there any appetite in the senate for taking up either of these two measures? rafael: that's the big question. certainly, senator mcconnell, he said he does not want to "waste at he already spent a week on" it. whatever happens, there has to be 10 democratic senators for it to pass. even if this bill does pass, whenever comes out of the senate is likely to lean to the left. we will see if that still passes. >> rafael is with the hill latino. you can follow him at thehill.com and on twitter. thank you for the update. rafael: thank you for having me. >> it's been reported that president trump went to capitol hill this week to speak with house republicans on

immigration. that's expected to take place tuesday a few days to consider immigration legislation. host: joining us from fort lauderdale florida is republican strategist and author of the new book stone's rules how to win at politics, business, and style. thanks for being with us. guest: good morning. great to be here. host: let me begin with news of the last 24 hours. your friend and former partner paul man forth now sitting inside a jail in the washington, d.c. on allegations that he tried to witness tamper connection to his case. your reaction to what happened on friday and where does this go next? guest: well, i think connection. your reaction to the special counsel is trying to pressure paul man fosht to plead guilty to avoid a trial. the reason i think they are doing that is they do not want to discuss the surveillance

that was on both paul man fort and according to the "new york times" on january 20, 2016, on myself and also carter page. in fact in discovery, the government insists to man fort that he was never under surveillance at any time. the "washington post," the "new york times" and many other media organizations have reported otherwise. i think that surveillance was unconstitutional, was illegal. i don't think the government wants to talk about it at trial. i think that is the reason mr. man fort is being squeezed in this way. host: but he is also accused of trying to influence witnesses in this investigation. guest: obviously i can't speak to the specifics of that other than what i have read but i do find it interesting that for brothers who the

hacked the house computer system who is accused of brothe burglary, stealing records, stealing money, has not spent a day in jail while mr. man fort sits in jail. this is very clearly a pressure tactic on him to induce him to plead guilty to avoid trial. host: let me get your reaction to another story. and the "washington post" has the headline at this hour. you revealed another conversation, another meeting in 2016 with another russian operatives and the "washington post" has this exchange between you and mike. ow crazy is the russian? your response wants big money for the info. waste of time. the russian way anything at all interesting. can you explain what this is all about? guest: your response wants big money for the absolutely. a long time associate of mine asked me to meet with a gentleman by the name of henry greenberg. turns out that's not his real name because he had information that he said he wanted to pass on to the trump campaign. i me with mr. greenberg who

has no been revealed to be a long-time f.b.i. informant and he tol h million for unspecified information. needless to say i declined. i said i didn't have $2 million and even if i did i w use it to buy political information. he laughed and said well it's not your money i want. it's donald trump's. i said you really don't understand. donald trump doesn't pay for political information. i have reported this meeting now that mr. cap uto has refreshed my memory to the house intelligence committee. it was a 20-minute exchange. even mr. greenberg in the "washington post" confirms that there was no transaction and that i declined. now, knowing mr. greenberg's extensive background as an f.b.i. inform nt, it is pretty clear to me that this was a sting operation of some kind, an attempt to penetrate the

trump effort and perhaps compromise donald trump himself. it turned out to be so inoccuous that i didn't recall it but i have given my entire recollection now to the house intelligence committee. and also to the inspecter general. host: the characterization is that you did not disclose it to federal investigators. you just explained that you didn't know about it or forgot about it. is that your excuse? guest: that is correct. i did not recall it at the time. i wouldn't call it an excuse. of special fice counsel raised this question with mr. cap uto in a memory -- i had no memory of this. it was an inoccuous exchange. this guy of special counsel shows up wearing a mag in a hat and trump t-shirt. he makes this offer, i decline, nothing inappropriate happened here. and i have now refreshed my memory and informed the committee. host: why do you think f.b.i. operatives would have done

this? helper ell, we have the example, the strock page exchanges. very clearly the f.b.i. or at least some subset of it was trump against the election, was trying to penetrate the trump campaign. i think this was a sting effort. at the time, i thought tru election, was it was a clumsy effort just to get money and i declined. but in all honesty, this was a 20-minute exchange which i did not recall because it was so ridiculous. host: should the president consider a pardon for paul man forth guest: i think that premature. i think mr. mana fort needs to go to trial. the president could make that decision at that point. in the case for example of general flynn, who has pled, i think the president should consider a pardon for general flynn. host: you are friends with paul

mana for, is your former partner. when is the last time you talked to him? guest: it's been a couple weeks now. bviously i feel very badly for him. it is going to be very difficult for him to prepare or trial from a jail cell. the hard ball tactics of the special prosecuter are obvious. but we have not spoken in several weeks. host: what did he sound like when you talked to him? where is his mind at the moment? guest: anxious to go to trial. unwilling to fold and plead guilty. not willing to testify against the president in any way. i don't think he has any information that's damaging to the president. therefore, in order to do so he would have to make something up. their false witness as it were, that would be perjury in itself. so i think he is at least the last time i spoke to him anxious to go to trial on these

charges. host: right now he is looking at charges based on his personal financial dealings, his lobbyg efforts, and his business practices. correct? nothing involved in the campaign. uest: ihought this was about russian collusion in the 2016 election. paul man fort stands charged with numerous infractions but none having to do russian collusion in the 2016 w presidential election or his service in the trump campaign. frankly, i think he does not get enough credit for his effort to thwart an effort to steal the nomination from donald trump even though donald trump had run the primaries and caucuses and state conventions. as you know there is a precedent in 1952 robert taft came to chicago with more than enough votes to be norm nated on the first ballot and that nomination was stolen from him in the credentials committee and the rules committee of the 1952 convention. the republican national

convention is governed by its own rules rather than state or federal law. and the trump campaign despite the fact that they were rolling up large victories when it came to delegates was really not payingtt to o was being appointed to these crucial and controlling committees. mr. man fort is a master at convention politics. he was exactly the person the trump campaign nded at that ti. he beat back an effort by the cruz folks to hijack this nomination. i think he deserves credit for that. host: and when rudy julianie, the president's lawyer saying the president could clean up the russian probe with a series of pardons your reaction? so far the russia probe doesn't seem to have revealed any russian collusion. that's why i call it the russian collusion so far the de given the partisan nature of all of the investigators, given

the fact that we -- that the special counsel indicted 13 russians and now doesn't want to provide discovery to them clearly looking for a headline, this is a bogus partisan investigation. the president's is r. it's a witch hunt and it has interestingly not slowed the president down in terms of returning the country to prosperity and seeking peace abroad. it's amazing how much the president has been able to achieve given the daily attacks magnified by the mainstream media from the democrats and his critics, and i think mr. july ni is absolutely right. host: let me go back to this story which broke this morning. trump associateevealing new contact with the russian 2016 l with the

campaign. were there any other meetings that took place that you now remember that took place in 2016? guest: none that i can recall. i didn't 2016 campaign. recall this one. it was so inoccuous. and, again, i want to be clear. i declined any effort to purchase information or to pass this information on to donald trump. host: let's get to your book called stone's rules. how to win at politics, buness and style. guest: let me be clear. i had no advanced knowledge of the source, content or the exact disclosure timing of the

wikileaks disclosures regarding the dnc. i received nothing including allegedly hacked e-mails from assadge or julian the russians or anyone else. i passed nothing of that nature on to donald trump. as some have assadge or the russians or anyone else. i passed claimed so this allegation keeps getting repeated. there is no evidence to back it up because it is not true. now, it is also accurate that i do not regd mr. assadge or wikileaks as russian assets. i thinhe is a journalist. he does what the "washington post" does, what the "new york times" does. he gets information sometimes classified and he publishes it. it is interesting to noted that wikileaks during the entire time of its existence has never been questioned in terms of the authenticity or accuracy of what they have published.

very few american newspapers or media organizations can say that. so i reject the idea that he is a russian asset or that wikileaks is a russian front. atthis juncture although i once believed that the dnc had been hacked, today i don't think they were hacked at all. as you m know i'm being sued along with others including the trump campaign by the democratic national committee, which is terrific because we'll get a chance to look and examine those servers and establish once and for all whether the dnc was ever hacked by anyone or whether the information was downloaded to kind of portable drive and taken out the backdoor, which a number of it counter kind terro experts now believe based on an rticle i read in the nation. host: up written how many

books? guest: this is my sixth book. but this book is somewhat different than the others. you don't have to be a republican or a conservative or a trump supporter to benefit and enjoy this book. it just would work for bernie sanders supporter, progressive, even people who aren't interested in politics whatsoever. if you're trying to get ahead in business or media or fashion or agriculture. no matter what your chosen avocation, i think these rules ould hold you in good stead.

host: good morning. guest: good morning. fox news is the fake news. they don't want to answer people who will question them on something. trump and july ni are using it to try to bring down a real american hero. mueller. he got wide bipartisan support for the job. and now he's getting closer and closer to trump and they're getting more and more hostile. secondly, trump's bankruptcies, he bailout, the facebook accounts, 2016 elections and money laundering. it's all connected. and mueller's the best person in the country to connect those dots and all -- they're all going to catch up with trump because no one including you, stone, are above the law in this country, it's just a matter of time. host: roger stone. guest: i guess i'll put you down as undecided. wow, real hostility this morning.

no russian collusion has yet been proven. you seem to want to litigate the last election which donald trump won. i find the coverage far more balanced than say cnn. host: i want to look at a picture from nuzz week magazine. in your office with a number of nixon posters from his campaign from 1968 and 1972. how would nixon have handled watergate in today's media environment? guest: let's remember that in 1973 and 74 we had a monolithic media, three major networks, several national newspapers. but there was no internet. there was no alternative media. no there was only one narrative. it was the "washington post" narrative. for example, we didn't know at the time that three of the water gate burglars were still

on the c.i.a. payroll and reporting to their case officers. e didn't know that john dean had directed tony and jack -- two private detectives and both decorated new york police officers working for the white house -- to case out the watergate six weeks before the break-in according to their oral histories and their own biographies. there was only one narrative. so i think if there had been an alternative news media, nixon would have had a bretter chance to make his case. this -- and i think it's important. nixon was both very great and very flawed. he reached a strategic arms limitation with the soviets. he opened the door to china. he tony desegregated the public schools. saved israel unlaterally in 1973 yomkip purwar. he launched affirmative action

in the office of minority enterprise. at the same time, he launched the racist war on drugs, which has been a total failure. he took us off the gold standard. gave us wage and price controls. so i think he was both very great and very flawed. but i think it's time that his presidency be seen in balance. bill clinton said this most eloquently at president nixon's funeral. it is time to judge richard nixon onis entire record, and his record i think shows he was a peace maker. host: he died in 1994. do you recall your final conversation with hinl? guest: i was supposed to dine with him the day before, and i had to cancel. but he was very upbeat. he was never very retrospective or intro spective. he was always looking forward.

and as you know he came to be a key adviser to president clinton during the breakup of the soviet ubeion and developments in china also wrote numerous best sellers on foreign policy in his retirement years. ask me about my reverence for nixon. it in a sense is almost nonpolitical. it has to do with ask his resilience, with his persistance. it's an american story. defeated, knocked down, disgraced, he still kept coming back. a man is not finished when he's defeated, nixon wrote. he is only finished when he quits. i subscribe to that. host: on the democrat's line from michigan. henry you're next with roger stone joining us in florida. go ahead with your question or comment. caller: good morning, gentlemen. i would like to kind of piggy back off that missouri caller

with two points of my own. f e first using a metaphor war. a conventional invading force into america or any other country when they want to take it over, the first thing they want to do is to take control and command of the country's communications structure. this is what donald trump is ing when he den grates and media. es our when he talks so much about the media and them being such bad people. vladmir putin knew that had he used conventional forces to invade america it would have been mutual suicide. so what did he do? he used trump's economic or financial situation, this flailing company needed money, no american banks would loan him money, so putin and the olegarks loaned him money, got im financially indebted to

them and now trump is their operatives.hearts this is where i agree with donald trump about the media being fake. the media says them and now trump is their operatives. my second point. the people who die- that donald trump touched the heart and knows the working class white people. and that's why he won. well, this is the thing. these people are not the forgotten people because black people see them every february during black history month in eyes on the prize. this -- host: thanks for call. i want to go back to the first point. with regard to russia and donald trump. the president has -- guest: i don't know -- go ahead host: the president has not released his tax returns and some seem to indicate that there could be potentially maybe a link between his finances and the russian government.

guest: no one has ever established that donald trump took loans for any russian entity. i have been on the record saying he should release his tax returns all the way back to the 2016 campaign. i said it during the campaign. i think it would clear the air. on the other hand, if you are really looking for russian collusion it's pretty easy to find. $143 million that the clinton foundation took from executives in the russian-owned energy company that was seeking control of 20% of america's uranium, or the half million dollars that bill clinton took from the same ee enty. that would seem to me to be a real effort to influence the clintons by the from the same r host: california. republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you mr. stone. you're a true patriot. here's a couple things that the

fake news isn't talking about. how about barack obama sending eller with uranium over to russia? is mueller was the guy that brought it over. so he's -- how can he is be investigating anybody? and there's another thing. what about the whole middle east -- the thing in the middle east? the fleecing of the whole middle east under barack obama after he got -- what was it? the noble peace prize? or barry rack obama society my or? he hid his school records and how -- and what about his financial ors from george soros and working for laraza all those years and this fake daca unconstitutional. unconstituti.

he said it 19 times on the air and we've got to quit chasing his tail. let's get down to the bottom of the corrt administration. host: thank you. any reaction? guest: you raise a number of key points. it's interesting, and the previous caller seemed to miss this also. as far as mr. mueller is concerned, he arrested the three wrong people in the anthrax matter. the individual he finally arrest died mysteriously in custody. to investigate the sara societya florida based light school where five of nine hie jackers were to investigate he let four men rot in a boston jail to cover up for f.b.i. informents involved in the whitey bullinger matter.

samples le the uranium to raugs during the acquisition of uranium one. this is hardly an unblemished us hardly an unblemished record. therefore that he would now sit in judgment of this president in what is clearly an effort to undo what they could not do at the ballot box i think is really questionable. you justed on what said it sounds like those will be some of the talkingnts when theueller reports comes -- discreditedit both him and his work. we don't know what his report will say. that -- any evidence of collusion in the trump campaign manager even the indictment of the 13 russians evidently active online still doesn't show a clear connection or consistency. some points appear to be

pro-hillary, antiheroine. print trump and most of their money is then after the election. middletown, new jersey. independent line with roger stone. good morning. caller: good morning c-span3 of the best channel on television. host: good morning david. caller: it's an honor to talk to you and to mr. stone. host: go ahead. we can hear you. caller: all right. mr. stone, i am a world war ii vet. and i lived through the depression. on linemember standing with another may he rest in peace to get food with thousands and thousands of other people. and i remember having dinner by candlelight.

not because it was romantic, mr. stone. we didn't have electricity. i know what it is to do without. i would like to make two comments. one has to do with president nixon. i firmly believe that if senator robert kennedy had not been assassinateded he would have defeated richard nixon. he would have got u us out of vietnam and it would have been a different country. secondly, we are the greatest country in the world. and we're the greatest country because of three words. the programible of the constitution, -- preamible of the constitution, we the people. host: he is a regular viewer nd just turned 90 years old.

we appreciate hearing from him. your reaction. guest: well, first we salute your service. i was happy to see that president trum too the $400 salary that he is given by the government and donated it for e upkeep of veterans cemeteries. i think the veterans health care system in this country may be the number one scandal and something the president feels very deeply about fixing. as far as robert kennedy is concerned, first of all i am an admirer of robert kennedy. was a staunch anti-communist. i don't really believe he was a liberal. i think he was a pragmatic and very effective leader. i disagree with the idea that he would have defeated nixon because i don't know what southern state he could have carried. recall that in his narrow defeat against john kennedy, southern every

state. kennedy carried georgia, alabama, mississippi, and so on. bobby could never have carried any of those by 1968 he was fully polarizing in the country. the new four-part netflix robert kennedy is really superb. i admire him for his commitment his ert kennedy civil rights o staunch anti-communism. host: let me get your reaction to comments this past week by senator bob corker republican of tennessee, he is not seeking a third term. it's almost becoming a cultish thing. it's not a good place for any party to end up with a cult-like situation as it relates to the president. is that in reference to president trump and the g.o.p. your comment. guest: first i think senator corker is upset because president trump is more popular

among republicans and all voters a in tennessee than he is. this was also frue of virtually every republican president who is remade their party in their concombage. lincoln, eisenhower, certainly reagan. so the fact that the president's popularity transcends the republican party not only dominates the republican party but transcends it is not only typical of successful republican presidents but is really profound. i believe that in places like nebraska, for example, where the president's farm more popular than senator sass or in tennessee. as i indicated, i don't see this as a cult. i see it as loyalty and popularity based on his successful governance. and the fact that we have 4% economic growth. and this is prior to the president's corporate and

personal tax cuts having a hance to get traction. 223,000 jobs created in may, 1 million new jobs created since trump became president. we were told that structurally this could not happen under barack obama but the president is demonstrating enormous success with this economy. i think that's what explains his popularity, not some cult-like phenomenon. host: how to win in politics, business, and style. the latest book by roger stone. i want to t on the table,

exchange exchange the president had on the north lawn of the white house. where network reporters and anchors do their est: the fact that virtually 100% of 100% of americans knew who he was and knew his life story as a successful businessperson was an enormous leg up in his efforts to become president. he as you know thought about running for president as early as 2000 although i don't think very seriously. he did consider it very seriously in 2012. ultimately running in 2016.

i began urging him to run as early as 1988 because i believed that he had the size and capacity and independence to be a truly great president. last unconnected to the 30 years of policy mistakes that have given us endless foreign war where our inherent national interests are not clear. the erosion of our civil liberties. agna economy. a last 30 years of policy mistakes bro. huge multiinternational trade agreements which seem to be good for our trading partners but not so good for us in that they have sucked the jobs out of america. i think 2016 was the time that donald trump was the right man at the right place with the right message and the american people were tired of politics as usual. tired of both parties, republicans and democrats, tired of congress, tired of a

system they viewed as fixed against the little man, against the individual, which is why i thought from the beginning presidential candidate and i think potentially a great president. host: from florida. good morning. caller: good morning. happy father's day. i wanted to ask about the meeting that you had forgotten with the now known f.b.i. undercover agent. you described it as kind of a setup. but isn't that the exact job counter intelligence of the f.b.i. to find out if there's any illegal money given to a campaign from a foreign and also one small fact that among many but trump's own son has said many times plibble that they got most of their from russia before he ran as president. so i can't imagine the f.b.i. not investigating.

it would be criminal not to. your comments on that. thank you. host: thank you. guest: well, were they conducting similar investigation into the clinton foundation and the millions of dollars of foreign money including ukrainian and russian money flooding into that entity? i believe this idea that the f.b.i. infiltrating the trump campaign to look for russian collusion is nonsense. they were planting falks evidence of russian collusion as part of the insurance policy that peter strobe spoke of in his e-mails -- e-mails the justice department did not want to hand over to the kgs and the house intelligence committee only learned about when the inspecter general's report was produced. or when judicial watch forced those through a freedom of information act request. so no i don't think it is the

role of the f.b.i. to infiltrate a presidential campaign. having been involved with nixon, let's point out that because t down individuals connected to his campaign broke into the democratic national committee and planted bugs -- none of which actually really ever worked -- and also because his campaign got caught infilling rating the campaigns of his opponents. first senator humphrey then senator george mcgovern. what we see today is far more egregious. it is the use of thehority and power of the state to conduct surveillance and to infiltrate one of the two major party presidential campaigns. the use of a fabricated dosier as the underlying legal rationale for surveillance on trump associates, i believe myself included, is an

outrageous abuse of power that makes watergate looke a second-rate burglary. host: let me go back since the caller brought it up. the headlines in the "washington post." that you and mike said in separate interviews they also dizzf did not disclose the greenberg meeting. and further there have been 11 different conversations between trump campaign officials and russian operatives. guest: i simply didn't recall this exchange because i viewed it as inok luss and fairly ridiculous. $2 million for unspecified documents. i have informed the committee. i expect to testify before the senate intelligence committee. i would again like that testimony to be in public not behind closed doors. certainly prepared to discuss this then. i have sent through my attorney

a letter to both the inspecter general and to the house chairman of the intelligence committee telling them everything i know about this brief meeting. i can't speak to the 11 other contacts. i can only speak based on my own experience. host: are you worried about being indicted by robert mueller? guest: well, i wouldn't say that i am worried about it. i find it interesting that they through every ng molecule of my personal, political, and business life, former o subpoena through evey employees who weren't working for me during the 2016 election and other long-time associates in what appears to be some effort to frame me in an effort to silence me because i former critic of the mueller

investigation. if the effort is to find some extraneous bogus else, and pass it on to the trump campaign. yeah, i think this is a witch hunt and i think it is outrageous. it is orwe willion. we clearly live in a police state. i thought this was about russian collusion and the 2016 election. why then would mr. mueller be interested in interviewing former associates of mine who weren't working for me during the 2016 election? it's the possibility that they me? attempt to frame i will respond accordingly. host: how often do you talk to the president?

guest: it's been a me? while now. nd from time to time. i believe his lawyers have probably advised him that it would be best if we did not talk while now. matter is clarified. his strongest e supporter. there was a "new york times" i report that the president feared me. that makes no sense. he has nothing to fear from me. i am among his strongest supporters. and i haveo intention of making something up and testifying against him if that is what the special counsel has in mind. host: ohio, democrat's line. good morning. mplingtsdz they should impeach him. cause he's a womanizer, he's a -- raped all these people and they haven't done one thing about it. he don't show his taxes. all he thinks about is the big people and the heck with us

little people. especially the seniors. i think it is a dirty shame. host: we'll get reaction. guest: well, if that were the citea they would have iched jack kennedy and bill clinton. it's interesting that we're still trying to clarify bill clinton's acts tivities as infidelities or indiscretions when the area is far more serious sexual assault and rape. these charges against donald trump are unproven and i don't think they are the basis for any kind of impeeve ych drive. host: joe, republican line. kimplingtsdz today is father's day. as someone who understands american history, and how people of color as slaves had their families separated, children taken away from mothers and fatsers, how can you and how can the president

support a policy that he has created that is separating youngsters from their parents at our border? guest: well, of course the real answer is people shouldn't come in to the country illegally and then they would not be separated from their families. of now, when the question pardons came up, i was very clear that almost a year ago wrote to the president to of pardons came up, urge him to issue a posthumes pardon to marcus garvi, an early civil rights leader who was an advocate of black education, black responsibility, black pride, black identity, who i think was a truly great man who was unfashely targeted and set p by the f.b.i. because he was successfully beginning to organize black people. so i having worked for richard

nixon who gave us affirmative action, who desegregated the public schoo without violence or blood shed, who created the office of minority enterprides, i identify with that struggle. but i think this question is a different one. if you don't want to be separated from your children, don't attempt to enter the country illegally. the problem with our immigration system seems to me that the people who are waiting in line, the people who are going through the process legally are being cheated by those who are entering the illegally and cheating the system. host: the president is tweeting this morning. just a short while ago one of i his number one targets the "washington post." he writes the following.

reaction? guest: well, look, i think the president's holding the mainstream media's feet to the fire is a good thing. visly i agree with it. i don't think that you can monolithically claim the main streelt media is entirely biased. there are biased reporters at the "washington post." there are fine and honest reporters at the "washington post." there are biased reporters at the "new york times." there are fine and honest reporters at the "new york times." but the president gets more and his share of fake news things are published about him and his family that are untrue. above all he is a counter puncher and i think a very effective one. ost: jim from long island. caller: hi, mr. stone.

i like the answer that you gave to the last call about illegal immigration. i wanted to say that when you thank veterans, i am starting to see that the as just lip service because i see the democrats andown my town ll tripping over each other to help illegal immigrants and do nothing for us. i'm steeped in the ms-13 stuff here. this place is turning into a third world country and i can't get the town to do anything about it. they've got these houses just loaded up with people. you wouldn't believe how many people are in these houses. you've got five to a room. the town isn't doing anything about it. they're getting all kinds of benefits that i never get. i really appreciate the comment you gave to the last person about them coming in here illegally. by the way, on tucker carls, he just talked about that guy with the two kids that got

arrested, and then i think the government -- the governor of new york stepped in. he was driving without a license and driving without insurance. if i did that, forget about it. this is the kind of stuff i'm talking about. thank you. host: thank you. we should point out that tucker carlson writing the latest tion to your book, stone's rules. roger stone. guest: well, you raised an excellent point. a perfect example. when the president criticized m-13 olence and specifically the mainstream media depicted that when he called them animals as a denunciation of all immigrants. not what he said. a perfect example of the mainstream media bias against this president. host: michigan, democrat's m-13 specifically the mainstream dia

line. good morning. kimplingtsdz good morning. i have a few things to say to mr. stone. first, there's a big difference in taking millions of dollars for your foundation as long as you don't use up any on yourself. andhe clinton foundation, makes for people all over the world. second thing is donald trump's sons were on a year ago and they both said money was pouring in from russia. another thing i want to say arrested for arrested for money laundering. he lived at trump towers ande was also donald trums campaign months. he also attended a meeting at the trump tower a year ago with the three russians. thank you. host: thank you. guest: well, manager for almost. first of all, the clinton foundation paid $6 million for chelsea's wedding. do we consider that a personal

use? they were supplying aids medicine abroad that had never been medically approved, was probably more dangerous than hiv. it is very clear that there was a pay to play scam going on at the clinton foundation where you would contribute in support of public policy decisions, the approval of uranium 1, perhaps the largest treasonist financial crime in american history. i still don't think it is proven that the trump organization has taken enormous russian financing. i've seen no proof of that. and paul man fort is innocent until proven guilty. he has a right to a fair and speedy trial. so let's not denounce him as guilty until he's had his day in court. host: the filing by the new york attorney general suing the foundation following a investigation saying the trump

family saying the children using it as their own personal piggy bank. guest: politically motivated. this was cooked up by eric sniderman who hoped to become governor on the back of a new york state weave of unpopularity in a blue state against the president. how coins dental is they announce this charge on the day the inspecter general's report comes out. the foundation actually gave out more than they took in with donald trump himself subsidizing it. i view this as an entirely politically motivated charge. host: virginia, republican line. good morning. aller: good morning, c-span. thank you again for a wonderful program this morning. mr. stone, i recently viewed the documentary about your political life and what you are doing these days. i thoroughly enjoy it.

i have one question. it's something that frustrates me to no end as a republican and conservative leaders who go on network television, the able shows, and the hosts will ask a question which is really more than pushing a certain narrative or certain false premise to a question. and i listen to republican leaders, conservatives, and they just don't push back on it strongly enough. i find it very frustrating how much falsehood is advanced by the so-called mainstream media. host: i'm going to stop you there. only because we're short on time. thank you for the question. those republican

conservative leaders need to read my book stone's rules and it will tell them how to handle those kind of media inquiries. i those republican conservative leaders need to read view shows like this as an opportunity to answer questions t also to say what i want to say. and that's why i like c-span. it's entirely fair and balanced and you get your opportunity to lay out your points of view. thank you for the call. host: we have time for one more question. this program is carried on the bbc parliament channel. this is from england. caller: thank you very much. just a quick question to go back to the beginning of the segment. when mr. stone discussed his interaction with mr. greenberg and the $200 million request and his recollection was he had a hat and trump t-shirts. i think that's memorable to kind of forget $200 million is not an easy amount to forget. if the f.b.i. was so hell-bent on negatively affecting the trump campaign, why didn't they

expose flash leak that trump -- last week that trump was under investigation when they made the announcement about hillary clinton? guest: i think it was ludicrous that mr. greenberg -- that's not his real name. he has several names. it has worked for the f.b.i. for over 17 years. i simply didn't recall. it wasn't $200 million. it was $2 million by the way. i'm not sure i understood the second part of the question. so i'm not going to try to answer it. host: but do you understand why this now coming out again leads those who have more questions about what role trump campaign operativeses may have had in 1if6? guest: grasping for russian collusion when there is none. i would be happy to answer these questions, again, for the senate intelligence committee, again. nothing changed hands here. i rejected what i now believe

was some effort at entrapment by the f.b.i. it was a simple denial on my part of any interest and i didn't pass the information on to the trump campaign. i'm certain i will have the opportunity to discuss this under oath again soon. host: in our final minute members of the trump administration very critical of leaks coming inside the trump white house. why so many? guest: well, i'm kind of disappointed in the fact that in many cases the president has hired people who don't support his agenda and who are not loyal to him or that agenda. therefore, the back-biting and leaking is very disappointing. working in the white house is probably the highest political our you can have in

business. our business. no one elected you. donald trump was elected and you serve at his pleasure and his appointment you his appoin him both your discretion and your loyalty. host: the book is titled stone's rules. how to win at politics, business, and style. author and republican strategist roger stone joining us from fort lauderdale, florida. thank you for be >> c-span's washington journal live everyday with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up this morning, we talk about the 23% increase in the federal deficit since last year. then roll call house leadership reporter and an atlantic magazine white house corrpondent. watch c-span's washington journal live at 7:00 eastern this morning. join the discussion. >>