Roger Stone Appears to Use Racial Slur on a Black Radio Host’s Show

The president’s longtime adviser denies doing so.

Graham Macgillivray/ZUMA

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

Fresh off of receiving a presidential commutation, Roger Stone on Saturday appeared to use a racial slur during a live taping of a radio show hosted by a Black man. Stone, a longtime adviser to Donald Trump, has insisted that he made no such remark, and he told Buzzfeed Sunday that he has “hired the best technicians in the country and will disapprove (sic) shortly.”

The comments came while Morris O’Kelly, host of the Mo’Kelly Show, and Stone were engaged in a heated discussion over the president’s July 10 decision to commute Stone’s 40-month prison sentence for lying to Congress and witness tampering in the Russia investigation.

“There are thousands of people treated unfairly daily,” O’Kelly said at one point. “How your number just happened to come up in the lottery, I’m guessing it was more than just luck, Roger, right?”

Stone, who up until that moment had been providing rapid-fire, animated responses to O’Kelly’s questions, paused. A muffled voice—apparently Stone’s—was then heard mumbling a few unintelligible words before uttering the phrase “arguing with this Negro.”

“I’m sorry, what was that?” O’Kelly, clearly taken aback, asked. “Roger? I’m sorry, what did you say?”

For awhile, Stone didn’t respond to O’Kelly. “I thought we were having just a very spirited conversation, what happened?” O’Kelly continued.

After O’Kelly said that he could hear that the phone line was still open, Stone reappeared and suggested that the phone signal had been wonky.

“I was talking, and you said something about negroes, so I wasn’t exactly sure,” O’Kelly told Stone, who quickly denied the accusation. “You’re out of your mind,” Stone said.

According to the Associated Press, Stone elaborated on this denial in a statement after the interview:

In a statement, Stone defended himself by saying that anyone familiar with him “knows I despise racism!”

“Mr. O’Kelly needs a good peroxide cleaning of the wax in his ears because at no time did I call him a negro,” Stone said, using lowercase for the word. “That said, Mr. O’Kelly needs to spend a little more time studying black history and institutions. The word negro is far from a slur.”

He cited the United Negro College Fund and the historical use of the word.

At one time, “Negro” was common in the American vernacular to describe African Americans. By the late 1960s, however, the word was scorned by activists in favor of such descriptors as “Black.”

These days, the antiquated word is widely viewed as derogatory in most uses.

In his statement, Stone noted that some of the program’s audio was garbled and alleged that there was cross-talk from another radio show and that his sound was cut off.

Stone claims that it was actually someone else who uttered the slur and told Buzzfeed that he has hired technical experts to prove his innocence.

Stone, a self-proclaimed “dirty trickster,” has long spewed racist, sexist, and inflammatory language, including the word “Negro.”

This story has been revised.

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