Roger Stone Releases Statement On “Reporters” And “News Outlets” Who Have Not Sought Comment Prior To Publishing, Lack of Transparency

Roger Stone at Book Signing Party for "The Making of the President 2016: How Donald Trump Orchestrated a Revolution" - Editorial credit: Cornelius O'Donoghue /, licensed.
Roger Stone at Book Signing Party for “The Making of the President 2016: How Donald Trump Orchestrated a Revolution” – Editorial credit: Cornelius O’Donoghue /, licensed.

PALM BEACH, FL – Today, Wednesday, March 10, 2021, the following statement was released by Roger Stone regarding what he called the ‘extraordinarily high number’ of journalists and media outlets which have reported on his presence in Washington D.C. on January 5th and 6th without practicing proper journalistic ethics allowing him an opportunity for comment.

I am releasing this statement because of the extraordinarily high number of “reporters” and “news outlets” who have reported on my presence in Washington DC on January 5th and 6th without respecting the time honored ethical practice of asking for comment. No real journalist would proceed in this fashion but perhaps they fear being challenged about their transparent use of the “guilt by association” technique and their broad use of innuendo to falsely imply that I have some involvement or knowledge of the events of January 6. It’s a vile lie without any supporting evidence.

Any statement, claim, insinuation, or report alleging, or even implying, that I had any involvement in or knowledge, whether advance or contemporaneous, about the commission of any unlawful acts by any person or group in or around the U.S. Capitol or anywhere in Washington, D.C. on January 6, 2021, is categorically false. For those who are a bit slow and work at Mother Jones and elsewhere in the corrupt fake news media, read that twice.

It is exactly this kind of smear and hate-mongering that is responsible for the continuing threats against me, my wife, my family, my children and yes, even my great grandson. The many public confrontations and incidents like the attack on my wife outside our home only weeks ago. This is precisely why I required the voluntary security services of the Oath Keepers when I learned that the off-duty DC police officers who quite legally provided security against the hateful mob during my trial, were not available.

Given the baseless smears I was subjected to in my own trial from these same “news outlets”, their malicious dishonesty does not surprise me. Their near hysterical lust for my blood generated because, by the grace of God, I escaped the snare set for me so deviously by Congressman Adam Schiff and Mueller’s dirty cops as well as the railroading by a politically corrupt Justice system with the full throated support of these same jackals in the media, is still shocking. Haters gonna hate but don’t get the drool from your foaming mouths on my old but well cared-for custom made English shoes.

I do not know Mr. Minuta nor was I familiar with his name prior to his being identified in earlier media stories where it was alleged that he was involved in illegal events at the Capitol. If he was indeed among those who volunteered to provide security while I visited Washington DC I was unaware of it at the time.

While I have acknowledged that the Oathkeeper’s provided security for me on a voluntary basis at two legally permitted events on January 5th -as they did for a number of speakers that day. The much-hyped videos produced by ABC are proof of nothing illicit or improper but serve as the basis of their broad smear. They should be ashamed of their naked duplicity. Even if it is true that anyone on this video is ultimately convicted for a crime that pertains later in the day does not mean was involved or knew in advance of the hair-brained idiocy of breaking into the Capitol. Why would any sane political realist think that such an act would “help” the President’s political cause?

This video does not in any way provide proof or evidence that I was involved in or had advance knowledge of the illegal acts at the Capitol on January 6 that are alleged to involve some individual members of the organization.

Such an implication is “guilt by association” with no factual basis. Both the New York Times and ABC News are guilty of journalistic malpractice for the willful innuendo that permeates their most recent reports. They are not worthy of either respect or consideration. They pedal baseless and unsupported supposition and fact-free conjecture in place of actual fact-based reporting.

As I have said previously, with exception of a brief period Saturday morning when several of those on my security detail were allowed to enter the hotel but were asked almost immediately to leave because their presence violated the DC Mayor’s Covid 19 regulations -the only time I noticed two or three of them without their ski-masks-they were not allowed in the hotel lobby. So when I emerged to go to the two events I spoke at on February 5th, they were wearing ski masks as it was both cold and wet. (Please note neither ABC or the New York Times is critical of ANTIFA thugs wearing masks to hide their identity). I was never informed of the names of those sent to protect me as they protected other speakers at legal events that day. The New York Times says they are “violent extremists” but I am unaware of any court decision that proves this so far. If a broader conspiracy is found that proves otherwise so be it but no proof of this exists today. These same “news outlets” insist neither the real masked terrorists ANTIFA or those in BLM are terrorists and “excuses” the trail of crimes, including riots, burning buildings, window smashing, menacing citizens and destroying both public and private property these well funded, well organized agents provocateur commit.

They were polite, professional and I saw no evidence of extremism or inappropriate behavior. New York Times Visual investigations “reporter” Christaan Triebert is fresh off his job as a hatchet man for the George Soros funded Bellingcat. Bad lot, those chaps. Triebert is not an objective “reporter” he’s a partisan. There is no reason whatsoever to consider anything he “reports” factual or accurate but all of his stories are “supported” only by his own uncorroborated “research”. Right.

Those are among the very same news outlets that maligned me endlessly as a Russian traitor and Wikileaks collaborator but did not have the decency to report the midnight Nov 3, 2020 release by the US Department of Justice of the long hidden last remaining unredacted sections of Mueller’s report in which he admits he could find no “factual evidence” to support these claims. Ignore the sugar- coated bullshit from the con-men at Buzzfeed and read the ACTUAL document release by DOJ-

I publicly denounced the senseless and destructive acts at the Capitol on Parler shortly after I learned about them and continue to believe that anyone who is involved in these events who broke the law should be prosecuted. The despicable effort to defame me in order to use my name and visage is clickbait.

Editors note: Stone periodically contributes to The Published Reporter.

Comment via Facebook

Corrections: If you are aware of an inaccuracy or would like to report a correction, we would like to know about it. Please consider sending an email to and cite any sources if available. Thank you. (Policy)