Roger Stone Wants a Pardon. He Previously Tried to Get One for Assange.

“I am working with others to get JA a blanket pardon.”

Roger Stone leaves court in Washington, DC. Drew Angerer/Getty Images

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

Roger Stone’s conviction Friday on charges of lying to Congress, obstruction of justice, and witness tampering has drawn widespread speculation about whether President Donald Trump will pardon his longtime adviser. Trump, after all, publicly cheered Stone’s promise not to testify against the president in special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation. And Stone himself, just before his conviction, reportedly sought presidential intervention through a note read on the air by far-right commentator Alex Jones. “I appeal to the president to pardon me because to do so would be an action that would show these corrupt courts that they’re not going to get away with persecuting people for their free speech or for the crime of getting the president elected,” Stone said, according to Jones.

This appeal is significant because Stone is asking the president to intervene in a case in which Trump is personally implicated. Stone was found guilty of lying to House investigators about contacts with Trump campaign officials in which he provided updates on WikiLeaks’ plans for releasing emails stolen from Democrats by Russian hackers. Stone’s trial included testimony suggesting that the self-described dirty trickster had personally briefed Trump on WikiLeaks’ plans. This means that Trump likely lied to Mueller when he claimed he did not recall discussing WikiLeaks with Stone.

Strikingly, this is apparently not the first time Stone has tried to convince Trump to use his pardon powers to intercede in the criminal probes surrounding WikiLeaks. After Trump was elected president in 2016, Stone told associates he was working to convince the president to pardon WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who at the time faced potential prosecution by the Justice Department in connection with his organization’s publication of classified US government documents in 2010. Randy Credico—a comedian and political activist formerly friendly with Stone—testified at Stone’s trial that in 2016, Stone contacted Margaret Ratner Kunstler, a lawyer who worked with WikiLeaks. According to Credico, Stone told Kunstler that he planned to urge Trump to preemptively pardon Assange.

Mother Jones first reported last year that Stone, in text messages to Credico, had claimed he was attempting to secure a pardon for Assange. “I am working with others to get JA a blanket pardon,” Stone wrote in one January 6, 2018, message. “It’s very real and very possible. Don’t fuck it up.” Stone sent that message, which was placed in evidence by prosecutors during his trial, after Credico mentioned plans to speak to a reporter about his contacts with Stone in 2016. Stone apparently wanted to dissuade Credico from doing that. “Hope u don’t fuck Up my efforts to get Assange a pardon” Stone wrote in another text to Credico, minutes earlier on the same day.

In September 2018 email to Mother Jones, Stone, without offering specifics, confirmed: “I most definitely advocated a pardon for Assange.” 

Under Trump, official US policy toward WikiLeaks has not seemed to soften. In April 2017, then-CIA Director Mike Pompeo called the organization a “hostile intelligence service.” Two years later, the Justice Department indicted Assange. But in late 2016, Stone likely had reason to believe that a pardon was at least possible—just weeks earlier, as WikiLeaks released emails damaging to Hillary Clinton, Trump had declared on the campaign trail that “I love WikiLeaks.”

Credico’s recent testimony adds to the pardon story. According to the comedian, Stone first broached the idea of Trump pardoning Assange in late 2016. Credico testified that after Trump’s electoral victory, Stone asked for help reaching Kunstler, who is Credico’s friend, regarding a pardon for Assange. Kunstler, a civil rights lawyer who represents WikiLeaks editor Sarah Harrison, testified at Stone’s trial that her work for Harrison left her functioning in effect as a WikiLeaks’ lawyer.

Stone later made public statements urging Trump to pardon Assange. But his outreach to Kunstler is one of several pieces of evidence presented during the trial indicating that the connections between Trump’s circle and WikiLeaks were more robust than previously known. Rick Gates, a former top Trump campaign aide, testified that he witnessed Trump speaking on the phone with Stone on July 31, 2016, shortly after WikiLeaks released a trove of Democratic National Committee emails. Immediately after hanging up with Stone, Gates testified, Trump told him that “more information would be coming.”

Former Trump campaign CEO Steve Bannon, who also testified against Stone, said the campaign considered Stone to be its “access point” to Assange and WikiLeaks. And Bannon suggested that Trump campaign officials believed Stone was working with WikiLeaks to influence the release of emails. Bannon said that in October 2016, he heard that Stone “was somehow involved” in WikiLeaks releasing emails stolen from Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta. 

Stone told Mother Jones last year that he urged Andrew Napolitano, a Fox News personality, to support a pardon for Assange. According to Credico, Stone said he hoped Napolitano would float the idea on Fox or directly to Trump. Credico has also told Mother Jones that Stone claimed to have secured Bannon’s support for an Assange pardon push. 

Still, it’s unclear how extensive Stone’s effort really was. Napolitano said in a statement last year that he “categorically denies” working with Stone to get Assange a pardon. There is no evidence Bannon took steps to help Assange. William Burck, a lawyer for Bannon, did not respond to questions about Stone’s alleged claims.

Trump has so far not pardoned Assange, and in May, the WikiLeaks founder was hit with a federal indictment for his alleged role in obtaining and publishing secret military and diplomatic documents in 2010.

The charges against Stone had no direct tie to his efforts to help Assange. Prosecutors crafted a far more narrow case. Stone was convicted of making false statements to the House Intelligence Committee, obstruction of justice, and witness tampering—the latter of which involved Stone pressuring Credico not to provide testimony contradicting Stone’s false claims to Congress. 

Credico has said he believes Stone’s talk of securing an Assange pardon, including Stone’s contact with Kunstler in 2016, was part of an effort to dangle a carrot to stop the comedian, a vocal WikiLeaks backer, from disputing Stone’s congressional testimony. “He was trying to get me not to talk,” Credico said.

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