All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 5, 2018 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
41:41
3952 Deep State Coup | Roger Stone and Stefan Molyneux
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi, everybody. Stefan Molyneux here with Roger Stone.
Happy New Year to you and to Roger.
He is a well-known political operative and pundit, a veteran of nine national presidential campaigns.
He has served as a senior campaign aide to three Republican presidents.
He is the author of the New York Times bestseller, The Man Who Killed Kennedy, the case against LBJ, as well as...
The Clinton's War on Women and Jeb and the Bush Crime Family, The Inside Story of an American Dynasty, and The Making of the President 2016, How Donald Trump Orchestrated a Revolution.
You can find Roger's excellent work.
We'll put links to the books below, rogerstone.com, stonecoldtruth.com, and stonezone.com.
Roger, thanks so much for taking the time.
I hope your hangover is better.
I am delighted to be with you, Stefan.
Again, I know that you had tried to reach out to me back when I testified for the House Intelligence Committee, and we were unable to make connections.
So, I am delighted to be with you now.
2018 may be the fall of a large number of delusions.
First among them, it seems vaguely possible that the saner elements of the left might begin to see through the giant civilization-rending mirage of the Russia collusion story.
Where do you think things are in that narrative at the moment, and where do you think it's going to go?
Well, Donald Trump has once again confounded his critics.
I think it's important to Review the facts that after his election, the political establishment, the two-party elites in the duopoly who were in complete and utter shock over his victory, first demanded a recount.
That failed. Then they tried to monkey with the Electoral College to undo his election.
That failed. And then they invented the entire Russian collusion narrative, which is largely a myth, or at least I would say half right.
In other words, there was a major party candidate in bed with the Russians.
There was a major party candidate for president Whose minions were making literally millions of dollars out of their associations with some of the oligarchs around Vladimir Putin.
Unfortunately, that candidate was not Donald Trump.
So this narrative, which has been repeated ad nauseam in the national mainstream media and by the Democrats on Capitol Hill, specifically in the House and Senate Intelligence and Judiciary Committees, That is exactly that.
It's a scandal without evidence.
It's a charge without any proof or any facts.
And then when they have stumbled on a fact, for example, Donald Trump Jr.
having a meeting with a Russian woman lawyer, well, now they try to make that meeting something it was not.
Such a meeting would not be illegal or improper in any way.
Nothing came of the meeting.
The woman lawyer had no I don't know the material to provide regarding the activities of Hillary Clinton.
But what is curious to me, Stefan, is the fact that the woman lawyer was in the country illegally.
That she had no visa to be here.
So the Obama administration let this woman into the country for some reason.
And we now have been able to tie her very clearly to Fusion GPS. What this is, in my view, was a setup.
And then the Adam Schiff's and the Mark Warners of this world try to make it something it is not.
The political establishment, even the sane liberals like the folks at The Nation, have now figured out that this is a giant nothing burger.
There is no evidence of collusion, conspiracy, or coordination with the Russians to Increase the chances of the election of Donald Trump.
The American people have moved on.
The Democrats, I think, keep trying to breathe life back into a phony narrative.
Well, I think it's wonderful that they keep doing that.
I mean, you never interrupt your enemy when he's in the process of making these kinds of mistakes, alienating themselves from the voter base.
And of course, the longer they pursue this particular narrative, Roger, of course, the longer they're not trying to develop policies that might be even remotely appealing to the voter base in America.
And it's really wild, too, because the whole thing seems to hinge on this idea that the Russian government hacked the DNC and then released the information of WikiLeaks.
Well, WikiLeaks seems to have openly said recently that Russia was not a source for WikiLeaks documents.
And of course, because there's no null hypothesis, this is all crazy, paranoid talk.
Therefore, you can't disprove it.
They're like, oh, well, WikiLeaks is lying.
There's just no truth to be found anywhere here.
Well, but unfortunately for some of us, it has a reality.
We recognize that Donald Trump and I are being sued in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C.
The allegation very specifically is Stone and the Trump campaign worked together with the Russians to hack the DNC and give the material to WikiLeaks.
That is a lie.
That is a charge for which there is no evidence or proof whatsoever.
Next thing you know, the entire front line of the Obama NSA, John Brennan, James Clapper, Admiral Rogers, the entire shaved head brigade, as I like to call them, they filed a brief in my lawsuit recycling their same garbage.
The Russians interfered in our elections.
The Russians burrowed into our system.
They also continue to offer no proof or no evidence.
Stefan, so far this lawsuit has cost me and my family just under $480,000.
And that's just to make the motions to dismiss it as frivolous.
The group bringing the lawsuit, Project for Democracy, is an Obama-blessed front group.
They're using the lawsuit for fundraising purposes.
But here is the point.
Last week, Donald Trump's lawyers went into the court in this lawsuit and declared that Julian Assange was a journalist.
And that his publication of materials that may be classified and may be purloined is not illegal.
It is what the Washington Post and the New York Times do.
They cited the Pentagon Papers case, the New York Times versus the US government, to make it abundantly clear.
Now, the Trump administration seems here to be speaking with two voices.
On the one hand, Donald Trump's lawyers are in court saying Assange is a journalist who's done nothing wrong.
And Mr. Pompeo and Mr.
Sessions are somehow arguing that Assange is a criminal and he's violated the law.
I'm sorry, I don't see what law he has violated.
He's not a Russian asset.
WikiLeaks is not a Russian front.
That is a fake news promulated by the U.S. intelligence services and their And they're allies in the mainstream media.
They want it to be true.
That does not make it true.
Do you think, and I'm sorry to hear about these legal bills, that is an astonishing amount of money and my sympathy goes out to you.
Do you have any fundraising going on regarding that?
Some friends of mine have set up a legal defense fund.
You can go to stonedefensefund.com, stonedefensefund.com.
We are slowly raising money.
I think perhaps people believe because I Dress, Natalie, that I am an extremely wealthy man.
I am not. I was prepared to pay all the legal expenses for the House Intelligence Committee investigation, for the Senate Intelligence Committee investigation, for the House and Senate Judiciary Committee investigations.
That has run several hundred thousand dollars as well.
But this new frivolous harassment lawsuit is an attempt to bankrupt me and to silence me.
And I think to sidetrack me in the coming fight in which I still believe the deep state will attempt to remove this president.
Right. Well, it does seem like there's some, I've referred to it as a kind of soft coup, which is that it's hard to get good people to work for you if they know that stepping into the administration is going to expose them to hundreds of thousands of dollars, potentially, of legal bills and attempting to defend themselves against endless investigations.
It's a way of crippling the administration.
It's a way of driving people out of the administration and making it harder to get good people into the administration.
It's highly, it is a huge amount of interference in the fundamental running of the presidency at the moment. - Well, it's lawfare is what we call it.
They are essentially weaponizing the judiciary to try to achieve what they could not achieve at the ballot box.
Let's talk about the Mueller investigation and where I believe this is going.
First of all, I don't think the president could have had a better month than December.
He passed a record tax cut The stock markets hitting all-time highs, unemployment at all-time lows, a boom in the housing market, real serious progress in terms of making America great again.
Robert Mueller could not have had a worse December.
The people who work for him and the people at the Obama Justice Department are so arrogant, so certain that Hillary Clinton would be elected, and therefore their internal official emails would never be said or read, Exposed their partisanship, exposed their bias, exposed their lack of objectivity, and exposed their motives in a stunning set of emails, texts, and other documents.
The Mueller effort is stripped bare.
It's a partisan hit squad.
And even they have found no evidence of collusion with the Russians.
Paul Manafort gets indicted.
But he gets indicted for business activities that have no relationship to Donald Trump.
He shall have his day in court.
I believe that General Flynn's indictment is bogus.
First, they illegally surveil Flynn to listen to everything he's doing.
Then they set up a series of questions hoping to trip him.
Then they send in an FBI agent in an early morning raid where Flynn has no attorney.
And they charge him, not with perjury, but with lying to an FBI agent.
This looks like a setup to me.
Now we know that General Flynn, who I believe is a great American, said that a senior member of the Trump transition team instructed him to reach out to the Russian ambassador for purposes of setting up a meeting.
Again, a perfectly legal and proper activity for General Flynn Part of his job description.
This is at a time when Donald Trump had already been elected and was president-elect.
Oh, but it was, sorry, just for those who don't know, it was originally reported as having occurred before the election.
And then, of course, these big corrections had to come out, which is kind of a, it's a big difference if you're dead or alive if they bury you.
You'd think they'd like to get those facts right.
Exactly. So in this case, they have indicted Flynn on a process crime.
And Flynn has said that a senior member of the transition ordered him to do that.
Let us suppose, most likely, that that is the president's son-in-law, Jared Kushner.
Now, Kushner has had many hours of FBI interrogation.
Did they lead him into a misleading statement about this directive to Flynn?
And therefore, is he next to be indicted?
I believe that may be the case.
Mueller is desperate to regain the upper hand.
He has lost it.
Between the revelations about Peter Strzok and the other corrupt aspects of his investigation, his public credibility is slipping badly.
I think he intends to indict Kushner, perhaps in a bid to get the president to fire him.
All of this, Trump is going to fire Mueller, It's not being generated by Republicans or people close to the president.
It's being generated by Democrats.
It's called the briar patch strategy.
It is what they want the president to do.
Fire Mueller, who by the way certainly deserves to be fired and there are certainly legitimate grounds on which to fire him, but firing Mueller would create the media firestorm they want to get back to their ridiculous narrative that Trump has removed Comey, now removing Mueller to cover up his own wrongdoing.
That is, of course, false.
I wrote a very long piece for the Daily Caller and for Infowars last week, making the case that what the president should do is as follows.
One, fire Rod Rosenstein.
You have grounds. The appearance of conflict of interest with the special prosecutor he selected is grounds for firing.
Now, order Jeff Sessions, which is the president's full authority and right to do, the Justice Department is an extension of the executive branch, order Jeff Sessions to appoint a special counsel in the matter of Uranium One.
That special counsel would necessarily begin their investigation on Mr.
Mueller, Mr.
Comey, former FBI assistant director McCabe, and oddly enough, Rod Rosenstein.
If Sessions should demure, he would surely have to resign.
Rosenstein, having been removed first, the decision over a special prosecutor would not go to him.
He would be conflicted anyway, since such a special prosecutor would have to look into the activities of Mr.
Rosenstein. The decision would then go to the solicitor general, who I believe would carry out the president's order.
Let me bottom line this.
The appointment of a special counsel In Uranium One would completely and totally checkmate Robert Mueller and his witch hunt.
Right. I tell you, though, Roger, I mean, I try not to be overly cynical about this stuff, but there's a part of me that's like, oh, another special investigator.
Oh, that's going to go someplace because there's going to be a slow walk.
I mean, they're refusing to hand over documents to Congress.
I mean, do you feel that this could really get somewhere?
It feels like everything's just become so sclerotic and paralyzed.
It's like this Medusa stare of injustices turning the wheels of the courts to stone.
Well, the problem we have, though, is we are operating, pardon me, without benefit of a special counsel law.
The law that governed these appointments has expired.
Originally, a special counsel appointed to look into and prosecute a specific crime had to have the written permission of the attorney general to expand the scope of his investigation, had oversight from a three federal judge panel.
Because no such law is in place, Mueller is completely unchecked.
He can dig into Donald Trump's real estate developments 20 years ago.
He can look at Paul Manafort's businesses 20 years ago.
There are no limits on where he can go and what he can do.
Therefore, I argue that one must fight fire with fire.
Uranium-1 is perhaps the single largest treasonous crime in US history.
It's ironic because the very people accusing Donald Trump of being in bed with Russian special interests were in fact in bed with Russian special interests.
It is they who are guilty of treason and they line their pockets while doing so.
So my question to you, Stefan, would be this.
Who do we want as that special prosecutor?
Judge Andrew Napolitano?
Andrew McCarthy?
Congressman Trey Gowdy, perhaps?
Former U.S. Attorney Rudy Giuliani.
I think they could all do a superb job.
Oh, I would go with McCarthy, although I love Judge Napolitano, simply because it would be fun to watch the left scream about McCarthyism once more.
You know, I didn't get enough of it the last time.
Now, do you think that this Russia collusion thing...
Might have been what the FBI agents were referring to in their text when they talked about this mysterious insurance policy regarding the potential.
Because it's got to be really frustrating for the left in that they did some work to actively promote Donald Trump because they thought he would be the easiest candidate to beat and it kind of blew up in their faces.
If you go back to the time the Electoral College was about to meet to vote, which would have the legal effect of Approving the president's election, John Podesta, the Clinton campaign manager, argued that the Electoral College needed a briefing on the collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians before the vote.
Well, John, that would have been a very, very brief briefing because there is no evidence to that effect.
There's a lot of evidence that you and your brother lined your pockets.
There's the gas deal.
There's the uranium deal.
There's the banking deal.
So, yeah, there were political operatives involved in the presidential campaign making millions off of Putin, but they weren't Republicans.
It's kind of a weird thing, too, just by the by.
I think this has struck just about everyone who looks at this.
When you look at people who make $200,000 a year, $300,000 a year, maybe four, We're good to go.
To her Yahoo account, before that Yahoo account, along with hundreds of millions of others, was hacked by foreign governments, I think is the latest understanding.
Maybe everybody's neck deep in gasoline outside of maybe Trump, and nobody wants to light the fire.
Well, there's something to what you say.
In the sense of the emails from Huma Abedin, My source is in the New York Police Department and remember that's where the story begins.
It is the New York Police Department who are investigating Anthony Weiner for potentially text to underage girls and it is in the course of that investigation that they become aware of this large trove of emails which Huma has forwarded from her State Department server to a personal server that she shares with her husband.
My sources tell me that what was released by the State Department last week was a tiny fraction of the material that is there.
It is largely just those documents that pertain to State Department business.
They include classified documents.
Therefore, they are a graphic demonstration of violation of the law by Huma Abedin.
But I believe that there's far more in that trove of emails.
I'm told by a High-ranking member of the New York Police Department that there is evidence of corruption, pedophilia, sex trafficking, cover-up of sex crimes, and even worse, the original conjecture of the NYPD was that this was Huma's blackmail file,
meaning this is the material that she compiled for her own protection, if the Clintons ever decided to turn on her, As they have turned on virtually everyone who has ever worked loyally for them.
What do you think is the holdup in getting this information out?
Is it just too explosive? Is it still being investigated?
What's the delay, do you think?
Well, to answer that question, I would have to understand Jeff Sessions and the Trump Justice Department.
I watched a Senate hearing when Sessions was asked Why, when he would investigate Hillary Clinton, and he said, I can't see anything to investigate her about.
This guy has all the visual acuity of Ray Charles.
It is so obvious that it's absurd.
There's the Clinton Foundation, slush fund for grifters, and obviously the facilitation, the platform for the facilitation of multi-million dollar bribes.
There is the entire Uranium One narrative.
There is the theft of the earthquake relief funds in Haiti.
I could go on for hours in terms of the various Clinton crimes that should be investigated by this Attorney General.
And he still, although he occasionally makes a feint in the right direction, or we hear that FBI agents question people about something regarding the Clintons.
That's not an investigation nor is it an indictment.
So it's very hard to know why we have not seen the rest of these emails other than to say it right now is under the control of Jeff Sessions Justice Department.
And sadly, that means it is under the control of de facto Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.
Rosenstein is running the show.
He is a close associate of Robert Mueller who gave him his first job.
He is a close protege of Mr.
Comey. He is a bad apple.
If you go to stonecoldtruth.com, I wrote a piece called The Three Amigos that outlines the intersection of these three gentlemen's careers.
The president, if he's listening, should fire Rosenstein now.
Some people say, well, if he fired Mueller, that would cause a firestorm.
Probably correct. Fire Rosenstein.
It will be barely a bonfire.
So, I guess this is the anniversary month of Trump taking effective office.
What's your review, Roger?
How do you think he's been doing?
Well, when you consider the implacable opposition by the Washington-based mainstream media, When you consider the implacable opposition of the elite leadership of both parties, when you consider the two-faced and duplicitous nature of the current Republican and House leadership, it's amazing the president has gotten as much done as he has.
And it's amazing the impact that that has already had.
The tax cut, I think, is a signature achievement.
The travel ban is a signature achievement.
Just enforcing our current immigration laws on our southern border is an achievement.
The appointment of a conservative Supreme Court justice who is most distinguished is an achievement.
What are the results of these actions?
And I should also mention the wholesale cutting of regulation at all levels.
A boom stock market Unemployment at historic low levels, a boom in the housing market, a new realistic foreign policy as it regards Islamic terrorism.
The president goes to Mar-a-Lago over the Thanksgiving holidays.
He posts on his Twitter feed a stunning video of Islamic terrorists killing a handicapped Dutchman.
And the mainstream media goes crazy as if there's something wrong with that.
Sorry, folks. New sheriff in town.
This administration calls out and opposes Islamic terrorism.
It doesn't pretend it doesn't exist, like the previous administration.
So, to answer your question, Stefan, I think the president has made extraordinary strides, particularly in consideration of the across-the-board opposition that he has faced.
Well, it's funny, too, because the Numbers came out recently.
I think it was a 43% approval rating.
And this was, of course, compared to Obama, which at this time in his administration had a 43% approval rating.
And to me, this is like the difference between two people coming across the same finish line in a running race, one of whom's carrying an anvil and the other of whom is on a horse, because there was so much support to keep Obama's numbers buoyed and so much suppression to keep Donald Trump's numbers down that the fact they ended up equivalent means to me...
Objectively, that Trump is far more popular in America than Obama ever was.
Well, that's conceivably true.
Look, all polls, unless you're conducting the poll yourself, have to be taken with a certain grain of salt.
There's a lot of variables here.
There's the methodology.
There's the sample size and whether it has been drawn properly to show an actual scientific balance.
There is the order of the questions.
There is the wording of the questions.
So this explains to a great degree why virtually every poll, with a few exceptions, showed that Hillary Clinton would handily defeat Donald Trump.
Didn't happen. And therefore, I look at these polls on presidential popularity as fleeting and perhaps not all that credible.
The president is in a highly charged, extremely partisan You'll notice he got no honeymoon, which has been tradition for American presidents.
Therefore, I agree with you.
I suspect he's doing better than the current polls might suggest.
And I also think that he retains a governing majority, that his coalition is completely intact.
And I think that is one of the keys, both to the 2018 election and beyond.
My big concern, Roger, is the DACA question about what's going to happen to the hundreds of thousands of illegals, I guess, brought in as children.
There does seem to be some indication from the administration that in return for the wall and improved border security that amnesty may occur, a path to citizenship may occur, which statistically is going to be disaster in the long run for the Republican Party turning it all, basically all of America, into what which statistically is going to be disaster in the long run for the What are your thoughts on how this may play out?
Because it seems to be fairly imminent.
Well, under no circumstances should the president give the Democrats what they want on DACA unilaterally.
The wall is vitally important, though, because, pardon me, the wall is an issue well beyond The question of illegal immigration and the security of our borders.
It's now become a symbol.
And the president is a dealmaker.
He's a pragmatist.
He's not an ideologue.
I also think, unfortunately, in the DACA question, the public relations aspects of being opposed to children are potentially disastrous.
Here's why I think this may work out.
When people become citizens, when they get a piece of the American Dream, when they see the ladder that leads to the top, we should not assume that they will spend their life voting for Democrats.
We should not assume that they are going to be habitual criminals.
I suspect there are many people in this category who are good, decent people who want a piece of the American Dream, who aspire for the freedom and opportunity that is America.
So let's see where the president goes on this, but no unilateral deal under any circumstances.
Well, yeah, the challenge is, according to the Center for Immigration Research, we've got three-quarters of the DACA, I guess, quote kids.
They're mostly adults now, but three-quarters of them are illiterate or close to illiterate in English.
Fewer than half of them have completed high school.
This is not a group that you would normally choose to gain the crown jewel of American citizenship, but we'll have to see how that goes.
Of course, if there is an improved economy, this is one of the funny things about success when you border a third world country is that if you have an improved economy, that actually draws people across the border.
And therefore, an improved economy, lower unemployment can serve to increase or aggravate the problems of illegal border crossings.
So if you're going to have a very strong economy, I think the wall becomes very necessary.
I concur.
Let's turn to something that you have had conversations with the president about regarding the JFK documents that he, I guess, had the power to keep them sealed for another 25 years.
But you talked to him about that.
And what did you say? And why was your case so strong?
Well, in 1992, the Congress passed a law which set a timetable for release of all of the confidential documents that pertain to To John F. Kennedy's assassination.
And in the previous dumps back in the 80s and 90s, we learned an extraordinary number of interesting things.
We learned, for example, that President George H.W. Bush had prevaricated about his presence that day.
He lied about where he was, misled people for 30 years.
We also learned in that first dump that the Russian KGB conducted their own investigation into the Kennedy assassination, and they concluded that Lyndon Baines Johnson had been the ringleader of that effort.
We also learned that Jacqueline Kennedy had appealed to French intelligence.
They conducted their own investigations, and they also pinpointed Lyndon Johnson as the perp.
So this was the last and final tranche of documents.
In July of last year, the National Archives put out a small group of those documents, very, very, very heavily redacted.
So heavily redacted, that means blacked out, and so much material held back, that Stefan, they were useless.
You could conclude nothing from them.
I believe that that was a test to see what they could get away with.
Days before the October 26 deadline mandated by the law, in which the president would have to do nothing and the material would be released, but the president had the affirmative authority to delay release for another 25 years, I spoke to the president on this issue.
I made a case for transparency and full disclosure.
I sought to knock down what I knew would be the argument of the CIA, that their sources and methods would be revealed.
Sorry, boys, you don't have any sources still on the payroll 55 years later.
But if you do, why don't you name them for us?
They cannot do so.
So therefore, the president ordered the material released.
There was a separate tranche of the material.
That the intelligence agencies argued with him should never be released.
He said, no, that's not a good idea.
Let's delay it six months till I have time to look at it.
See, that's how they operate.
Oh, Mr. President, the deadline's today.
You don't have time to read this.
Why don't we just classify it forever?
And the president didn't bite.
Here's the moral of this story.
The material that was released was very revelatory.
We learned several things.
The US government's relationship with Lee Harvey Oswald was far more extensive than the CIA or the FBI had ever acknowledged.
He was recruited by the CIA out of Navy intelligence.
He worked as a paid informant for the FBI. He learned to speak Russian in a government language school.
And he was, I think you pointed out, he was sequestered in a government agency that required extraordinarily high levels of clearance.
He also was not, in my opinion, in Mexico City.
Somebody went to Mexico City claiming to be him, but we have J. Edgar Hoover caught on audio tape in a phone call with Lyndon Johnson, the president, saying, well, the fella down there in New Mexico sure doesn't look like Oswald.
There's more evidence of that in these recently released documents.
But the government still redacted large amounts of what they did release.
Here's the part I think they forgot.
Under the 1992 JFK Document Release Act, any material that they redact, they must publish an explanation for why it has been withheld.
And it must be published in the Federal Register by January 1st.
That was a couple days ago.
That has not happened.
And therefore, I believe Senator Grassley and Congressman Walter Jones are going to hold their feet to the fire and hopefully we can get even more information.
The president did, in my opinion, a bold and courageous thing.
Why do the CIA and the other intelligence agencies, the FBI, oppose the release of this material?
After all, these are events of 50 plus years ago.
The answer is simple. Because the same things they were doing then, they do now.
The leaking, the lying, the fabricating, the stalling.
What was happening then?
Well, I would argue the deep state was trying to undermine an elected president.
What's happening today?
Well, I would argue that the deep state, particularly with their leaks, are trying to undermine a duly elected president.
Well, what's interesting to me, Roger, as well, and I would really recommend that people have a look at your book on LBJ and his role in the death of President Kennedy, there is, of course, a strong parallel, which is that LBJ, as you point out, was facing, I think it was significant corruption charges and was facing jail time.
That seems to bring to mind a certain lady in the last election who could find herself in the same boat.
No, I think there are not a lot of analogies between the takedown of Richard Nixon and the attempted takedown of Donald Trump.
Essentially, they are, I think we've had three coups in this country, the violent coup involving President Kennedy, the legal coup involving Richard Nixon, and now we don't know what the establishment has in mind.
I have argued that There's a plan A, a plan B, and a plan C. Plan A, Mueller will indict Trump, the president, on some process-related crime.
Oh, he obstructed justice, or he perjured himself in the removal of Comey.
That is thin gruel, indeed.
Given the partisan nature of his probe, I doubt that he can get that one across the plate.
But let's say that he shoots and misses.
Well, then we are going to move into high gear on the 25th Amendment strategy.
The 25th Amendment allows that if a majority of the Cabinet and the Vice President determine that the President is no longer capable of discharging his duties because of mental disability or physical disability, he shall be removed.
The President can appeal this to a vote of the U.S. House of Representatives.
There are quizlings, there are asps in the bosom within the Trump cabinet.
Mike Pence is sadly an establishment Republican.
And we know back during the campaign when the NBC Billy Bush tape hit the fan that Donald Trump called his running mate and his running mate would not return the call, sending a message that he wanted to think about what he was going to do.
We know that in that episecond of time that Reince Priebus and Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell approached Pence and said, the National Committee is prepared to meet.
We will dump Trump as our candidate if you will take the designation.
Fortunately, Donald Trump's situation stabilized so quickly that none of that was to come to pass.
And Pence went back to the number two second banana position.
But as I told Alex Jones on Infowars the other day, Nick Ayers, the Chief of Staff for Mike Pence, is an inveterate leaker.
He has been caught leaking information that is detrimental to President Trump.
Rather than fire him, Mark Lotter, who is a very highly regarded young man who was Pence's press secretary, took the fall.
As they might say in Julius Caesar, Pence has the lean and hungry look.
Now, you would have to gear up a new hysteria.
Many people will listen to what we're saying here today, Stefan, and say, oh, this is a crazy conspiracy theory.
Trump's on an all-time high.
He just got his tax cut done.
There's no way.
Look for a whipped-up hysteria along the lines of Joe Scarborough, Don Lemon, Senator Robert Corker and others.
Trump is crazy.
Trump's mentally unbalanced.
Trump's unfit. I've talked to the president.
He's the same person I've known for 40 years.
He's sharp as a tack and he misses nothing.
He's instinctual.
He's not your typical wet finger in the wind politician.
He's not all that interested in the political gossip and so on.
He's interested in the big picture, much like Ronald Reagan.
He's interested in the There are already some mental health professionals who are breaking the Goldwater rule and diagnosing from a distance and attempting to gin up this kind of hysteria.
It is a sad thing in modern life that when people disagree with you and have reason and evidence behind them, a lot of people will say, well, if you disagree with me, that makes you insane.
Actually, that makes the person making the accusation mentally unstable.
Agreed. But you can see the establishments.
It would be a mistake to underestimate the enmity That they have for this president and it would be an equally be a mistake to underestimate their resolve to remove him.
Now with this new executive order, which is essentially a death sentence for Hillary Clinton and many of her globalist allies who have been profiteering illegally as well as engaged in pedophilia and other crimes, the hysteria grows.
There's a new sheriff in town, and he's going to enforce the law.
You're going to see a spate of unexplained corporate CEO resignations, which has already begun to a certain extent.
The president has struck at the heart of the deep state with this executive order, and I think it is a roadmap for what is to come.
Well, we'll stay in touch with you over the course of this year.
I think it is going to be an absolutely pivotal year in Western history, if not world history.
Still, we'll stay close on the scent.
I really want to appreciate us.
I say thank you for your time today.
Remind people, of course, we'll put the links to Roger's books below, rogerstone.com, stonecoldtruth.com, and stonezone.com.
Thank you so much, and again, Happy New Year to you.
▲
Export Selection