit fear and in intimidation while weaponizing our President Trump is merely a singular metaphor for all who stand for freedom.
Such actions destroy public trust in the fairness created by our Constitution and raise the very foundations of our nation's governance.
This vile encroachment of the Democratic Party on our country's values and principles through these tactics constitutes an absolute departure from the norms of the ethical and unlawful society.
The This corrosive influence jeopardizes the rights and freedoms of individuals while compromising the fundamental tenets of our just and equitable system of government.
It is imperative that all citizens, Republicans, Democrats and Independents alike, denounce these actions collectively to safeguard the sanctity of our elections and ensure the enduring strengths of our Republic's democratic ideals.
Stephanie Enders is the chairwoman of the Fulton County Committee.
I thought that her statement was so outstanding I wanted to read it to you.
Bottom line, folks, I'm the subject of a smear.
It is a left-wing media campaign whipped up by MSNBC and further weaponized by Twitter, but Roger Stone did nothing wrong.
Thank you for joining us in the Stone Zone.
God bless you and Godspeed, and we'll see you tomorrow.
You're watching Lindell TV.
Hello, I'm Mike Lindell, and I'm excited to announce my new product, My Coffee.
I get products all the time from entrepreneurs, from my new platform, mystore.com.
And when I tried my coffee for the first time, I was blown away.
It is the best coffee I've ever had in my life.
I spent the last four months doing my due diligence, and this family-owned business micromanages every step from the fields to the cup to ensure the best quality coffee you're ever going to have.
It starts with the beans that are grown in Honduras.
Honduras' volcanic soil and humid climate make the perfect growing conditions for coffee plants.
Which produced the best beans ever.
Then each batch is tested for its aroma, taste and other aspects to meet the highest standards in the coffee industry.
And after that it goes into production which is all done right here in the USA!
It's like you're getting that small batch specialty coffee but delivered right to your front door.
So go to mystore.com or call the number on your screen.
Use the promo code and you'll get your very own My Coffee for 25% off.
You guys all know that I've traveled the country for the past year and a half.
I've stayed in hundreds of hotels.
I've tried every coffee out there.
Well, some of the coffees have that terrible aftertaste, some that leave me jittery or I get an upset stomach.
Well, my coffee is different.
It's the richest, smoothest, best coffee I've ever had.
My coffee comes in a variety of flavors.
You get them ground or whole bean, plus it's certified organic and non-GMO.
I guarantee it'll be the best coffee you've ever had.
So go to mystore.com or call the number on your screen.
Use your promo code and you'll get my coffee for 25% off.
And I'm going to give you deep discounts on all my store products.
That's mystore.com.
▲
Export Selection