Judging Freedom - Roger Stone discusses his appearance before the January 6th committee

Episode Date: December 20, 2021

The one and only Roger Stone joins Judge Napolitano to discuss his appearance before the January 6th committee. Revealing why he plead the fifth amendment. #RogerStone #JudgeNapolitano    See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Hello, my dear friends, Judge Napolitano here with Judging Freedom, my podcast where I get to invite my best friends on and talk about things that are of interest to them and to you. Today, a man who needs no introduction. In fact, for the first time in the history of Judging Freedom, friends of mine and strangers have emailed me saying, can we watch the interview with Roger Stone live? Well, we sort of, you know, finally produced these interviews.

So even though we're doing this at two o'clock in the afternoon on Monday, December 20th, it'll be up in a few hours. Roger, welcome to Judging Freedom. Judge, always great to be with you particularly. Thank you. Tell me what happened to you last week when you were subpoenaed to testify before the House January 6th Investigation Committee. Yeah, I was served a subpoena and I fulfilled my legal obligations under the terms of the subpoena. I did appear at the appointed hour and I invoked my Fifth Amendment right to answer any question whatsoever. Let me be clear. Contrary with the chairman of the committee from Mississippi, Mr.

Thompson says the invocation of one's Fifth Amendment right does not automatically prove that they are guilty of some crime. In my case, I pled the Fifth to protect myself from the proven track record of miscreants like Congressman Adam Schiff taking statements you make that are immaterial, irrelevant, or even innocuous, and fashioning them into some kind of process crime, calling them perjury. Been there, done that, even have the T-shirt to show for it. Right. I just don't do nothing wrong. I have no intention of putting myself in that position.

So I know of no misdeeds by the president or anyone else. I literally know nothing about the illegal events of January 6th that was not there, did not speak on the ellipse, did not march to the Capitol, was not at the Capitol, but I refuse to be involved in Witch Hunt 3.0. So I invoked my Fifth Amendment privilege. I think everybody knows that no one has been more abused by the excesses of Congress in the modern era than Roger Stone. But when you appeared, was it before the full committee or was it before their staff trying to take a deposition, but committee members such as Liz Cheney, the former Republican, and Adam Schiff, who only the day before was exposed for selectively editing text messages that he then leaked from the committee, were present and they were entitled to ask questions. Their questions were also addressed with the invocation by Fifth Amendment rights. And I declined respectfully to answer them.

Did the chair of the committee actually suggest at the hearing or elsewhere that you, Roger Stone, must be guilty of a crime or you wouldn't be invoking your Fifth Amendment right to remain silent? He said it on CNN and he said it twice. It demonstrates his ignorance of the law and the Constitution. But then, Judge, Chairman Thompson has filed a civil suit against Donald Trump with all manner of accusations against him. Consequently, he cannot possibly be the unbiased, good faith chairman of a fact finding committee of the Congress. He's already stated his opinion in his lawsuit. Just the fact that he's withdrawn himself as a plaintiff is immaterial. Once you sign it, you sign it.

It makes your position clear. Chairman Thompson needs to step down. Chairman Thompson also needs to talk to the lawyers on the committee because your invocation of your natural right to remain silent, protected by the Fifth Amendment, it allows an inference of nothing and is the basis for no legal proceedings against you whatsoever. If anything is clear in American law, it is that. Well, the committee staff argues that my refusal to turn over documents, by the way, that's not an admission that I even have relevant documents, but that that is not covered by my Fifth Amendment right. It will be prepared to litigate that if necessary. Not that I have any documents that would prove anything, because I don't, but I have also declined to turn over documents. I remember very specifically during my trial in Washington, D.C., when the prosecutors put up on the screen an email between Paul Manafort, then Donald Trump's

campaign manager, and me. And it was after the convention, but at a time that we've gotten a very discouraging national poll. And I said, well, there is still a way for Trump to win, but it's not pretty. That's it. Aha, you said. Here is absolute proof that Stone was referring to the WikiLeaks disclosures. No, it didn't say that. And I was specifically talking about the need to get the woman victims of Bill Clinton, the women he had sexually assaulted, exposed himself to, raped out front to talk about that experience. Not because Bill was running, but because Hillary Clinton was the one who hired the heavy-handed private detectives and the nasty lawyers to intimidate and bully these women into silence. One cannot be an advocate for women if one is intimidating, threatening, and bullying women. That's what I was referring to, but not according to the government. Most of the time when a witness invokes the Fifth Amendment or their right to silence

protected by the Fifth Amendment, they do answer, what is your name and where do you live? Did they ask you those questions? And if so, did you answer them? The only question that I gave an answer to is I confirmed that I was Roger Stone. They did that on the advice of counsel. Then on the advice of counsel, I asserted my Fifth Amendment right to respectfully not answer any question after that time. How long did the Q&A last? At some point, they must have realized that they were wasting their time and spinning their wheels. I was in there for about an hour and a half. It was perfectly pleasant.

The staff conducted themselves entirely professionally. But the fact that they have not sent a subpoena to Ray Epps, the FBI informant, who can clearly be seen on both videos of January 5th and the 6th, urging people to storm the building. The fact that they have not released the video footage of what went on in the tunnel between the U.S. Senate office building and the Capitol, where a woman was literally trampled to death, an unarmed Trump supporter, but where Capitol Hill police officers were using nightsticks, mace, and flash bombs on the crowd. Why don't they release that video or the many hours of video taken by government cameras? These things will get released, even if it has to be by the next Congress.

The cover-up cannot continue to be sustained we we have to thank god and james madison for something called the bill of attainder clause which prevents the congress from declaring legislatively that an individual is guilty of a crime as the british's used to do. All they can do is investigate, drive you crazy and publicize things. But they're they're ultimately toothless. Well, and they can run up your legal bills. Let me ask that, too. You know, not only do I have now the January 6th investigation to contend with, but I still have six frivolous, totally baseless, groundless, unsubstantiated, but extraordinarily sensationalized civil suits pending against me filed by crackpots, nut jobs, leftists, Democrats.

Oh, wait a minute. I'm being redundant. You're repeating yourself. But again, I had there were 17 pending civil suits against me. 11 of them have been resolved. Almost every case dismissed. But I still have to fight the other six. People who want to help me can go to stonedefensefund.com. That's stonedefensefund.com. I can't do this alone. I wish I could. But I must tell you, Judge, I underestimated the extent to which being canceled, being deplatformed, being completely censored on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, TikTok, that that would make financial recovery for me and

my wife as difficult as it has been. I used to sell a large number of my books on Facebook quite successfully, helped support my family. Today, I'm banned for life on Facebook. So we need the help. I cannot do this alone. Stonedefensefund.com is the single best way you can help us. Well, you know, you always have a platform here. Let me switch gears. Do you think that President Trump will seek the Republican nomination in 2024? And if you think he will, do you think the former New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is a credible threat to that?

Wait a minute. I can't stop laughing. Chris Christie is not a viable candidate for president. There needs to be a federal investigation as to why his brother was engaged in inside trading and why Christie as a prosecutor gave a very lucrative conservatorship to a prosecutor who gave his brother a pass. Everybody else in the scandal was convicted, and I believe some of them did time. So if Chris Christie shows up in New Hampshire, I will be there with handcuffs to take him into custody in a citizen's arrest. You're not governor anymore. You have no authority.

You also have no base in the Republican Party. You couldn't care New Jersey. His argument is that he, he has feet firmly planted in both wings of the Republican party, the Liz Cheney wing and the Donald Trump wing, and that he's the only credible candidate. He told me this personally, uh,

that, uh, has support from both wings. Look, if anyone has read his book on the Trumps, you realize how ridiculous that is. Chris Christie is not electable. He could not carry the state of New Jersey. Now, I think Bill Palatucci is a friend of mine. He's a skilled political operative. I think he's the one who came up with that little nugget of bullshit you just put out there. But I don't know anyone who supports Donald Trump who would be willing to vote for Chris Christie for president. And again, he's not a prosecutor. He's a criminal. We need to know

about that insider trading case against your brother and how you fixed it. Is Donald Trump going to seek the nomination and the presidency in 2024? You know, I think he would like to based on a privileged but but warm conversations with him. He hates to see what's happening in this country. He was the president that got us energy independence. You remember what gas prices were like. Now we're back to buying oil and gas from Russia and from the Saudis. Thank you, Joe Biden, who shut down the Keystone Pipeline. The ignominious retreat of American troops in Afghanistan. Now, like you, Judge, I was in favor

of the troop withdrawal. Yes. So was Donald Trump trump he's the one who started withdrawing our men from these endless foreign wars but you cover your retreat with the extraordinarily expensive drone technology that we as taxpayers have paid for to keep the enemy pinned down as you withdraw and if you cannot uh if you cannot withdraw the 86 billion dollars worth of military equipment that you're leaving behind then you destroy it so you're not handing it over to a rogue regime so i don't criticize joe biden for the withdrawal of the troops that was actually the right thing to do it's the manner in which he did so uh and the weakness that he showed that emboldened the taliban you have written economic sanctions against them ended the day joe biden was sworn in as president no wonder they were emboldened

you have written a dynamite book on the jfk assassination uh which doesn't theorize, it demonstrates the involvement of Lyndon B. Johnson. Two questions. One, what did President Biden order released the other day? And two, will you and I and the people watching and listening to us now ever see the full federal file on the JFK assassination? Well, as you know, President Trump released a number of the key documents, but he did hold some back for further review. What Joe Biden did this week was very clever. They took all the material that had been previously released and they mixed it in with some new things therefore it will take scholars several days to figure out what's new and what's old the headline seems to be oswald was in touch uh with the russian officials prior to the assassination this isn't new he or someone claiming to be him visited the Russian embassy in the United States demanding a visa to return to Russia, doing it very loudly to make sure it was noted for the record.

I don't believe the government's narrative. The government doesn't even believe their own narrative. In 1978, the House Select Committee on Assassinations concluded, totally contrary to the conclusions of the Warren Commission, that organized crime played a substantial role in the murder of John F. Kennedy. That's accurate, but it's only part of the story. And here's what we do know, Judge. The Central Intelligence Agency completely stonewalled that congressional investigation, turned over nothing whatsoever, no documents, and can go to StoneColdTruth.com, StoneColdTruth.com in the shop, and you get an autographed copy of my book, The Man Who Killed Kennedy, The Case Against LBJ. It's a New York Times bestseller. If you love history, this is a page turner. I got to tell you, it's a potboiler. It reads like a murder mystery. I urge you to consider it as a great Christmas gift for someone in your circle.

It does read like a murder mystery. I was privileged to read an advanced copy and to endorse its methodology and its conclusions. You know, I had a conversation with the president with president trump while he was president about this subject matter and he said i saw things that can't be revealed and someday i will tell you and roger meaning you uh what i saw but i don't want to discuss it now on this phone yeah it was a white house call and we could called to talk about other things god knows who was listening and what was being taped last uh question for you you are a champion of civil liberties you uh proudly and magnificently defended your own before that committee that of course wanted your scalp uh were you or anybody in your family mocked for your invocation of a fundamental constitutionally guaranteed freedom

judge this is almost beyond belief but a committee a comedian named michael shea who's not even the slightest bit funny made a a joke on Saturday Night Live last Saturday, previous Saturday to this last one, saying that my wife should be gang raped by members of the January 6th committee because of my refusal to cooperate. Now, not a single member of the committee has denounced that tasteless comment. But obviously, the Me Too movement only matters for young progressives of color. It doesn't take in a 74-year-old mother and grandmother who is, as you know, winning the battle against stage four cancer. Stress is the great triggering factor in cancer. Yet my wife had to put up with this kind of public humiliation. No apology from NBC. It's almost unbelievable that no producer, no executive, nobody at NBC would see how tasteless this joke was. But I believe in the First Amendment. Sadly, they have the right to say

that as unpleasant and repugnant as it may be. I have some choice words about them, but I'll save them for another time. Roger, God bless you. Merry Christmas to you and your family. We'll do this right after the holidays again. Judge, it's great to be with you as always. God bless you and Merry Christmas. Thank you. From Judging Freedom, Roger Stone, Judge Napolitano.