This transcript appears in the September 21, 2018 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
[Print version of this transcript]
It’s a Fight for the Republic,
Not the Two-Party Duopoly
This is an edited transcript of Roger Stone’s live-streamed video address to the Schiller Institute Conference on Sept. 13, 2018. Stone is a longtime friend of President Donald Trump and a legendary political operative, who was a key mover in the 2016 victory of Donald Trump.
Thank you very much. First of all, I guess I should say that I’m delighted that this worked out logistically so that I was able to join you. I think it’s very important to say at the top, that the work that the international Schiller Institute is doing for both peace and prosperity around the world is very important work. I first became acquainted with Dr. Lyndon LaRouche back in 1979 when he was a candidate for the Democratic nomination for President and played a very important backstage role in the election of our last outsider President, Ronald Reagan.
I have great admiration for Helga Zepp-LaRouche, who is with you today. I think these people are doing an extraordinary job to try to forge greater understanding of the international issues that would bring my country—the United States—and Russia, China, and virtually every country on the globe into some kind of harmony, so that we can all live in both peace and prosperity. So, I salute you for being there today and participating in this conference.
I have been a friend of Donald Trump for 40 years. I first thought of the idea of Donald Trump as a plausible and viable Presidential candidate in 1988. I thought of this because I saw he had the courage and the determination, and frankly the fortune and the public recognition, to be a viable candidate. But also, that he was not beholden to any of the special interests, any of the neo-con elements that have driven the United States into the ground, into 30, almost 40 years of unprecedented decline.
I tried to get Donald Trump to run again in 2000. I wanted him to challenge both the Republicans and the Democrats. But he correctly determined then that probably one needed to be either a Republican or a Democrat to be elected President, because of the structural prohibitions to an independent candidacy. Namely, it’s difficult to get on the ballot; it’s impossible to get into the national debates, and so on.
By 2012, I think he was ready, but the country was not quite ready; meaning, I believe, that the United States had to suffer all eight years of decline under Barack Obama and his globalist policies before they were ready to entertain the idea of a President who had never held public office, who had never been a governor or a senator or a general in the military, which may be the most political job of all. But America was ready.
False-Flag Attack Aimed at Trump
What I have seen in this administration is very similar to what I saw in the administration of Ronald Reagan, who I worked for in the 1976, 1980, and 1984 campaigns for President. When the political establishment, when the two-party duopoly, when the globalists that we call the neo-cons cannot defeat you, they seek to co-opt you; they seek to surround you. Here’s how the argument goes: “Well, Mr. President, we know how all of this works. We’re experienced in government. Let us help you here.” Of course, they aren’t interested in helping the President, they’re interested in deluding or derailing his policies.
Case in point, sadly, is the situation in Syria. How ironic that right after Donald Trump woke up one morning and tweeted that it was time to get our troops out of Syria, that Assad attacked his own people with a chemical weapons gas attack. Or did he?
Any reasonable person who understands geopolitics, understands that people don’t do things that aren’t in their interest, leaders don’t do things that aren’t in their interest. Assad not only had the upper hand against the rebels, but we know that Assad entered into an agreement with the Russians, certified by Secretary of State John Kerry, who said he had no chemical weapons. We also know that Assad is a canny enough politician to understand that the world community would condemn him across the board for the gassing of his own people; which is why he didn’t do it! It was most likely a false-flag operation. How many times can they pull the same stunt? This is now twice, and they’re probably warming up for the third attempt to use this false-flag technique.
Sadly, the President has surrounded himself with a number of advisors who did not vote for him, did not support his candidacy, do not support his reform agenda either on the economic front or the domestic front, or on the foreign policy front for that matter, and are committed to nothing less than his removal. It is extraordinary that despite these advisors, he has cashed in the Iran nuclear deal which was most likely, in my opinion, a fraud to begin with. One has to wonder, why aren’t all the terms of the deal in the document that was shown to the American people? What are all these side deals with hundreds of millions of dollars, literally pallets of American cash, going into the pockets of Iranian politicians? Why weren’t the American people told about any of that?
In addition, you have the President’s economic record. Many of you may remember, under Barack Obama we were told that anything in excess of 2% GDP growth was just structurally impossible; couldn’t be done; you don’t understand the new world economy. America’s greatest days are behind us! We just need to recognize we’re no longer a world leader. Just get prepared to cinch your belt and accept less.
Well, Donald Trump doesn’t believe that. In fact, Donald Trump’s greatest sin in the eyes of the two-party political establishment is his commitment to American exceptionalism; his patriotism; his belief in American sovereignty; and his strong desire for peace. Better relations with the Russians and, if they will come to the table, the Chinese. Oh my God! He’s a peacemaker! We haven’t had one of those since, oh I don’t know, Richard Milhous Nixon, a man who reached a Strategic Arms Limitation with the Soviets, a man who opened the door to China, a man who ended the Vietnam War on a much faster timetable than the Pentagon that probably didn’t want to end it at all.
Stay Out of Woodward’s Gutter
It’s kind of ironic that Bob Woodward is back in the news. Here’s a man who lied about being a military intelligence briefer for the Nixon White House; lied about his relationship as a briefer for General Alexander Haig, the White House Chief of Staff; lied about Deep Throat—there is no Deep Throat, folks. It’s most certainly not Mark Felt, the FBI agent who was in a position to know none of the information that Woodward and Bernstein said was passed on by their source. But the same Bob Woodward who lied about Iran-Contra, lied about President Ronald Reagan.
This is the man who said that he gained access to former CIA Director Bill Casey’s room and conducted an interview in which Casey confessed everything. The problem with that is that Casey had been felled by a stroke, and according to his doctor, his wife, and his daughter—both of whom are friends of mine—he had lost the capacity for speech. So, how could such an interview take place? Simple. It didn’t. Now, you have the same phenomena where Woodward is lying about this President.
Where I’m disappointed, and I say this candidly to you, is that the President shouldn’t get down in the gutter with the New York Times. He shouldn’t get down in the gutter with Bob Woodward. I can tell you exactly who wrote the famous anonymous New York Times op-ed right here today. This is breaking news. You know who wrote it? No one! It’s a fraud! It’s a fraud upon the people. It’s a MacGuffin, it’s a device designed to undermine the President.
Moving on to Robert Mueller
Now let me say, before we move to some questions that you have about Robert Mueller—ironically, the man who penalized Lyndon LaRouche as part of the prosecution team in Boston—that tried to silence that great world patriot who is now on a mission, despite the fact that Mueller can find no Russian collusion with the Trump campaign. “Collusion” is defined as coordination, conspiracy, working in concert. That never happened. Yeah, we have evidence of Russian meddling in our election. Do we think that we in the United States have not meddled in foreign elections, specifically in Russia? Who do you think financed the election of Boris Yeltsin? Why, that would be Uncle Sam. Were we interfering in the most recent Israeli elections? You bet your ass! That’s what we do.
But now we act like this low-level, ham-handed, ineffective Russian meddling, most likely done by people who have English as a second language based on their social media output, which had no effect whatsoever on the election, is being held up as proof of the success of Mueller’s probe. Also troubling is the unconstitutionality of Mr. Mueller’s appointment.
You see, Mr. Mueller has not been confirmed by the U.S. Senate; there is no Federal law in place that holds for the creation of his position. He has unlimited budget; he can take on as many hungry left-wing prosecutors as he wants. It’s amazing that virtually none of them—in fact none of them—are Republicans. What are the chances of that? Yet we’re told by the courts, at least so far, that his appointment is perfectly proper because he is being overseen by an elected official, Donald Trump, and an appointed official, Rod Rosenstein, who was appointed by an elected official, and confirmed by the Senate. The problem with that is that both Mr. Trump and Mr. Rosenstein are at a minimum witnesses, and more likely subjects of the very investigation of which Mr. Mueller is engaged.
After all, it was Mr. Rosenstein who got caught red-handed writing a memo to the President telling him how and why to fire FBI Director James Comey. That came as quite a surprise to Comey, because he thought Rosenstein was one of his closest friends. Rosenstein is mortified because he thought he could do this weasel act behind the scenes, and he would never be outed. So, his consolation prize for the Deep State was the appointment of Robert Mueller.
Mueller is an interesting fellow. He is the man who covered up Saudi involvement in the 9/11 attack on the United States. There were no less than 16 reports from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement—that’s our state police—about strange men who were training at a Sarasota, Florida-based flight school. Mr. Mueller failed to investigate those tips, but then, after the fact, investigated a local Sarasota-area Saudi family that was harboring these men in their home. These Saudis had disappeared in the dark of night, leaving behind all their personal effects: their cars, their clothing, their jewelry. And Mr. Mueller certified to the Congress and to the people of the United States that there were no ties between that Saudi family and the 9/11 plot. We now know that that was a lie. Freedom of Information Act-acquired documents from the Federal government prove it.
But then again, it was Mr. Mueller who let four men rot in a Boston jail, who he had convicted of murders that he knew they didn’t commit, solely because it would have exposed Mafia FBI informants in the Whitey Bulger case. Then there was the anthrax scandal. Mueller arrested the wrong three men. The man he did ultimately arrest amazingly died in captivity within 24 hours of a Tylenol overdose. Then of course, there’s Mr. Mueller’s role in BCCI or Lockerbie Flight 103. We can go through the list. He is the cover-up artist for the Deep State.
They say, “Oh, but Mueller’s a registered Republican.” Try not to think of American politics anymore in terms of Republicans and Democrats; it’s an outdated way of thinking. This is a contest between outsiders and insiders. Mr. Mueller has been the hit man for both the Bushes and the Clintons. He is the Lord High Executioner for the Deep State.
What will happen here? Where will this all go? Well, he plays by no rules, so the wide supposition that he would wrap up his investigation by Election Day or by September 11, or by the end of the year, I think that is wishful thinking. He is determined to remove President Donald Trump from office on any thin reed necessary. If the Democrats are successful in winning control of the U.S. House of Representatives, there will be a vote of impeachment. But for students of American government, our Constitution, impeachment is not removal. Removal from office requires a trial and conviction in the Senate to remove this President. That requires two-thirds of the votes of the U.S. Senate; unlikely while we are having an economic boom that is only going to get stronger with each passing day.
I myself have been subject to the inexorable inquisition by this Torquemada, who has—and some of you may know—interrogated as many as twelve of my current or former associates, dragged as many as eight of my current or former associates before the grand jury. This I can tell you with every confidence: he can find no evidence of Russian collusion; he can find no evidence of Wikileaks collaboration; he can find no evidence that I knew about the acquisition and publication of John Podesta’s devastatingly embarrassing and incriminating emails. I will confess to two things. I might as well say it right here, so you know it. I do like Russian vodka, so arrest me.
Let me say in conclusion, that it has been a pleasure to be here with you today. I would be happy to take some questions and participate as the program goes forward. Thank you very much for your kind invitation.