All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 10, 2023 - The StoneZONE - Roger Stone
57:46
Fani Willis Linked to MASSIVE Election Fraud & Money Laundering RICO Enterprise by Chris Gleason
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And now Lindell TV brings you The Stone Zone with legendary Republican strategist and political icon and pundit Roger Stone.
Stone has served as a senior campaign aide to three Republican presidents.
He is a New York Times best-selling author and a longtime 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 you are back after the Labor Day weekend in the Stone Zone.
Gentlemen, let me remind you that after yesterday, no seersucker suits, no madras jackets, and no two-tone shoes of any kind.
It is a sad rite of passage.
But yesterday, Labor Day, we celebrate the virtue of hard work.
We celebrate the tradition of industry and hard work that made America great.
So I'm glad to be back with you after a restful weekend.
Last week was an interesting week because the demented talking heads at MSNBC, sometimes referred to by my friend Sean Hannity as MSDNC, unleashed a series of attacks on me in which they insisted that I must be indicted
Either by special counsel Jack Smith in Washington DC or in Georgia in some connection to the challenge to the Georgia election results.
The problem is what they lack is Any evidence whatsoever of wrongdoing.
The folks at MSNBC, they're aware of the fact that on August of 2021, I was cleared by senior members of the FBI of having any involvement with the actual riot at the Capitol.
They're well aware of the fact that Oathkeeper Joshua James, who was part of my security detail, and then subsequently charged with seditious conspiracy to which he pled guilty, has already testified under oath that I had no involvement or knowledge in advance about the activities of the Oath Keepers at the Capitol on January 6th.
The folks at MSNBC also know that if there was a war room for Trump's allies at the Willard, The Washington Post has accurately reported that at least three sources tell them that I was never in it,
nor was I involved in the effort by my good friend Rudy Giuliani to challenge the certification of the Electoral College in the U.S. Senate, an activity that I, to this day, as a non-lawyer, still continue to believe was perfectly legal.
What seems to have set these demented, deranged lunatics at the end of the day, At MSNBC Off was a piece of video in which I accurately said that Article 2 of the U.S.
Constitution grants to the state legislatures the authority to award that state's electors to a presidential candidate based on a review of the popular vote results.
That doesn't mention fake electors anyplace.
I made no reference to fake electors.
And my comments are both legally, constitutionally, and historically correct.
But what they really hang their hat on is this little video from the Kabuki Theater January 6th hearings.
The night before January 6th, President Trump instructed his chief of staff, Mark Meadows, to contact both Roger Stone and Michael Flynn regarding what would play out the next day.
Ms.
Hutchinson, is it your understanding that President Trump asked Mark Meadows to speak with Roger Stone and General Flynn on January 5th?
That's correct.
That is my understanding.
And Ms.
Hutchinson, is it your understanding that Mr. Meadows called Mr. Stone on the 5th?
I'm under the impression that Mr. Meadows did complete both a call to Mr. Stone and General Flynn the evening of the 5th.
And do you know what they talked about that evening, Ms.
Hutchinson?
I'm not sure.
Is it your understanding that Mr. Giuliani, Mr. Eastman, and others had set up what has been called, quote, a war room at the Willard Hotel on the night of the 5th?
I was aware of that the night of the 5th.
And do you know if Mr. Meadows ever intended to go to the Willard Hotel on the night of the 5th?
Mr. Meadows had a conversation with me where he wanted me to work with Secret Service on a movement from the White House to the Willard Hotel so he could attend the meeting or meetings with Mr. Giuliani and his associates in the War Room.
And what was your view as to whether or not Mr. Meadows should go to the Willard that night?
I had made it clear to Mr. Meadows that I didn't believe it was a smart idea for him to go to the Willard Hotel that night.
I wasn't sure everything that was going on at the Willard Hotel, although I knew enough about what Mr. Giuliani and his associates were pushing during this period.
I didn't think that it was something appropriate for the White House Chief of Staff to attend or to consider involvement in.
I made that clear to Mr. Meadows.
Throughout the afternoon, he mentioned a few more times going up to the Willard Hotel that evening, and then eventually dropped the subject the night of the 5th and said that he would dial in instead.
So, General Flynn has appeared before this committee, and when he appeared before our committee, he took the 5th.
Let's briefly view a clip of General Mike Flynn taking the 5th Amendment.
General Flynn, do you believe the violence on January 6th was justified?
Do we have a minute?
Yes.
All right, we're back.
Congressman Cheney, could you repeat the question, please?
Yes.
General Flynn, do you believe the violence on January 6th was justified?
Can I get a clarification?
Is that a moral question or are you asking a legal question?
I'm asking both.
I said, I said, I said, Do you believe the violence on January 6th was justified morally?
I think so.
Do you believe the violence on January 6th was justified legally?
Yes.
General Flynn, do you believe in the peaceful transition of power in the United States of America?
Yes, sir.
They could go on and play my own appearance before the committee in which I fulfilled my legal obligations to show up.
I also pled the Fifth.
Why?
Because otherwise they seek to charge you with some process crime.
By the way, under the U.S.
Constitution and the law, the assertion of one's Fifth Amendment rights cannot be used for the assumption of guilt.
But let me make this very clear.
I never received any phone call from Mark Meadows, never communicated with him in any way.
I wrote that extensively at the time of these hearings.
But that didn't stop MSNBC from reporting this canard.
I've checked with General Flynn.
He also never heard from Mark Meadows.
I don't believe he's ever heard from Mark Meadows.
I met him once in a green room at Fox TV back when he was a congressman.
Other than that, we've had no communications whatsoever.
So this idea that we should be charged because the president reached out to us is categorically false.
It is a lie, but that's the way they roll at MSNBC.
Among the very worst journalists in the country is a man at the Washington Post who's a columnist named Philip Bump.
Mr. Bump, for over two years, continued to insist that I was a back-channel go-between between WikiLeaks and the Trump campaign.
It is an egregious lie for which the government never produced.
Any information whatsoever.
But very recently, Mr. Bump elected to go on a very interesting podcast.
Let's show you this.
What do you take from the text message to his adult daughter, Hunter's text message, that I have to give 50% of my income to Pop?
I have no idea what that means.
I don't.
I have no idea what that means.
I know, it's circumstantial evidence and you prefer that.
What could it mean?
I have no idea.
I don't know.
Has anybody asked her?
I don't know.
I don't know.
Don't you think somebody should ask her?
Okay.
I just said I don't know, and I don't know what to make of it, so I have nothing else to say about it.
What do you want me to say?
Yeah, but you say there's no evidence, but then there's a text message where he says, I give Pop 50% of my money.
That's evidence!
Okay, fine.
It's evidence.
I appreciate you having me on.
Something like that?
Who do you think is more- I listen to that and I'm saying- You're free to go!
I feel like you want me to leave, like just walk out in the middle of this because that way you can- You can go.
Is this a standard really?
This is the way the Washington Post handles people who disagree with them?
Yeah, when I agree to be on for 45 minutes and then I get on for an hour and 15?
Yeah, that after a while I go.
Thanks for having me.
Yeah, I do have Mr. Bump blocked on Twitter because I won't put up with his abuse.
He is the worst of the worst.
Very extraordinary news out of Georgia, reading now from a blockbusting piece at The Federalist.
As you know, in her August 14th indictment, Fulton County District Attorney Fannie Willis alleged the existence of Republican electors for Trump constituting an unlawful conspiracy to overturn the Peach State's 2020 election results.
Among those charged for taking part in this so-called quote-unquote conspiracy are David Schaeffer, one of Georgia's 2020 electors, and Ray Smith, who served as one of Trump's lawyers at the time.
Specifically, Willis claimed that Schaeffer and other alternative electors unlawfully, falsely held themselves out as Georgia's duly elected and qualified presidential electors.
She further insisted these electors With Smith's assistance, intentionally attempted to mislead figures such as Vice President Mike Pence and Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger into believing that they were actually such officers.
However, among the documents Willis obtained during her year-long investigation of Republicans was a meeting transcript which completely refutes her allegations.
A transcript of the Georgia Republican electors dated December 14th, 2020 obtained by the Federalist.
Explicitly shows that the intent behind casting alternative electors was not to impersonate public officials, as Willis alleges, but to lawfully preserve Trump's legal challenge to the state's election results.
At the meeting's outset, Chairman Schaffer specifically noted how he and his fellow Republicans were acting as Republican nominees for Republican presidential electors, not as, quote, duly elected and qualified electors.
Quote, President Trump has filed a contest to the certified results.
That contest is pending and has not been decided or even heard by any judge yet with the authority to hear it.
And so in order to preserve his rights, it is important that the Republican nominees for President's Elections meet here today and cast their votes.
For context, Trump filed a lawsuit against Secretary of State Raffensperger in Fulton County on December 4, 2020, alleging tens of thousands of illegal votes had been cast in the state's presidential election.
The suit came after a recount requested by Trump, which deemed Biden to be the winner of Georgia's 16 electoral votes, by a margin of 11,779 votes.
The recount prompted Raffensperger to certify the election on December 7th, while Trump's legal challenge remained pending.
By the time December 14th arrived, the day in which nominees for presidential electors are required by federal law to meet, Trump and Schaeffer's lawsuit was still pending.
As such, Georgia's Republican nominees, including Schaeffer, cast their electoral votes for Trump, while the state's Democratic nominees cast theirs for Biden.
During the December 14, 2020 meeting, Schaeffer further clarified the legal rationale for filing alternative electors in a conversation with lawyer Smith saying, it is our only way for us to have a judge to consider the merits of our complaint.
The thousands of people we allege voted unlawfully and is for us to have this meeting and permit the contest to continue.
That is correct, Mr. Smith said.
According to The Minutes.
I think this demonstrates convincingly that those charged with President Trump and President Trump himself acted in good faith in accordance with the law.
Hopefully this will be part of the President's defense and the defense of those individuals charged with him in Georgia.
But while we speak about Fanny Wills, the bombshell story this weekend carried by The Gateway Pundit, The Stone Zone, and several others was written by Chris Gleason.
Chris Gleason is known to you who watch The Stone Zone.
He's one of the world's Expert authorities on election integrity.
He is a computer wizard who's done yeoman work pertaining to the integrity of the voter rolls and the election system here in the sunshine state of Florida.
According to headlines published this weekend, Mr. Gleason has uncovered a massive campaign finance RICO racket For which Fannie Wells, among others, was a major beneficiary.
Chris Gleason joins us now on the Stone Zone.
Hey, Roger.
Here we are, my friend, back in the saddle again.
Yes, we are.
Yes, we are.
I want to thank you, first of all, for the Christian-based encouragements that you send me every couple days.
I watch every one of them.
They help remind me of key sections in the Bible that buck you up and remind you to put your faith in Christ in times of turmoil and times of difficulty.
So, a heartfelt thanks for that.
You have uncovered what appears to be a massive criminal enterprise.
Sure.
that is affecting elections nationwide.
Can you give us a brief summary of the enterprise and some of the specific elections that you believe have been effected?
Sure.
So when we started looking at the data with the voter rolls and with the campaign finance contributions, we discovered that there were massive concerns and irregularities. we discovered that there were massive concerns and irregularities.
We noticed that there were individuals who were making thousands upon thousands of campaign contributions during an election cycle.
And that just didn't make a lot of sense, especially once we started looking at the financial viability of these campaign contributions.
We have people who are making contributions that are, you know, a quarter, half, Third, the value of their homes.
We're seeing elderly people who are making thousands upon thousands of campaign contributions.
And so we started to look and expand our search from where we first found it in Washington State into Oklahoma.
We confirmed the pattern there.
We moved it into Florida.
We confirmed the pattern there and from there we moved to Missouri, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and so on and so on and so on.
And ultimately, we noticed that this was going on at the federal level and at the state and local levels.
So what was interesting is we find that these individuals who are making these campaign contributions, they have certain similarities.
And some of those similarities are the PACs and candidates that they are contributing to.
One of the big beneficiaries that caught our eye was Raphael Warnock in Georgia.
We saw a lot of the same PACs.
We saw Color of Change PAC, Win Justice PAC, the Fair Fight PAC, EMILY's List, and a whole host of other Various Soros and Pierre Omidir connected PACs and organizations.
And it was pretty interesting stuff.
When you look at things, right, I'm a big believer in following the money and to see who benefits from this.
And so as we were expanding our searches throughout the various states, we identified these same Same and similar patterns.
We noticed that a lot of these organizations were also dramatically impacting local races.
In one race, we noticed in Manhattan, there was the DA, our good friend Alvin Bragg.
Now, I call Alvin Bragg my good friend because there were some unanswered questions.
As to how this Ricoh money laundering enterprise was functioning.
And it was Alvin and his campaign that helped me uncover even more stuff to include how prepaid credit cards and debit cards were being employed to help finance these Soros left-wing type of local candidates.
Like Alan Bragg, and as we have now come to see, Fannie Willis.
So, it's been pretty interesting.
We also found that this enterprise highly financed the Janet for Justice campaign, which was probably, I believe, the highest expenditure for any state Supreme Court race in the United States history.
And Janet, for justice, she also took an awful lot of money from this money-laundering Smurf network.
So we have this massive enterprise that is operating both at the federal and state levels.
So when we peel the onion on these contributors, we see some interesting stuff.
So what was particularly Particularly interesting here with the Fannie Willis case was we had identified this one individual who had made multiple campaign finance contributions.
And once we investigated her against the FEC database, she fit a local Smurf money laundering profile.
So we went and we showed up at this lady's house and She just happened to be there, and she just happened to answer some questions for us.
And the question was, first off, did she know who Fannie Willis was?
And she said, the name sounds familiar.
I might know who she is.
So then I followed up with, well, did you make any campaign finance contributions to her?
And she's like, oh, no, I never made any campaign finance contributions to Fannie Willis.
I'm like, OK, so if you didn't make one, how about four?
Did you make four?
She's like, no.
And I'm like, oh, OK.
So as the investigation continued, we looked further into this elderly woman who fit this profile where her identity was used to make illicit campaign contributions to evade Reporting requirements and evade reporting limits.
We noticed that she was actually her name was used both in Florida and in Michigan.
And so as we started exploring that, we found out that she was a voter here in Florida and a voter in Michigan.
And then we found another individual who had just made one contribution To the Fannie Willis campaign out of Wisconsin.
However, what was pretty interesting with her is when we ran a search on this woman, we noticed that she was making campaign finance contributions in Wisconsin, in Illinois, in Florida, in New York.
And then we started looking a little bit more and we found out that she was registered to vote in all those places.
So again, we're seeing more patterns, more patterns of fraud, more patterns of RICO.
So the thing about RICO, right, is you have what's called predicate acts.
So you have to have at least one or two predicate acts to contribute to this ongoing criminal enterprise.
Well, we have wire fraud, we have mail fraud, We have money laundering.
We have all sorts of wonderful things that have opened themselves up to us.
Because these individuals who are voting in multiple states, they're doing so by vote by mail.
So it makes us ask questions.
And as this story started to get some traction, there was a guy in Georgia whose last name ends with Kemp, Who says, Oh, there's nothing to see here.
And we're going to leave this alone.
We're not going to do anything about it.
There's nothing to see here.
Wow.
It appears Mr. Kemp might also be a beneficiary of this Rico enterprise as well.
And we're, we're investigating that.
So as these individuals are taking money from this, Vast money laundering network because it's going on through ActBlue.
It is going on through WinRed as well for certain candidates.
We're asking a lot of questions about this.
And, you know, so when you follow the money, who benefits?
Well, apparently Kemp benefited greatly.
And there's all sorts of interesting things.
So here in Florida, What we noticed was that Ron DeSantis has been a massive beneficiary of this operation, an election fraud RICO scheme.
He's taken money from Dominion.
He has changed the laws to hide the evidence of the election fraud and rigging.
They have, just like in Georgia, I want to make sure people understand the scale of what you're talking about.
And this is very deeply troubling, and every American should be deeply troubled and really mad about this.
So I want to make sure people understand the scale of what you're talking about.
We're not talking about a handful of elderly donors who gave a couple times to candidates in various states.
How many total donors information did you review in your investigation?
We're talking about dozens, hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands?
Hundreds of millions of transactions.
Hundreds of millions of transactions.
Millions upon millions upon millions of voters and donors.
So, we're dealing with massive data sets and we're seeing that RICO.
So here's the thing about RICO.
It was created by the Congress to deal with the infiltration of legitimate organizations by criminal elements.
And that's essentially what we have here.
However, we don't just have the mafia.
Well, we have a mafia.
We have the election fraud mafia.
And they've deeply infiltrated all levels of government.
They've Infiltrated the judges, the judiciary, they've infiltrated the DOJ, they've infiltrated the FBI, they've infiltrated intelligence agencies.
I mean, they have infiltrated the government thoroughly and completely.
And they're able to do this through this massive money laundering enterprise.
So you've got law firms like Perkins Coie, the law firm that was behind the Russian Dossier, the one that played a role in the FISA stuff, all that wonderful stuff where you and Flynn and President Trump and people like me ended up getting roped into this ridiculous mess.
Over what?
It was over made up claims.
So we have people like Elvis Chan Right.
We have the Center for Internet Security.
We have, I mean, this is a major, major, major issue.
So we have people, the Board of Commissioners at the Federal Elections Commission.
Right.
These are people who said that there was nothing to see with the Twitter censorship of the Hunter Biden laptop story.
Right.
Well, that's a problem because That translates into actual election interference.
It translates into undisclosed in-kind campaign contributions worth trillions of dollars.
And it's not like they weren't warned about it.
I mean, I tried ringing the bell with Commissioner Trainor.
There's emails there.
There's multiple emails there.
There's a trail of it.
And now, thanks to the lawsuit, Of Missouri and Louisiana against Biden, you know, we can see that this has been going on for quite some time.
And Elvis Chan, Mr. FBI, who Mr. Senior FBI agent who worked in collusion with the Center for Internet Security and Big Tech to censor Americans like myself and countless others.
You know, they falsely claimed that we were Russian bots and misinformation and Yeah, I mean, it's absurd.
And these people have really subverted.
This is the real coup.
This is the real RICO.
And just like Saul Alinsky breaches and rules for radicals, it's all about blaming the other guy for what you're doing.
And that's exactly what they're doing.
So, you know, Fannie Willis is charging President Trump and his attorneys for RICO, it's because they're themselves are guilty of it.
So all you have to do is whenever somebody does that, right?
You look into it and you find more evidence of the RICO.
Like look at Jack Smith, right?
Jack Smith, this is election interference.
This is RICO.
And it is absolutely ridiculous.
So with the evidence, I'm sorry, Roger.
Yeah, go ahead.
Let me interpose a question here.
Prior to the 2022 election, you worked closely with Steve Kovach of The Epoch Times and then with James O'Keefe, now with O'Keefe Media, to uncover nationwide ActBlue money laundering, RICO enterprise activities surrounding the campaign of Senator Warnock.
Can you share with our viewers any response you received when you filed complaints with the Federal Election Commission or the Department of Justice or the Georgia Attorney General?
So we had sent some complaints to Warnock.
There was a lot of attention brought to this, and there were no responses.
We didn't get any responses.
And some of the responses that we did get from people were, oh, well, this is just double counting of of data, or this is, you know, you're wrong and your data's wrong.
And I thought that was funny because I just use their data.
I use the FEC's data.
I use the state of Georgia's data.
And I've yet to have anybody refute anything of what we've said.
As a matter of fact, what we have been doing is we applied for API access into the FEC database.
And what we find is, in particular, when we look at Raphael Warnock, and we are doing queries about that, they're significantly limiting our API access.
And they're, they're using very unethical ways of obfuscating API requests or computer generated requests or queries.
And so We know that they're playing games.
We know that they really don't have any interest here in uncovering anything.
I mean, we shouldn't have to be doing this.
This is their job.
I mean, if the FEC isn't investigating these types of allegations, what are they there for?
What are they doing?
I mean, seriously, I mean, What is going on there?
Well, wait, I know what's going on.
We have an illegitimate government that is operating without the consent of the governed because what we have uncovered is that our votes aren't really even counted anymore.
And the ballots that we're casting, they're being counted on uncertifiable and uncertified machines.
With void certifications.
So, in the lead up to the 2020 election, okay, the EAC sent out a notification to ES&S saying, hey, we've been made aware that your company is selling and marketing DS200 tabulators with modems attached.
And you're telling people that these are certified for use.
They're not.
You need to notify all of your customers that this is not the case and that this would void any certification of the entire voting system.
Well, guess what we found out in our investigation?
We found out that ES&S didn't send that notification to everybody and a lot of municipalities all across the country, to include swing states and non-swing states, they They had no idea that having a modem attached to a DS200 tabulator voided the EAC certification for the entire voting system.
We uncovered all sorts of crazy stuff.
Like in Georgia, we uncovered the system audit logs.
And in those system audit logs, we noticed that there were massive numbers of errors.
And we noticed that there were changes being made to the programming of the machines while they're tabulating votes in Georgia.
I personally looked into several of the audit logs from the Dominion machines in Georgia.
And based on what I saw, there's no way that the machines in Georgia should have been allowed to been used because they had too many errors.
You're only, they're only allowed to have so many errors.
You have a Mac, what's called a maximum allowable error rate.
And what we saw in Georgia was absolutely horrific.
And so for Raffensperger or Kemp or any of the election officials in Georgia or Maryland or Wisconsin or Florida to be certifying these elections, it's downright criminal.
And so what's going on there with that?
Well, we saw here in Florida, Ron DeSantis, He was a major beneficiary of this Ricoh election fraud enterprise.
Matter of fact, I believe there was the attorney for Dominion who hosted a nice fundraiser up in D.C., and I believe Laura Loomer covered that one.
And, you know, Ron DeSantis, he changed the law, SB 7050, and you had done a bunch of reporting on that, on them covering up the data that we used to catch them.
But you know the funny thing, right?
Here's the funny thing.
There were key counties in Florida that suddenly they did something about all those blank ballots.
And so in President Trump's election in 2020 and other elections throughout 2020, there were massive numbers of blank ballots that were cast.
We also saw that in Carrie Lake's election.
You know, Ron DeSantis, he did a good job of cleaning it up in a couple of counties here in Florida.
Miami-Dade, they went from 68,000 blank ballots cast in 2020 to like 400 and some.
Enough for Ron DeSantis to win Miami.
Same thing happened in Hillsborough County.
Same thing happened in Orange County.
And a lot of that stuff we see went on also in Arizona.
So, what is really going on here?
And, you know, the people who are the beneficiaries of this massive Ricoh enterprise, they're playing their role.
I mean, just think about it like this, right?
Had Florida really had a gold standard of election in 2020, it would have been a massive blowout, according to the data that I have analyzed here in Florida.
But they needed To not have that blowout here in Florida so they could perpetuate the myth that it was a close race to give some credence to the fact that Joe Biden got the votes that he did, which we know he didn't get.
And with this massive money laundering enterprise, right?
We know that during COVID, there's no way that this type of money would have flowed into That election.
There's just no way.
People didn't have it.
People were terrified about what was going on.
And, you know, let alone, you know, elderly people donating 65,000 times, you know, you don't, you don't see that.
So the question is, why are, why is this going on?
Well, we know Kemp and we know DeSantis had a secret meeting, right?
To discuss stuff.
Well, what happened during that meeting?
What happened with these Secretary of State organizations?
Which, by the way, they all share a group organization that they're all a member of.
And Pierre Omidir, he's a big funder of that.
You know who else?
You know what else Pierre Omidir is a big funder of?
He's a big funder of all of these packs that all of these mules and all these smurfs are donating to.
Soros too.
So we have to ask a lot of hard questions.
You know, we know that a lot of this money is coming from Soros.
We know it's coming from pure Omanir.
We know it's coming from outside of the United States.
The question is who?
Where is this money coming from?
And why is the IRS not investigating?
Because here's the thing, right?
You have all of these elderly people who are making, or somebody is creating an asset account in their name, okay, and they're depositing funds into it, and they're making campaign finance donations with it.
I believe that that would be a taxable event.
And you have all of these people who are making $10,000, $20,000, $50,000, $200,000, $300,000 in campaign finance donations when we know that there's no way that these people could have possibly afforded to do it.
Where's the money coming from?
In some cases, you actually note that the donor is unemployed, many cases retired.
You specifically mentioned in your report JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, an amalgamated bank in connection with this massive campaign finance Money laundering operation.
How are these banks implicated and what evidence supports their involvement?
So, we know ActBlue is one of the main methodologies that is being used to do this.
There are some others too.
There are two other organizations that are trying to fly under the radar.
I don't want to quite tip my hand yet.
To let everybody else know who they are yet, but here's the thing.
At Blue, all of their banking, all of these transactions, all of these financial transactions, they're being routed through Chase, Bank of America, and Amalgamated Bank, okay?
Amalgamated Bank is also the bank to a lot of these PACs.
These Soros connected and other various PACs that are large beneficiaries of this money laundering network.
So how are they doing it?
Well, you know, Chase, they, they're big on the whole reputational damage that they use to de-platform people.
I believe they de-platformed General Flynn at Chase over his banking.
And, but yet here they are participating In this massive money laundering operation.
So what you have to under, or people have to understand, right, is that there are, there's fraud protections.
And one of my favorite ones, when I was talking to an attorney who used to work at the FEC, who was trying to tell me that my data was bad, I said, I'll tell you what, let's play a game.
I want you to go out and get your debit card, and I want you to walk into Walmart, and I want you to make one purchase, and then I want you to walk out to your car, put the purchase away, and go back in and make another purchase.
I want you to do that 15 times, 30 times in an afternoon.
We're gonna see how quick your car gets flagged for fraud.
Well, this is just, Typical fraud protection.
This is anti-money laundering protection.
This is all stuff that banks are required to do.
So why is Chase not doing that?
Why is Bank of America not doing that?
Why is Stripe not doing that?
Why, why, why, why, why?
Why is Amalgamated Bank not doing that?
Are they not noticing this?
Plausible deniability goes out the door.
And in order for you to have RICO, okay, and crime, right, you have to have intent.
And what we have here is willful blindness.
And willful blindness does fulfill this wonderful thing for criminal intent.
So the FEC, their willful blindness, you know, that's Criminal intent.
Bank of America.
That's criminal intent.
So, what's going on?
I mean, we know that Raphael Warnock, last year, I believe at the end of December, he ended up making about 680,000 refunds.
Well, if Raphael Warnock's campaign wasn't doing anything bad or illegal, why did they make over 680,000 refunds?
Hmm.
We're almost out of time.
We are using Rumble Live Chat today, as we do on every show.
BRNEWT2594 asks, if the Federal Election Commission, Department of Justice, and state-level law enforcement aren't interested in investigating what you have uncovered and charging these people, what is our recourse?
That's going to have to be our last question.
Fire away.
We have to hold them accountable.
We personally have to hold them accountable.
So anyone who says or tries to say that there's nothing wrong with the machines, that there's nothing wrong with the vote by mail, we have to hold them accountable because what this is, is they have stolen our constitutional republic and they're doing so without the consent of the governed.
And it's very simple.
If you are operating without the consent of the governed, then you are an illegitimate Regime, you have no power.
And so for your Jack Schmitz and your Fannie Willis's, you know, people need to start filing bar complaints against them.
Imagine if the millions of Americans went out tomorrow or today, right, and started filing bar complaints against Jack and against Fannie.
That's something real.
All right, we have to leave it there.
Folks, I urge you to go to StoneZone.com.
You can read Chris Gleason's entire incredible story on this report.
Again, to recap, he's undercovered a massive campaign finance fraud.
You can go to StoneZone.com and read about it there.
Chris Gleason, one of the smartest guys I know.
Thank you so much for joining us on The Stone Zone.
Thanks for having me, Roger.
All right, folks, there you have it.
I want to remind you that we are brought to you by the great folks at MyPillow.com.
All of our activities here, our daily programming, five days a week with the exception of holidays, is brought to you by the great folks at MyPillow.com.
Now there is no other compensation other than your loyal patronage to our sponsors, of which MyPillow.com is the leading sponsor.
So please take a moment to go to MyPillow.com.
Right now and use promo code stone promo code stone.
There are many, many great products there.
Let me very quickly mention a couple.
The revolutionary new MyPillow 2.0.
This is a pillow that employs a cooling technology that is woven into the pillow.
The pillow remains cool to the touch for a perfect night's sleep, the best night's sleep.
You've ever had every night right now there is a special on these pillows where you can get a four pack of the pillows normally this would be a value of $259.92 but with promo code stone you get four pillows for $99.98 We don't need to show them to you, but there are a number of other great products at MyPillow.com.
Let me specifically mention the dog and cat beds listed on the website as the dog beds, the pet blankets, the all-season men and women's moccasin slippers, the MyPillow blankets, The MyPillow waffle blankets, the six-piece towel set, the men and women's bathrobes.
Many, many great products, folks.
You can help Mike Lindell, the leading advocate for election integrity and free speech in the country, in his epic fight with the FBI, who seized his phone calls.
You can help Mr. and Mrs. Roger Stone.
You can help us here at The Stone Zone by going to MyPillow and using promo code STONE.
God will bless you for it.
The outrageous assault on President Donald Trump, in which he is framed for various crimes in an effort to interfere with his election, is backfiring quite badly.
Let's take a look at the polling very quickly, because I've never seen polls like it this weekend.
Now, a new poll published yesterday by Interactive Polls has Donald Trump up over Ron DeSantis, 69 to 13, and Vivek Ramaswamy now actually in second place, coming up over Governor Ron DeSantis.
The next poll.
This is a National Republican primary vote by the Wall Street Journal.
Donald Trump's vote at 59.
Ron DeSantis, his nearest competitor, at 13.
Nikki Haley at 8.
Ramaswamy at 5.
Notice that Trump is up.
These are post-indictment polls, folks.
Post-indictment In Georgia, Trump is up 11 points.
DeSantis down a matching 11 points.
This is really unlike anything I have ever seen.
I'll show him another poll.
This is a national Republican primary poll.
This is sponsored by CNN, so you know it is not a conservative organization.
Trump at 52, up 5 points.
DeSantis at 18, dropping 8 points since the debate.
Nikki Haley up to 7.
Pence at 7.
Vivek Ramaswamy at 6.
We have one more poll, I believe.
This is a New Hampshire poll.
This is actually stunning.
Nikki Haley has now moved into second place where she actually ties Ron DeSantis 47 to 37.
Do we have one more?
Yes.
This is a new poll from McLaughlin and Associates.
I am very familiar with their methodology.
This is a national general election poll.
This is incredible news.
Donald Trump leading Joe Biden 47 to 43 nationally.
In the key battleground states, Trump now leading Biden 49 to 41.
It's important to note that this poll was taken again after the Georgia indictment.
So, it is dawning on the deep state that Donald Trump is a phenomena, that this movement is getting stronger, not weaker.
Look at this incredible video of veteran Democratic operative Donna Brazile.
I'm old enough to say this.
I've seen two movements outside of the social justice movements in my life, on the political side.
One was the Reagan movement.
Reagan had a hold on his base, the country at large.
They saw him as someone who was willing to stand up for American values, whatever that might have meant.
Now, I thought it was reactionary.
The other movement I saw was Barack Obama, Hope and Change.
That galvanized the American people.
I've never seen anything like this with Donald Trump.
I mean, what doesn't kill you makes you stronger?
I mean, being convicted?
I mean, being indicted?
That's making him stronger?
Raising $10 million using an ugly mugshot to raise money?
This is a movement.
And anyone who thinks that you can apply the old political rules to try to defeat this candidate based on he's scary, he's ugly, whatever you might want to call him, this is a movement.
And I have to respect the fact that it's a movement.
There you have it, folks.
We can't use the old political techniques.
So what are we doing?
We're abusing our judicial system.
We are trying to criminalize constitutionally protected political speech and political activity in an effort to interfere in this election and stop the juggernaut that is Donald J. Trump.
It is worth saying that when I went to trial in D.C.
in the completely fabricated charges that claim that I lied about Russian collusion under oath to Congress in my voluntary testimony.
The jury forewoman was a protege of Donna Brazile.
She was an African-American woman who had run for Congress as a Democrat in Tennessee.
She insisted during jury selection that she wasn't familiar with who I was and not familiar with my case.
But we learned after I was convicted that she had attacked me by name regarding the very case in which she was later selected as a juror and attacked Donald Trump claiming all of his supporters were racists.
She kept all of these postings on a private setting during jury selection during my entire trial and tried to quietly erase them afterwards.
She was unsuccessful thanks to the independent journalist Mike Cernovich.
Was I given a new trial?
No.
Was my conviction voided based on the extraordinary bias of the juror?
No.
The judge in my case ruled that this was not evidence of bias.
People ask me what's going to happen in Georgia.
I think that the Georgia case should be removed to federal court.
Here's an incredible video of Trump impeachment lawyer David Schoen.
To my mind, the single smartest criminal defense lawyer.
In the United States.
With us, former President Trump's impeachment attorney, David Schoen.
We won't see the spectacle of Trump going to and from court for an arraignment now in this case.
But Fulton County has just said that they will broadcast the trial on a YouTube channel.
So cameras will be there.
I think we're going to see more attention to this case than we saw even for OJ.
Will this help or hurt the case?
It's an interesting question, but I would really hope that the case is going to be removed to federal court.
It fits every criteria for that.
There's a case from Georgia, federal court in Georgia, called Georgia versus Hines.
Right on it.
He clearly was acting in his official capacity, under color of law.
He wouldn't have had the phone call with the Secretary of State if he weren't.
He was operating under the Constitution's take care that the laws are faithfully executed clause.
This case ought to be removed to federal court, which will remove the idea of television cameras.
On the other hand, if it goes in state court, I think there's a great public interest in the case.
So I like the idea that it's televised, but I'm afraid of the lawyer's egos tend to take over when it's televised and becomes a circus.
Excellent points there.
David, before I let you go, we have about a minute left as President Trump's impeachment attorney.
What is your prediction on all these cases?
Because they seem to be crumbling at this point.
Just a couple quick points.
Number one, if Meadows' petition for removal is granted, the whole case goes up.
They can, at some point, try to remand some of the other defendants.
But Trump should have filed his motions earlier.
He should have been the first one to file.
But if Meadows wins, the whole case goes up to district court, federal district court.
On this 14th amendment question, I think it's outrageous.
I don't think it will prevail.
It ignores his exoneration in the impeachment trial that was specifically about insurrection or seditious conspiracy, that sort of thing.
The prosecutor had every opportunity to charge seditious conspiracy or sedition or insurrection here.
The federal code section 2383, they chose not to charge it.
Constitution's clear in article 2 section 1 on the qualifications for president.
President 14 years, over 35 years of age, American-born.
Those are the qualifications.
We can't modify that now.
I think it's an outrageous effort.
I think it harkens back to Jerry Nadler a couple years ago saying, we can't trust the American voters.
We must trust the American voters.
That's our democracy.
Absolutely, the democratic way.
Thank you so much.
Brilliant analysis.
All right, David Shone, to my mind, the most brilliant criminal defense attorney in the country with an excellent analysis.
It is important to recognize, however, that even if President Trump were successful in removing the Georgia case to federal court, it remains a state case and the president would not have the authority to pardon himself if convicted in that federal court suit.
Small point.
The pluses are that you would get a different and presumably less biased judge than you will get in Fulton County, and you get a much broader pool, including of some people in the suburbs, in the jury pool, if the case were to be successfully removed to the to the US federal courts.
In the meantime, I'm Roger Stone.
We're out of time.
I'll remind you to go by StoneZone.com and subscribe today.
Also, go buy my pillow and use promo code STONEWILLYOUDO.
Until tomorrow, God bless you and Godspeed.
And a friend of mine for a long time, he only likes politics.
If you ask him about how are the Yankees doing, he has no interest.
If you ask him almost anything, he likes politics and he's a professional at the highest level level.
Roger Stone.
Where's Roger?
▲
Export Selection