Roger Stone dissects Pope Francis’ Vatican-China deal as a "globalist" betrayal, warning 80% of his cardinals will perpetuate liberal policies unless a conservative like Cardinal Burke or Serra wins the conclave. He contrasts this with Trump’s fight against judicial obstruction, calling out ABC News for distorting his claims on Venezuelan gangs while praising his deportation push under the Alien Enemies Act. Investigative journalist Joel Gilbert exposes NY AG Letitia James’ mortgage fraud—falsifying residency, hiding five-unit properties as four, and exploiting HAMP loans while earning $14K/month—arguing her actions make her constitutionally unfit for office. The episode ties elite corruption to systemic decay, framing 2024’s Democratic missteps and judicial overreach as symptoms of a broader institutional rot. [Automatically generated summary]
If you're looking to create, grow, and sustain your wealth, download and subscribe to the Pain Points of Wealth podcast at bebullish.com with Bob, Ryan, and Chris Payne.
It's your podcast for market insights, money tips, and real talk on the economy.
Download and subscribe at bebullish.com.
The Stone Zone.
Entertaining and informative on the Red Apple Podcast Network.
Welcome.
You are entering the Stone Zone.
I am a proud Roman Catholic.
I was baptized at St. Mary's Church in Norwalk, Connecticut, one of the most beautiful Roman Catholic churches in the northeastern United States.
I received my first Holy Communion and my holy confirmation at St. Aloysius in New Canaan, Connecticut.
I admit that there was a period in which I fell away from the church, but ultimately, during the Russian collusion hoax, when I was unfairly targeted in a political prosecution and subjected to a Soviet-style show trial, I was redeemed in the blood of the cross, and it is why I am with you today.
I become increasingly interested after Pope Francis died on Easter Monday, April 21st, 2025, at the age of 88, in the process that is involved in the selection of a new pope, as well as the politics of that process.
Now, the process to choose a new pope is called a conclave.
After a pope dies or resigns, a group of the highest-ranking non-papal officials within the Catholic Church, the cardinals, gather in Rome.
Cardinals over the age of 80 are excluded from the process, stemming from a Pope Paul VI edict made in the 1970s.
This makes very little sense to me.
Why would the church exclude its oldest and wisest cardinals?
This alone will make it much more difficult for a conservative successor to Francis to be named.
Candidly, I believe that Benedict was the last legitimate pope.
I think the selection of Francis was a manipulated and political selection.
I, for example, strongly disagree with the fact that Pope Francis essentially reached agreement with the Chinese Communist Party that allowed the Chinese Communists to decide who the bishops in China would be.
When Cardinal Zhen with responsibility for China objected, he was essentially shunned by the Pope.
This is just one of many criticisms I have of Francis, who I think was more of a globalist than he was a Catholic.
Now, among the current College of Cardinals, 80% of them were chosen by Francis, indicating that significant change in the direction of the church is highly unlikely.
These are the electors, and there's a cap of 120 of them, although the number can slightly vary depending on circumstances.
They will meet in the Sistine Chapel, the Pope's official residence in Vatican City, and they're essentially locked in, hence the term conclave from the Latin conclave, meaning with a key.
It's kind of similar to a sequestered jury during a high-profile case.
The idea is to shield them from undue influence and protect the integrity of the process.
Anyone who tries to pretend that this isn't inherently political doesn't understand how the real world works.
Now, as someone who grew up watching the Reverend Fulton Sheen on WPIX in New York, and who remembers when the Catholic Church was a bulkwork of anti-communist communism, today's Catholic Church is, to say the least, disappointing.
The cardinals will cast ballots up to four times a day, two in the morning and two in the afternoon.
Each writes the name of their chosen candidate on a slip of paper, folds it, and places it in a chalice on the altar.
The ballots are counted by three scrutineers, and to win, a candidate needs a two-thirds majority of the votes.
If no one gets that majority after a round, the ballots are then burned with a chemical that turns the smoke black, visible from St. Peter's Square, to signal that no pope has yet been selected.
This process repeats until there is a winner.
At that point, the smoke turns white thanks to the use of a different chemical mix, and the crowd knows that a new pope has been chosen.
That is when habemus papum, Latin for we have a pope, is shouted from the balcony.
The winner is compelled to accept the election, choose his papal name, and prepare himself to lead over $1 billion Catholics worldwide.
The whole thing can take days or could even take weeks, although modern conclaves turn to wrap up much faster, often within a couple of days.
One common misunderstanding is that people, including many Catholics, believe the Church teaches that the Holy Spirit directly chooses the next Pope.
That is not so.
While we pray that the Cardinals are guarded by the Holy Spirit, there is jockeying over who will be the next Pope.
While it may be inappropriate to jockey the election of the next Pope as both a baptized Catholic and a political strategist, I feel an obligation to give you the names and the handicapping of those currently rumored to be in contention.
So here we go.
Cardinal Pietro Perilin as the Vatican's Secretary of State and Cardinal Francis' right-hand man, Perilin might be the current frontrunner for the position.
He is considered a moderate with extensive diplomatic experience.
His selection would be viewed as a continuation of Pope Francis' pro-globalist policies.
Through some controversial dealings like the Vatican's agreement with China, this could complicate his candidacy.
Then there is Cardinal Luis Antonio Tago from the Philippines, known as the Asian Francis.
Tago is a progressive figure aligned with Francis' pastoral approach.
My sources tell me that he would be the worst choice for the church and could be further to the left of the past Pope Francis.
At 67, he could be there for a very long time if chosen.
There is Cardinal Matteo Zuppi of Italy.
He's 69.
He is currently and was a great favorite of Pope Francis.
Zuppi is the president of the Italian Episcopal Conference and a moderate to liberal known for his social justice advocacy.
His work as a peace envoy and his ties to the San Erdogo community bolster his profile among those who are seeking continuity with the Francis legacy.
Cardinal Fridolin Mbongo Besungo, he is from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 65 years old.
He is a conservative voice from Africa.
Mbongo has gained attention for opposing Cardinal Francis' liberal stances, notably on same-sex marriage blessings.
His leadership in the African church makes him a potential candidate for those favoring a traditionalist shift in the selection of a new pope.
Then there is Cardinal Wem Egic of the Netherlands, a former doctor and staunch conservative.
Egic is known for opposing Francis' views on marriage and divorce.
His traditionalist stance could appeal to cardinals seeking a counterbalance to the recent reforms promulgated by Pope Francis.
Cardinal Raymond Burke of the United States, 76, is an outspoken American traditionalist.
Burke has clashed with Francis over issues like marriage, the Eucharist, and same-sex marriage.
He's a long shop, represents a vocal conservative faction.
My sources think Burke would launch a major set of reforms to strengthen the church, particularly among younger Catholics who are overwhelmingly conservative, and he has many support among the younger Catholics that I am friendly with.
Cardinal Peter Erdo is yet another contender.
He's 72, a Hungarian.
He is a conservative canon lawyer.
Erdo is respected for his adherence to church doctrine and his low-profile approach.
He's been mentioned in past conclaves, and he could attract moderate and conservative voters.
I guess he would be my first choice if I had a vote, but of course, I don't.
Then, of course, there is Cardinal Mario Creech.
He's from Malta.
He's 67.
A secretary general of the Synod of Bishops.
Kretsch is a Francis appointee with a progressive bent, emphasizing dialogue with marginalized groups.
He's a less prominent, but I would say, plausible contender.
Now, if I had my brothers, I guess my real first choice would be Cardinal Robert Serra.
He is from Guinea.
He's 79.
I think he would be my pick.
He is a staunch conservative, defender of the faith and the church, believer in borders and the rules of the West.
No man, in my opinion, is more suited for the monumental job than Cardinal Sara.
With his dark complexion and his articulation of traditional teachings of the Catholic Church, his eminence would be very much a pontiff in the same vein as, say, Justice Clarence Thomas is to the U.S. Supreme Court.
My friends have pointed out another long shot, that is Cardinal Piera Battista Pizzabala.
Cardinal Pizza Bala is an Italian Catholic prelate who has served as the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem since November 6, 2020.
Cardinal Pizza Bala's work and message reflects his commitment to peace, unity, and well-being of the Christian community in the Holy Land.
I stress once again, many consider him a long shot.
Now remember, 80% of those voting were selected by Pope Francis, so that the selection of a more traditionalist or conservative pope who is a staunch anti-communist in the mold of Pope John Paul II may require a miracle.
So I suggest that if you are a Catholic or if you're just someone who cares, that we pray over this.
With a papal conclave convening as soon as next week, I would say a prayer to support the church.
May the Holy Spirit guide and influence this election process.
May God's blessing be upon the cardinals that they may be open to his guidance and choice of a new pope who will be a blessing to the church.
I would also say may God grant the cardinals wisdom, discernment, and courage in their decision-making, so they may choose a leader who is truly after his heart.
May God raise up a shepherd who will be faithful, compassionate, and unified.
Amen.
That's my prayer.
Now, despite the handicapping, despite the politics, despite the fact that Pope Francis essentially selected 80% of those who will vote in the upcoming conclave, as a Catholic, as a Christian, we believe that nothing is impossible for the Lord.
And in the end, he will decide who the next Pope is.
If he needed any advice, well, I hope he listened to this show.
Actually, I think he listens to all of our prayers.
And I pray for a just result.
I think the Catholic Church needs to return to be a bulkwork of anti-communism, anti-authoritarianism, and a beacon for freedom and respect for the Lord.
This upcoming election is crucial, and I'm glad if you had an opportunity to tune in to my handicapping.
You're listening to the Stone Zone.
I'm Roger Stone.
Whatever you do, don't touch that dial.
The Stone Zone on the Red Apple Podcast Network.
Rural Americans deserve access to the best of what our nation has to offer, especially health care.
Hospitals Lifelines 24/700:04:37
Across every state and every community, America's rural hospitals are the first line of defense, protecting our families, neighbors, and loved ones.
No matter where you live, hospital care doesn't clock out.
They're there 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year.
Each year, America's over 5,000 hospitals care for millions of patients, providing 24-7 emergency care, delivering babies, cancer treatments, and other life-saving care that patients rely on.
Behind every one of those patients are doctors, nurses, and caregivers working tirelessly to keep people healthy and safe.
Hospitals are our community's lifelines.
They employ our neighbors and keep our families healthy.
But now, some in Congress are threatening access to care.
Tell Congress, protect patient care to keep America strong.
Don't cut rural health care.
The Stone Zone.
Entertaining and informative.
On the Red Apple Podcast Network.
President Donald Trump just the other day slammed the United States court system, including the Supreme Court, over their response to his efforts to deport illegal migrants, stating it is not possible to try every person who is in the United States illegally.
The Supreme Court ruled last weekend, temporarily blocking Trump's latest round of deportations under the 1798 Alien Enemies Act.
Trump's deportations have come under undue scrutiny after he began removing hundreds of illegal migrants he accused of being gang members without due process.
The president defended his actions in a post on True Social I saw, claiming it would take 200 years to try to give every illegal migrant in the country a trial and slammed the Supreme Court for allegedly not wanting him to send violent criminals and terrorists, in this case, back to Venezuela.
I'm doing what I was elected to do, the president said, which is to say remove criminals from our country.
But the courts don't seem to want me to do that, wrote the president.
My team is fantastic, doing an incredible job.
However, they are being stymied at every turn by the U.S. Supreme Court, the courts and the U.S. Supreme Court, which I have such great respect for, but which seemingly doesn't want me to send violent criminals and terrorists back to Venezuela or any other country.
Only yesterday, we saw a fake news report from ABC News, which said that the 18 intelligence agencies disagreed with the president's assertion that the violent terrorist gangs are directly connected to the Venezuelan government.
I spoke personally to the director of national intelligence, Tosi Gabbard, who told me that the determination of the intelligence agencies was actually the direct opposite of what ABC News had reported.
So much for ABC News being either a journalistic outfit or a legitimate news outlet.
The president praised Supreme Court Justice Alito's dissent, stating that the justice was right for wanting to dissolve the pause on deportations.
Alito wrote in his scathing dissent: literally in the middle of the night, the court issued unprecedented and legally questionable relief without giving the lower courts a chance to even rule, without hearing from the opposing party, within eight hours of receiving the application, with dubious factual support for its order and without providing any explanation for its order.
Again, on True Social, I saw the president declared: if we don't get these criminals out of the country, we're not going to have a country any longer.
We cannot give everyone a trial because to do so would take, without exaggeration, 200 years.
We would need thousands of trials for hundreds of thousands of illegals.
It just cannot be done.
Don't touch that dial because we'll be right back.
The Stone Zone on the Red Apple Podcast Network.
The Stone Zone, entertaining and informative on the Red Apple Podcast Network.
Mortgage Fraud Allegations00:15:10
Welcome back.
You are entering the stone zone.
Yet again, joining me now is Joel Gilbert.
Joel Gilbert is an investigative journalist, a documentary filmmaker, and a musician.
He is best known for his documentaries, including Dreams from My Real Father, Trump, The Art of the Insult, hysterically funny, by the way.
But more recently, Joel Gilbert has written a series of articles for the Gateway Pundit regarding New York Attorney General Letitia James.
You remember her?
She's the one who said that no one is above the law.
She's the one who charged President Donald Trump claiming that he had overvalued his assets in order to obtain commercial loans, all of which got paid back on time, in which the lenders made $40 million in interest.
In fact, every one of the lenders said they would do those transactions yet again.
Letitia James used a law that has never been used in New York state history to prosecute anybody.
But it turns out that the Attorney General is a bit of a hypocrite.
Joe Gilbert, welcome to the Stone Zone.
Great to be back.
Thank you, Roger.
So, Joe, I'm going to throw this to you.
Summarize for us what you have learned and what you have reported on, and most importantly, what you have documented regarding New York's Attorney General.
Well, you had a great introduction there because Letitia James charged Trump with civil mortgage fraud on garbage charges.
What I have detailed is actual criminal mortgage fraud by, I think, Letitia James herself.
And I wrote a series of articles for the Gateway Pundit.
In the first one, I looked at her history, entire history of taking mortgages out.
First one, we find out when she's only 24 years old.
She's out of college.
She's got no job or probably a low-paying job.
And she decides to buy an 800-square-foot townhome, and she's obviously not qualified.
So what does she do?
We look at the mortgage document.
It's online on Accris.
And it shows that she pretended that she was married to her father, who had a real job, and she used his income balance sheet to try to qualify for this loan.
It says it right on the mortgage document in three places, so it could not have been a typo.
And in fact, years later, when they sold the property, they also sold it as husband and wife.
So this, I think, is a clear case of mortgage fraud.
It's illegal to misrepresent a relationship in order to qualify for a loan.
And Ilhan Omar, of course, is known for marrying her brother to get an immigration advantage.
I think Letitia James actually pretended to marry her father for a mortgage loan advantage, which was illegal.
That was her first.
Go ahead.
I think you have addressed those who say that this was just a typographical error.
If it's three different places in the documents, and if the mortgage document says husband and wife, but the title to the property says correctly father and daughter, there's very little chance that this was a typographical error.
Not possible.
Her father was quite old at that time.
He actually died only three years later.
So for the deed, they actually wrote father and daughter.
But on the mortgage, to qualify for it, they said husband and wife.
And indeed, 15 years later, when Letitia sold the property, she sold it as husband and wife, even though her father was deceased.
Now, her second big mortgage snafu has to do with 296 Lafayette Avenue in Brooklyn, where it's a four-story apartment building with five apartments in it.
And that's pretty much become a crime scene, according to what I've discovered.
Because what she did is she took mortgages and refinances over 20 years, and she always falsely claimed that it only had four apartments in a five-apartment building.
Now, the certificate of occupancy for this building is the official designation by the city of New York that says how many apartments you have.
2001, Letitia buys the property as a five-unit building.
It says so on the certificate of occupancy.
So when she each time applies for a refinance saying that it's only four units, that's mortgage fraud.
The biggest fraud was a HAMP loan she took out from the U.S. government under the TARP program.
She was paying about 10% for her adjustable rate mortgage, and she decided, hey, I'd like to refinance on the back of the American taxpayer and get this government loan at only 2.7%.
Now, to do that, the HAMP loan is not even available for anybody with five units or more.
So she once again lies and says it's only four-unit building, even though it's clearly five.
She also lies saying that she has a financial hardship.
You had to have a financial hardship to get this government loan, but she's making $14,000 a month from her city council salary and from her rentals.
So that's a second criminal lie in a mortgage.
And Letitia made it very clear that no one is above the law.
And therefore, her HAMP loan by itself, which has now been referred to the Department of Justice by Bill Pulte, because of the fact that she lied on this loan to get a 2.7% loan.
So there's many mortgage crimes that are coming out about this property.
Now, in addition, I've got another article coming out on the Gateway Pundit tomorrow.
And the title is, Is Letitia James a Slumlord?
Because when you look on the New York Department of Buildings website, she's got four of the units are infested with bed bugs.
That means every one of her tenants, because she lives in the building.
So she lives in one unit, and all four of her tenants have bed bugs.
Obviously, Letitia wasn't going to make a report about her own unit.
She's got two units with peeling paint all over the place.
She's got 17 complaints in the last 20 months.
So it's also the hypocrisy, again, is stunning because she has built her political brand on this commitment to tenant advocacy and housing justice.
But Letitia herself really is operating her building as a slumlord.
So I think Letitia has to resign.
I don't see how she can survive this scandal that she's again and again guilty of mortgage fraud and now being a slumlord.
I noticed that Sam Antar, who's also appeared here in the Stone Zone, has published at his website, whitecollarfraud.com, a series of additional exposés on the misdeeds of Letitia James.
He reported that only in 2023, literally weeks before she put Donald Trump on trial in the so-called valuations case, a case in which Mr. Trump, then a candidate for president, was not allowed a jury, was not allowed to put up a defense, and the judge essentially declared him guilty without a real trial.
Letitia James signed a power of attorney which said that she and her niece would inhabit a property that they purchased in Virginia within 60 days of closing the mortgage.
And the mortgage clearly reflects that it had to be owner-occupied in order to qualify for the mortgage.
Now, the New York Daily News Editorial Board published a piece dismissing all of this, saying that these were flimsy claims of fraud and petty payback by the administration for the civil case she brought against Donald Trump.
You know Sam Antar.
You know his work.
It is extremely documented.
By the way, Sam Antar is not a Republican, not a Trump supporter.
He has a very interesting background.
He himself was convicted in one of the greatest security frauds in American history.
He went to prison.
He did his time.
He paid his debt to society.
But when he came out, he decided to use his unique forensic talents to help governments, law firms, and other institutions detect white-collar fraud, turned his life around, and now using it for good.
Joel, what do you think of these revelations by Sam Antar?
Sam has just done a fantastic job on his website.
Everyone should look at it every day because he's got great updates, whitecollarfraud.com.
He discovered that Letitia claimed, as you mentioned, that this home in Virginia would be her primary residence.
Now, the reason she did that is because you do get lower rates when you say, when the mortgage companies give you a lower rate.
And I had an article also on Gateway Pundit showing you that insurance companies also give lower rates when someone says they're going to inhabit their house.
If they say they're going to rent it out or have someone else living there, the insurance rates are higher.
So I believe Letitia James is also guilty of insurance fraud.
And Sam Antar has shown how the Northfook property is just a primary evidence done at exactly the same time she was prosecuting Trump for mortgage fraud.
She herself was engaged in mortgage fraud.
I also had an article about a foreclosure property that Letitia purchased in 2008 in Martinsville, Virginia, where she purchased a property with a couple who had been foreclosed on.
And then the deed for the property that was created, the new deed, Letitia wasn't on it.
So she should have been because she was a purchaser.
So that was another indication of possible mortgage fraud because the purchasers have to appear on the deed.
She may to this day have an interest in that property that she bought this foreclosure, but never disclosed it on her campaign forms.
So Sam Antar has a lot more information about campaign fraud, misuse of airplane expenses, you name it.
Letitia, I think, has to resign at this point.
The New York Daily News is not going to save her by pretending and repeating things that aren't true.
The Albany Times Union, in a tight contest, perhaps be the worst newspaper in the country in terms of absolute bias in their reporting, never mind their editorial page, has also come to her defense to try to pretend that these are not legitimate issues.
It's interesting.
Attorney General James told the New York Times that despite this power of attorney she signed, in which she claimed that she would move to Virginia, which might have made her instantaneously, constitutionally ineligible to be the New York Attorney General.
Or if she did move, if she didn't move, she would be guilty of a false statement on this sworn document.
She claimed that there was a prior application for that mortgage in which there was no pledge to move in and occupy the property.
She also claimed that the mortgage did not require her to do so.
Anyone can go to whitecollarfraud.com or can go look up the documents themselves.
Both of those claims are completely and totally false.
If there's a prior application in which she doesn't pledge to move into the property, then the New York Times should make it public because they seem to be the only ones who have a copy of it.
And they wrote about it as if it is a fact.
This is part and parcel of the establishment cover-up that I think she is currently benefiting from.
Look, I'll agree with that.
New York State is an open record state.
That's how I, in California, could simply jump on the website and download all these mortgages.
Anybody, just type in Letitia James.
You can download every mortgage myself or Sam Antar I've written about, and you can read them yourself.
You will find nothing to support these flimsy leftist rags claims that Letitia did something that was legal because everything was illegal from the HAMP loan to the claim of a primary residence in Northfolk.
Illegal what she did with the foreclosure in Martinsville, Virginia, illegal to defraud insurance companies by claiming she only had four units.
Illegal to claim that with the HAMP loan that she had a hard financial hardship while making $14,000 a month.
It's overwhelming evidence.
I invite everyone to go onto the ACRIS website, and you can verify everything myself and Sam Antar have reported.
And by the way, I have invited the Attorney General to appear on this program anytime she wishes to appear to defend herself against any of these charges.
I think that's only fair.
Somehow I won't hold my breath.
Where do you think this goes?
I mean, now this is a political question.
I read the letter that the head of the Federal Housing Finance Agency sent to the Justice Department, a referral for prosecution.
Do you think that the Attorney General will be held accountable?
Well, this is a good test to see if Pam Bondi's DOJ will follow through on the promise of Donald Trump and his campaign to restore law and order, because Letitia James has violated, even as a public official, the law, I think, repeatedly.
I have some concerns about Pam Bondi, as do other MAGA Republicans.
I think I detailed in my film, The Trayvon Hoax, where I looked at the George Zimmerman case in Florida.
Not everybody knows that Pam Bondi was the Attorney General of Florida when the local police in Sanford, Florida exonerated George Zimmerman, said he shot Trayvon Martin in self-defense.
But because of the street protests by Ben Crump and Al Sharpton, Pam Bondi caved in.
Instead of looking at the evidence and saying, hey, I've looked at the police report.
Zimmerman was acting in self-defense.
See you later.
Michelle Obama's Potential Run00:04:03
Instead, she appointed a special counsel to investigate and arrest Zimmerman and defended the attorneys like Crump and others.
And so she's kind of partially responsible for Black Lives Matter, which was founded on Zimmerman being acquitted.
So this is a great test to see if Pam Bondi will follow through and if she really is a MAGA Republican or not.
All right.
If you're just tuning in, folks, talking to Joel Gilbert, documentary filmmaker and author.
You're tuned in to The Stone Zone.
We'll be back with more of Joel Gilbert and our great coverage here in the Stone Zone.
So whatever you do, don't go away because we'll be right back.
The Stone Zone.
On the Red Apple Podcast Network.
The Stone Zone.
Entertaining and informative.
On the Red Apple Podcast Network.
And we're back in the Stone Zone.
We've only got a few minutes left.
We're talking to documentary filmmaker and investigative journalist and author Joel Gilbert.
Joe, I want to go back to an old topic.
You did a great book and a documentary on Michelle Obama.
You and I both believed that there was a high probability that she, rather than Kamala Harris, would emerge as the Democrat nominee after they dumped Joe Biden.
I still believe, based on the 10 days between Biden dropping out and declaring his support for Kamala and the Obamas finally endorsing Kamala Harris, that there was a backstage effort to try to get Michelle Obama, who in my opinion would have been a much stronger candidate, to run.
The only reason we both turned out to be wrong is because it fell on deaf ears that they could not persuade her to do so.
What do you think?
I think that clearly Michelle Obama was and still is the most beloved Democrat.
She's got 100 million social media followers.
People just love her.
And I think we were right when we said the Democrats would dump Biden.
And there was going to be a convention four weeks later in Michelle's hometown of Chicago.
But I think a very bitter Joe Biden, 30 minutes after he was pushed aside, sent out a tweet endorsing Kamala Harris.
Hillary and others jumped on board.
And the Obamas tried to hold out for about 10 days and said, no, no, no, we want an open convention in Chicago because I think the intent was to get Michelle in there.
She loves politics.
She's a better politician than Barack.
She's a better speaker than Barack.
Her father was a politician.
And I think we need to keep our eye on her for 2028 because she is definitely the most popular, beloved Democrat.
Anything she does, she gets tons of attention.
She just started a new podcast.
Even though it's incredibly boring with her brother, she still commands a tremendous amount of attention.
So I think we were right when we predicted Biden would be knocked out.
And I think there was a little bit of an outmaneuvering that went on that prevented Michelle from getting the nomination.
But I definitely would keep my eye on her for 2028.
Yeah, it's also true that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was maneuvering furiously for an open convention.
I'd point out that most people don't realize that 70% of the delegates to that convention were people of color, either African Americans or Hispanics, and that three major union leaders controlled two-thirds of the delegates to the convention.
So the convention was not an accurate reflection of the makeup of America.
All that had to happen is any one delegate could have stood up and said, I nominate Michelle Obama for president.
Once it was seconded, I think that motion would have carried, and we would not have been subjected to the disastrous candidacy of Kamala Harris.
All right.
Unfortunately, we have to leave it right there.
Leadership Thread with Dr. Peggy Polonis00:01:45
I want to thank my guest, Joel Gilbert.
Joel, tell people where they can find you on social media.
Yeah, please go to Joel S. S. isn't Sam, Joel S. Gilbert on Twitter.
I post a lot.
I link up to everybody.
You'll see my article tomorrow on Gateway Pundit on Letitia James, the slumlord.
And let's keep this story going because there's a lot more information that's still going to come out about Letitia James.
We're calling it the Letitia Files.
And she's a very corrupt politician, and I don't see how she survives this.
Yeah, some of my followers are calling her Lyticia James.
All right.
Thank you for joining us, Joel, and thank you to our many listeners for tuning in today to the Stone Zone until we meet again.
God bless you and Godspeed.
Thanks for listening to the Stone Zone with Roger Stone.
You can hear the Stone Zone with Roger Stone weeknights at 8 on 77 WABC.
If you like the podcast, share it with your friends and listen anytime at wabcradio.com and download the WABC Radio app.
Hit that subscribe button on all major podcast platforms.
Plus, follow WABC on social, on Instagram, TikTok, Facebook, and X. See you next time for a new episode so you never have to wonder what the heck is going on here.
Listen to this podcast now on the Red Apple Podcast Network.
The leadership thread with Dr. Peggy Polonis.
I'm Dr. Peggy Polonis.
Join me on each episode where I unravel the story that shaped leaders, tracing the thread that led them where they are today.
Because leadership isn't born in adulthood.
We thank you once again for joining us on the leadership thread, education, ethics, and sustainability.