Roger Stone dissects Susie Wiles’ praise for Trump’s patriotism while exposing CIA Director John Brennan’s alleged perjury over the Steele dossier, tied to Hillary Clinton’s $1M funding and 9/11 visa ties. He demands legal action against Brennan, Comey, Clapper, and Rosenstein for treasonous acts, framing Trump’s presidency as a target of deep-state sabotage. Stone also links USAID’s $210M Wuhan lab grant to COVID-19 bioweapons claims, questioning Fauci’s denials. Praising Trump’s NATO, India-Pakistan, and Congo-Rwanda diplomacy, he contrasts Zorhan Mamdani’s mayoral campaign—backed by $3.7M from billionaire PACs—with Curtis Sliwa’s grassroots $300K effort, framing the race as a clash between elite corruption and populist integrity. [Automatically generated summary]
At Manhattan University, a graduate degree is not out of reach.
You'll gain real-world skills, credentials, employers' value, and connections to New York City's top companies.
Choose from their new Master of Science degrees in healthcare, informatics, digital marketing and analytics, business analytics, or financial analytics.
All built around hands-on learning and industry partnerships.
Graduate ready to lead, not just work.
Take the next step at manhattan.edu/slash graduate.
Manhattan University.
Lead the future.
The Stone Zone on the Red Apple Podcast Network.
This is The Stone Zone with Roger Stone.
People love him and respect him.
Roger Stone.
Now, get him a zone.
It's the Stone Zone.
Here's Roger Stone.
You are now entering the Stone Zone.
Susie Wiles is the first woman chief of staff to the President of the United States.
She is a woman who has always believed throughout her long and victorious political career that good political operatives are seen but not heard.
Therefore, she very rarely gives interviews.
But she did give an interview with the great Miranda Devine of the New York Post.
We're going to play just a little bit of it.
He cares so, he is truly a patriot and cares so deeply about this country.
And that's not something that he came to in 2016.
It's always been there.
I didn't know his dad or his early life, but I have to believe that it comes from there.
And this country's given him everything, and he believes this is his chance to begin to give back.
And I think he's right.
That's Susie Wiles talking about her boss, Donald J. Trump, being interviewed by the great Miranda Devine of the New York Post.
And you can find that interview, which is about 40 minutes long, on YouTube.
I highly, highly recommend it to you.
Well, in the wake of a CIA-released report last week that fingered former CIA director John Brennan as the main perp in the orchestration of the phony Russian collusion hoax, the FBI has now opened a formal investigation into Brennan as well as DeCrace former FBI Director James Comey.
This has been a long time coming.
Now, it is my view expressed yesterday that based on my own sources, the CIA's report was kind of a shallow dive into the intelligence agency's misconduct in the launching of what was a completely politicized and politically motivated operation known as Crossfire Hurricane.
The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Rick Crawford, has gone public to say that the CIA's report is woefully inadequate.
It actually continues some of the same cover-up of these extraordinarily important issues.
His committee has been working on a more comprehensive report for eight months, and I think it is Chairman Crawford's view that the CIA review was put out quickly to try to preempt the House committee report.
The House Committee report, however, contains a great deal of classified information, and therefore it will require declassification by the President of the United States before it can be released.
I'm highly confident that the President will make those documents public, but the FBI director certainly had more than enough probable cause based on the CIA report put out by CIA Director Radcliffe to open the investigation into both Brennan and Comey.
Both Brennan and Comey have a serious problem in that they made false statements to Congress and therefore could face perjury charges.
They have been widely accused, perhaps no more loudly by anyone other than me, of abusing their power to perpetrate the conspiracy to undermine President Trump.
They believe they were above the law, they acted recklessly, and now the chickens may well be coming home to roost.
Now, I was charged with lying to Congress, specifically lying about the Russian collusion Oaks.
But then that's not possible because there was no Russian collusion.
In fact, Hakeem Jeffries posted on Twitter that I made a deal with President Donald Trump to lie to cover up his misdeeds in return for a pardon.
If Hakeem Jeffries was not a member of Congress, I could sue him for that falsehood, but he hides behind his status as a member under the debate clause.
Congressman, if you're listening, if you want to waive your congressional immunity, I'd be happy to see you in court.
News of the impending charges come after the CIA review, which outlined that John Brennan essentially pushed for the so-called steel dossier to be included in President Barack Obama's intelligence community assessment.
At the time, Brennan knew that the steel dossier was a fabrication.
He knew that it had been paid for by Hillary Clinton's campaign.
He knew that it had been compiled by a former British intelligence agent for a company called GPS Fusion.
And they used the steel report despite veteran intelligence officers warning repeatedly that it was a Faghazi and then lying about what they did after the conspiracy blew up in their faces.
Brennan actually testified before Congress in May of 2017 where he stated that the Steele dossier was not in any way the basis for the intelligence community's assessment that RussiaGate was built off of.
That is a material misstatement and therefore a chargeable crime.
Brennan stated years later before Congress that the CIA was very much opposed to having any reference or inclusion of the Steele dossier in the intelligence community assessment.
That, of course, may be true to an extent, but unfortunately it was the CIA director himself, John Brennan, who enthusiastically pushed in favor of including the fake steel dossier in the ICA report that was given to Barack Obama.
Now, if you don't know John Brennan, he has quite a background.
He admitted on a lie detector test to being a member of the Communist Party and to supporting the Communist Party candidate for president three times.
He was also the CIA station chief in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, where he personally approved the visas for four of the men who were involved in the 9-11 attack on America, the so-called hijackers.
Brennan also got caught red-handed spying on a Senate committee that was investigating CIA Director John Brennan's illegal use of torture.
We also have a report from former CIA and, pardon me, former FBI counterintelligence officer John Gwandolo, who insists that in an elaborate ceremony in Riyadh, that Brennan converted to Islam.
In fact, he converted to Wahhabism, which is the most virulent and radical form of Islam.
Then, of course, there is NSA Director James Clapper.
You remember him.
He's the guy who said under oath that the intelligence agencies were not collecting data on any American citizen and that there was no metadata collection program in place.
Of course, all of that was disproved by Edward Snowden when he released documents proving that Clapper was lying.
As it comes to the Russian collusion case, former NSA Director Clapper stated falsely before Congress that the team that put together the intelligence community assessment was not to draw on it as a source for the intelligence community assessment.
So you won't find a footnote using the dossier as a source.
In other words, he too lied about the use of the steel dossier.
Because these deep state hacks put the steel dossier in the appendix of their ICA, their intelligence community assessment, they thought they could slyly claim it was not used to devise the Russian Gate scam.
But now that they have been caught, and this is the thread that when pulled by the Trump administration, can bring down the entire deep state enterprise, it's time for the Trump administration to become ambitious in going after the interests of those who likely committed treason to sabotage Trump's first term.
It's time for a messy public example to be made of John Brennan, James Comey, James Clapper, former Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, and particularly Assistant Attorney General, in this case acting Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein.
Rosenstein actually testified before Congress that he never approved the investigation into Roger Stone.
Yet we have the document that he signed on October 17th of 2018 when he did exactly that.
Once again, a material statement, a violation of the False Statements Act.
In order to violate the False Statements Act, your false statement must first of all be willful, but secondarily, it must be material, meaning it can't be some frivolous accidental statement.
I still insist that if one looks at the charges against me, you will see that there is no material misstatement.
One of the specific charges was that I lied when I said that a New York radio personality, Randy Credico, told me that Wikileaks had an extensive trove of information on Hillary Clinton and that Julian Assange would release it in October.
When I asked him how he knew that, he said, and I quote, I know a woman lawyer who works for Wikileaks.
Now don't ask any more questions.
I said that in my sworn testimony.
They said it was a lie.
I have a text message from CreditCo, which has been authenticated, which the judge would not allow my lawyers to enter into evidence in my defense.
This is what you call a Soviet-style show trial.
It is definitely time, in my view, to hold these government officials accountable.
The future of the rule of law and the constitutional jurisprudence in this country depends on it.
Meanwhile, we have learned that the U.S. AID sent bioweapons to the Wuhan lab.
That's right.
The U.S. Agency for International Development has been revealed this week by the Daily Caller for sending thousands of viruses to the infamous Wuhan Research Lab over the course of a decades-long span.
They did this even though they have no formal agreement with the lab with little or no oversight over the dangerous operation.
U.S. AID money resulted in 11,000 viral samples being exported from the Yuhan province of China over to Wuhan through a $210 million public health grant called Predict.
One of the viruses that was part of the USAID transfer is closely tied to the infamous COVID-19 virus.
In response to this news, senior State Department told the Daily Caller, investigations involving USAID's former funding of global health awards remains active and ongoing.
The American people can rest assured knowing that under the Trump administration, we will not be funding those programs again.
But we know that Dr. Anthony Fauci, under questioning from Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, specifically denied funding the gain of function of the COVID-19 vaccination in the Wuhan lab, and that too was a lie.
Fauci's Warning: Protecting Patient Care00:02:03
Now, Fauci has a preemptive pardon from Joe Biden, but it was signed by an AutoPen.
And the way to test that preemptive pardon is to charge Dr. Fauci.
He will argue in his legal defense that he can't be prosecuted because he's been pardoned, and therefore the legality of the AutoPen pardon can be tested in a U.S. court of law.
I'm Roger Stone.
You're listening to the Stone Zone right here on the Red Apple Audio Networks, and we'll be right back with more political news from the headlines.
This is the Stone Zone with Roger Stone.
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.
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.
And we're back in the zone.
Peace Through Strength00:03:30
President Donald Trump has been winning big on foreign policy in recent weeks as he demonstrates, like Republican Presidents Ronald Reagan, Dwight Eisenhower, and Richard Nixon before him, that peace through strength can benefit America greatly.
You see, the Trump foreign policy is a departure from the neocon philosophy of the bushes, where America went around the world looking for wars to get into where our inherent national interests were never actually clear.
As you know, we were lied into war in Iraq, told by President Bush and particularly Vice President Dick Cheney that the Iraqis, pardon me, yes, the Iraqis had weapons of mass destruction and that they had been involved in the attack on America of 9-11, both false.
Thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis lost their lives in that unnecessary and senseless war.
Trump has now been nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize by a number of people, including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, as well as the Tunica Biloxi Indian tribe of Louisiana, who noticed that under the rules of the Norwegian Nobel Peace Prize Committee, any sovereign nation may make a nomination.
And the U.S. government recognizes the Indian tribe from Louisiana as a sovereign nation.
So they have nominated President Trump.
Trump has also been nominated for the peace prize by the Islamic Nation of Pakistan for diffusing tensions between Pakistan and their longtime enemy, India.
Pakistan nominated Trump for the peace prize because, they said, he demonstrated great strategic foresight and stellar statesmanship through robust diplomatic engagement and that deescalated, he de-escalated a rapidly deteriorating situation.
Before Trump played the role of mediator, India and Pakistan were on the brink of yet another major conflict.
Pakistan has nuclear weapons.
Now the tensions have died down and the region is no longer inflamed as a direct result of Donald Trump's peacemaking actions.
President Trump also received a pledge from all of the NATO countries to pay 5% of their GDP to contribute to the common defense.
You may recall that in his first term, President Trump pointed out that all of our NATO allies were greatly delinquent in paying their dues.
In other words, we were footing the bill for the defense of these European nations.
Trump pledged that he would get our NATO partners to stop off and force them to pay their fair share.
They have now done so.
NATO is no longer a subsidiary of the U.S. government.
Now these European countries will be forced to get off the dole for their defense spending because of Trump's impressive negotiating skills.
President Trump hasn't taken his eye off the ball, whereas across the globe, even in Africa, just two weeks ago, representatives from the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda, who have been in a long and bloody war, traveled to the White House to sign a historic peace deal next to President Donald Trump.
Democrat's Fraudulent Funding00:14:54
The greatest single title that history can bestow is that of Peacemaker.
And it describes the Donald Trump I know perfectly.
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.
Joining me now is Sam Antar.
Sam Antar is one of the most interesting individuals I've ever come across.
He's a former certified public accountant whose career trajectory took a remarkable turn.
He went from being the perpetrator of one of the largest security fraud schemes in American history to being an investigator of financial fraud.
He was the chief financial officer for Crazy Eddie.
Remember them, a major consumer electronics change in the Northeast during the 1980s.
Following his criminal conviction and his paying his debt to society, he reinvented himself using his extraordinary forensic accounting skill to ferret out white-collar fraud and crime.
His unique perspective and his technical expertise have made him an expert advisor to government agencies, law enforcement organizations, law firms and accounting firms, independent investment research firms, hedge funds, and other public companies.
He is one of the most meticulous researchers that I have ever met, and he's already established quite a track record.
It was Sam Antar who discovered the 22-year crime spree in which New York Attorney General Letitia James engaged in multiple instances of mortgage fraud.
Those conclusions by Sam Antar having now been referred to the U.S. Justice Department for prosecution.
Sam Antar has had a new analysis of the campaign of Democrat nominee Zorhan Mamdani that is mind-blowing.
Sam, welcome to the Stone Zone.
Thank you for having me on, Elijah.
So you were with us, I don't know, maybe it was a week ago, and you pointed out that on the New York City's campaign finance board website, that the supposedly grassroots-oriented people-powered campaign of Mr. Mamdani had received zero in small contributions,
and that all of the money raised had come from bundlers, and that one particular bundler was responsible for $1.6 million of the $1.7 million that the campaign raised.
In other words, despite the fact that millions of people were following Mamdami's campaign on Instagram, on YouTube, on X, on Facebook, not a single person pushed that donate button on his website.
How extraordinary.
And then, suddenly, after you and I had this interview and you published your extraordinary expose, which you can find at whitecollarfraud.com, whammo, overnight, the New York City Election Board changed all of that information.
Suddenly, that major bundler disappeared entirely, and suddenly their contributions in smaller donations popped up out of nowhere.
And of course, Politico, which is not a journalistic enterprise, but which is a propaganda front for the Democrat Party, dutifully reported all of this as if it was Sam Antar who made a mistake, when in fact it was the City Campaign Finance Board acting in an act of subterfuge, in my opinion.
Sam?
Not only that, but it was the campaign's mistake too, because even if, I'm saying even if, capital letters, if, even if the city was at fault, still the campaign should have looked at their own data on the campaign finance board's website.
They didn't.
Okay, this is just a way of getting back at me.
And that's fine.
But the other part of the story, which is extremely important, okay, is that even though he raised $1.7 million and it's no longer $1.6 and $1.7 million in direct contribution, even though he raised $1.7 million and it's no longer $1.6 million was bundled, there's still another part of the ecosystem that they chose to ignore.
In other words, two packs that are completely aligned with him raised over $2 million.
That's money, okay, that exceeds the amount of money he raised from direct contributions.
And when you peel at the layers, you see exactly who's behind those PACs, and you see that he's not running a grassroots campaign.
I call it grassroots washing.
In other words, he's pretending to be a grassroots campaign if you look at layer one.
But when you go to layer two, you start seeing the billionaires that are behind him.
Yeah, it's quite interesting.
The rhetoric doesn't match the record.
In other words, he would have us believe that this is a people-powered campaign, that he's running against the dark money and running against the special interests.
When in fact, a piece that you have up right now exposes how he is the recipient of millions of dollars in dark money.
This is, by the way, the same exact psyop that we saw in Kamala Harris's campaign, where immediately after she was anointed as the nominee, a nominee that not a single Democrat primary or caucus voter voted for, not a candidate who was chosen in a completely undemocratic process, and they complain about Donald Trump trying to be a king.
They inflate the polls by oversampling Democrats to make it look like she is either leading Trump or tied with him.
They flood her campaign through Act Blue with small donations from donors that either don't exist or when you contact them, tell those contacting them that they made no such contributions.
Most of those donors giving many, many, many times.
By the way, all that now currently under congressional investigation.
And of course, the handmaidens in the fake news media gobble this stuff up, creating this psyop that she was running a viable campaign.
She lost, we were told going into election day, it was nip and tuck.
She had a great chance.
She lost every swing state by big numbers.
And she lost the popular vote.
Donald Trump being the first Republican to carry the popular vote in decades.
So I see the same thing happening here.
The rhetoric sounds great.
It's a people campaign in the sense that they falsify where their money come from, then they use that money to spread his populist-sounding agenda.
This is a recycling of the hope and change that we saw under Obama.
It all sounds great.
I mean, free bus transportation, that sounds great to a lot of people.
Defunding the police, opening Rikers Island, letting everybody out?
Not so great, if you ask me.
So they take this elitist money, and I'll let you break this down in a moment.
They take this elitist money, they use it for mass advertising, and they come up with this faux populist agenda.
My final point: Mamdami's rise is very much like the rise of Donald Trump.
He's perceived as an outsider challenging a corrupted system.
The difference is their prescription to fix it.
His prescription is known as communism and worst socialism.
If you look at his issue agenda, it is, first of all, soft on crime, do away with cash bail entirely.
Essentially, he says that violence is a social construct.
That means tells me he's going to open Rikers Island.
He wants to defund the police, as I say, and then he wants to raise taxes on, I'll be saying it, white people.
That's what he said.
He can't unsay that, although his surrogates keep saying, well, that's not what he meant.
No, that's exactly what he meant.
Sam, who are the two major dark money operations that funded this grassroots revolution?
Let me get to the first one, which is really interesting.
Out of the $2 million that's spent by these PACs that exceeded the amount of money he raised generically, which is $1.7 million, $1.3 of that $2 million comes from a PAC called New Yorkers for Lower Costs.
Now, you think, okay, New Yorkers for lower costs.
It's New Yorkers, right?
But 71% of the money that went into that PAC came from out-of-towners.
And these were not regular out-of-towners.
These were billionaires and people from out of state.
You know, it's and they're pretending to be New Yorkers.
They're not New Yorkers.
They don't have to live with the consequences of putting this guy in.
They're just, you know, they're just supporting him.
One of the tech billionaires that supported this PAC is a guy by the name Tom Preston Werner.
He's the co-founder of GitHub.
He gave him $20,000.
The big money that comes into this pack comes from out-of-towners.
A guy by the name of Munib Azhar, $151,000.
This guy, Muni, this guy, Ali, another $100,000.
Zaman, another $100,000.
All of these people, okay, 40% of the money going into this pack came from just five people, and they're all out-of-towners.
So between the billionaires and the out-of-towners and the billionaire out-of-towners, you know, it makes it look like it's grassroots, but it's not grassroots.
71% of the money came from out-of-town donors.
That is number one.
Number two is you have the Working Families Party PAC.
They spent $762,000 to help Mamdani and also oppose Cuomo.
The Working Families PAC received $300,000.
This is where you go layers deep.
The Working Families Party received $300,000 from another PAC called Leaders We Deserve.
Leaders We Deserve, according to a Democratic analyst, a guy that's a Democrat, only spends 28% of its money on Democratic candidates, and the rest goes to their cronies.
Another point to make is that this PAC is backed by Phobie Gates, billionaire, daughter to billionaire Bill and Melinda Gates, Steven Spielberg, and this guy Ronald Conway, who was the Silicon Valley godfather who invested early in Google and Facebook.
Now, I doubt that Spielberg is anti-Israel, but does he know where his money is going?
Does he know what people are doing with the money and what he's attaching himself to?
These organizations, okay, are funded by billionaires.
They're not me and you and mom and pops and our uncles and cousins.
These are people that are very, very wealthy that are behind the Mamdani campaign.
Everything else is just the front.
Excellent, excellent analysis.
It is interesting here.
Key takeaway, as you point out, that PAC spending to benefit Mamdami's direct campaign contributions were 18.4% greater than what the candidate himself raised for his own campaign.
So much for the idea that his campaign was about rejecting elitist influence and was a challenge to dark money.
Everything about this guy seems to be relatively fraudulent, but his agenda for New York City is not fraudulent.
It's downright dangerous.
I had a vigorous conversation with former Congressman Pete King on the radio the other day.
I have huge respect for Pete King.
He was a great member of Congress.
He seems to favor former Mayor Eric Adams.
And I think Congressman King would like to see the field narrowed to give Adams a better chance to stop Mamdami.
I respectfully disagreed with him, despite the fact that our disagreement doesn't diminish in any way my admiration and respect for Pete King.
He's a great American patriot.
But I do see the frustration of the divided operation.
I've talked to Curtis Sleewa, the Republican nominee.
Wild horses could not get him out of this race.
Eric Adams is the incumbent.
He's filed as an independent.
All public polls and private polls show him running last, by the way, in this contest.
I think he is committed to the race as a perhaps as a way to stay out of prison.
There's still three sealed indictments against him.
And then, of course, you have former Governor Andrew Cuomo.
Now, Andrew Cuomo is a political animal, but I also think his time may have passed.
He's carrying very, very substantial negatives because of the Me Too charges against him and the systematic, I would say, deconstruction of Andrew Cuomo by Attorney General Letitia.
Nobody is above the law, James.
But he still continues to run second in the race.
Whether he will continue to run as an independent, having qualified for an independent line, is probably the hottest question in New York political circles.
If he were to withdraw, where does his vote redistribute?
Most of them are Democrats, but they're not socialist Democrats.
They're not likely to be progressive Democrats.
Do they go to Adams?
It's unlikely that they go to Sleewa, but Sleewood did get 30% of the vote, which is actually a high watermark for Republicans in his last race for mayor.
It's an intriguing race.
Editor and Publisher's Insight00:06:08
We're going to be following it very closely here in the Stone Zone.
If you're just tuning in, we're talking to Sam Antar.
He is the editor and publisher of whitecollarfraud.com, whitecollarfraud.com.
I urge you to check out his website.
He's laid out all the documentation of all of the numbers that we talk about here today.
And he's demonstrated that the Mamdani campaign, which being told is a grassroots phenomenon, is actually being financed with dark money, with big contributions from elites.
And it's amazing how the city's campaign finance board website, once Sam Antar revealed that they showed no small contributions and all of their money coming through one bundler, completely changed that overnight.
You're listening to the Stone Zone.
I'm Roger Stone.
Whatever you do, don't touch that dial because we'll be right back.
Milstone Zone on the Red Apple Podcast Network.
Milstone Zone, entertaining and informative on the Red Apple Podcast Network.
And we're back in the Stone Zone with Sam Antar, the Fraud Investigator Extraordinaire.
Sam, you wanted to comment on Curtis Slewa's campaign for mayor.
Yes, in contrast to the propaganda you get that Zoram Mamdani is a grassroots candidate, the only real grassroots candidate in this race is Curtis Liwa.
He only raised $300,000 in private funds versus Mamdani $1.7 million.
He spent only $260,000 compared to Mamdani, excluding PACs of about $8.7 million.
Okay, so on yield per vote, dollar per vote, Sleewer is spending far less money to get far more votes.
So therefore, he is the only candidate that I could see.
I'm looking at the data right over here in front of me that that is grassroots.
Yeah, it's very interesting.
According to the New York Campaign Finance Board's filing, the Working Families National PAC is led by Joe Dinkin, who also serves as the National Deputy Director of the Working Families Party, while its treasurer is a Mike Bolin, who holds the position of chief of staff to the National Working Families Party.
The PAC's mission statement explicitly states that it exists to support candidates endorsed by the Working Families Party.
Okay, so far so good.
And it's spending a free flexis alignment.
Every dollar in direct sport went to candidates with the Working Family Party's official 2025 ranked choice endorsement slate.
But another $540,000 was spent attacking the Working Families nemesis, Andrew Cuomo.
This organizational structure, if you ask me, raises serious questions about this institutional alignment complies with New York City campaign finance rules, specifically Rule 5-03, Section E, which requires independence between campaigns and expenditure committees.
The systematic coordination between party endorsements and PAC spending suggests that the Independence Party may have been more than structurally operational.
This funding structure actually fundamentally questions how authentic this is.
How does a $300,000 transfer from a PAC that spent 72% of its money on consultant enrichment represent the authentic grassroots support that formed the foundation of Mandami's political brand?
That is correct.
And also, you know, as I go deeper, because right now we're at layer two, we'll get to layer three eventually.
But as you go, you can see that a lot of these entities supporting Mandami have overlapping managements.
This one's a treasurer here, while a secretary there.
This one is the head of the PAC here, where he's the co-head of another PAC.
We have a situation here where it's just a game of musical chairs.
That's all it is.
And this is very, very professionally structured.
So while it may be, it may be, let's say it is within the law, it violates the spirit of the law, at the very least.
And personally, I don't think it's within the law, but that's for lawyers to determine and for federal investigators.
But for sure, it violates the spirit of the law.
So in substance, maybe not in legal form, they are breaking the law.
All right, I want to thank our guest, Sam Antar.
Again, he is the editor and publisher of WhiteCollarFraud.com, an incredible website.
Urge you to check it out because the great thing about Sam is he documents with the actual documents everything that he says here on the show and everything he says in his great commentary.
Also, want to thank you for joining us five days a week in the Stone Zone where we talk politics, news, history, style.
And once in a while, we talk about food because, well, I love to eat.
Until tomorrow, God bless you and Godspeed.
And as Donald Trump would say, God bless America.
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.
Follow WABC On Social00:00:56
Rural Americans deserve access to the best of what our country has to offer, especially health care.
Across every state, 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.