A Judge Just Imposed a Strict Gag Order on a Groveling Roger Stone

Judge Amy Berman Jackson stopped short of jailing Stone for an Instagram post.

Jose Luis Magana/AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

US District Judge Amy Berman Jackson slapped a strict gag order on Roger Stone on Thursday but stopped short of jailing him over an Instagram post showing what appeared to be a crosshairs next to Jackson’s head. “Any violation of this order will be a basis for revoking your bond,” she told the longtime adviser to President Donald Trump and self-professed dirty trickster. 

Stone, who is awaiting trial on obstruction of justice and perjury charges brought by special counsel Robert Mueller, apologized profusely and repeatedly to Jackson on Thursday after his lawyer took the extraordinary step of putting Stone on the stand to defend his conduct.

Stone admitted he had “abused” an earlier order that Jackson issued which did not bar Stone from commenting publicly on the case as long as he avoided commenting within Washington, DC. “I let myself down,” Stone said. “I let my family down. I let my attorneys down. I can only say that I am sorry.”

But Stone drew Jackson’s ire with a series of statements that the judge said suggested he did not fully accept responsibility for his post. 

Stone claimed his “stupid lapse of judgment” resulted from “emotional stress” due to his indictment. Stone also said he is under “extreme financial stress” because his legal issues have cut off the political consulting and other income he relies on. “I’m having trouble putting the food on the table,” he said.

Stone said that an apology filed under his name on the court’s docket had been drafted by his lawyers. “I did not write that,” he said, seeming to distance himself from the expression of contrition. “I signed it on the advice of my attorney.”

Stone said he believed that the image he posted on Instagram does not show a crosshairs but a “Celtic occult” symbol. Stone said that while he posted the image of Jackson, he did not find it. One of “five or six” volunteers who assist him with social media selected it, Stone said. “I just said, ‘Get a photo,'” Stone explained. “I am responsible for the posting. I just didn’t look at it. I did not review it properly.”

Under questioning, Stone said he could only recall the names of four of his volunteers, including blogger Jacob Engels, who has close ties to the far-right Proud Boys group. Stone said Engels had access to his phone on the day the post was made and had the ability to sign into his Instagram account. But Stone said none of his volunteers would admit to finding the image. (Engels, who attended the hearing, declined to tell Mother Jones if he had selected the image.)

Stone’s claims drew incredulity from Jackson. “Do your volunteers know how to do a Google search?” she asked. “How hard was it to come up with a photograph that didn’t have a crosshairs in it?” 

“You cannot remember the names of all the people who were working for you four days ago?” Jonathan Kravis, a prosecutor in the US attorney’s office in Washington, asked during a cross-examination. “Correct,” Stone said. “You cannot remember all the names of people who had access to your cellphone four days ago?” Kravis asked. “Correct,” Stone responded.

“I would submit that the defendant’s testimony at this hearing was not credible,” Kravis said later.

Jackson concurred, offering a withering explanation for her decision to bar Stone from public comment on the case. “The apology rings quite hollow,” she said.

Jackson ruled that Stone had posted the Instagram image with the intent of denigrating the court’s proceeding and tainting the jury pool in the case. She modified her order on media contact so that Stone’s bond will be revoked if he violates the new order. “From this moment on the defendant may not speak publicly about the investigation of this case,” she said.

Jackson cited Stone’s lawyers’ argument that he should not be gagged because he is a professional communicator and, as they put it, “a voice.”

“Roger Stone fully understands the power of words and the power of symbols,” she said. “There’s nothing ambiguous about crosshairs.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate