Roger Stone's Legal Threat Against Lauren Windsor Linked to Newly Published Secret Recordings
Undercover tapes reveal Stone discussing plans to challenge 2024 election results (VIDEO & TRANSCRIPT)
The motivation behind Roger Stone's legal threat against journalist Lauren Windsor has been called into question following the release of a bombshell new exclusive by Nikki McCann Ramirez at Rolling Stone.
The magazine's report features undercover audio recordings of Stone himself, captured by Windsor and her team at a Mar-a-Lago event in March of this year, in which he discusses plans to undermine the 2024 election and ensure a Trump victory by any means necessary.
This revelation sheds new light on Stone's potential reasons for threatening legal action against Windsor today, suggesting that his focus may not have been solely on her secret recordings of Supreme Court Justices Alito and Roberts, as I initially believed.
Instead, it appears that Stone's legal posturing may have been a preemptive attempt to discredit and intimidate Windsor and others who would write on this topic after he was asked for comment, but before the evidence of his own incendiary remarks could be made public.
In the newly released recordings, Stone can be heard discussing the Trump camp's "offensive footing" and their preparedness to challenge election results in November. He mentions having "lawyers, judges, [and] technology" at the ready, implying a coordinated effort to potentially subvert the will of the voters should the outcome not favor the former president.
The fact that these recordings were made in Florida, rather than Washington, D.C., where the Alito and Roberts tapes originated, and are not related to the Justices reduces complexity in the legal landscape surrounding Stone's threatened lawsuit. The applicability of Florida's two-party consent law and anti-SLAPP statute, previously discussed in the context of the D.C. recordings, now takes on renewed significance.
Furthermore, Stone's status as a prominent public figure, known for his involvement in the "Stop the Steal" movement and his history of political provocations, complicates his claim to an expectation of privacy. Much like Justices Alito and Roberts, Stone's influential position and notoriety make him a subject of valid public interest and journalistic scrutiny.
The content of the Mar-a-Lago recordings, which appear to expose a concerted effort to undermine the integrity of the electoral process, imbues Windsor's work with substantial public interest value.
If Stone and his associates are indeed planning to subvert the democratic process, as the tapes suggest, then bringing their actions to light becomes an essential act of journalism, one which clearly aligns with the core purpose of the First Amendment.
The content of these recordings (shown below) raises several red flags:
Plans to challenge election results: In both recordings, Stone discusses ongoing efforts to prepare for challenging the 2024 election results, particularly if the outcome is unfavorable to Trump. Stone mentions having "lawyers, judges, [and] technology" ready to "stop" alleged voter fraud or a "stolen" election. This suggests a coordinated effort to potentially undermine the electoral process and sow doubt about the legitimacy of the results.
Voter suppression tactics: Stone mentions efforts to change state laws, monitor voter lists in real-time, and file lawsuits to challenge voting laws. While some of these actions could be viewed as legitimate efforts to ensure election integrity, they can be more aptly interpreted within the greater context of Stone’s background and history in democratic subversion as attempts to suppress voter turnout or disenfranchise certain groups of voters.
Potential for violence: One of the undercover individuals in the recordings mentions being present at the Capitol on January 6 and expresses a willingness to "go back" if necessary. While Stone dismisses this suggestion by stating this “may not be necessary”, the way he worded his reply highlights the potential for election-related tensions to be forcibly escalated into violence as they were on January 6.
Increased RNC funding: Stone indicates that the Republican National Committee, now under the control of individuals aligned with their cause, will be spending significantly more money on election-related efforts. This raises questions about the nature and intent of these expenditures and whether they will be used to support legitimate election security measures or to fund activities aimed at undermining the electoral process.
VIDEO & TRANSCRIPT
Recording 1
LW: Do you mind taking a photo with me, Mr. Stone?
RS: Sure.
LW: You're in a position to know more than anybody else. How are you feeling about the election?
RS: Too early to say.
LW: Biden can't win again.
RS: No, but it can be stolen again.
LW: We're in a whole- but there's got to be something we can do to prevent that.
RS: We're working on that but I'm not just, I'm not saying that I'm totally confident yet, because I'm not. By the way, in 2020 only 65% of Evangelical Christians bothered to vote.
So when you tell people “oh we're doing great” then this (inaudible) thing. "I don't have to worry about voting". That's our biggest-overconfidence is one of our giant problems right now among our own people.
LW: but so what are we going to do to stop it though? Thank you.
RS: I'll tell you the same thing I told her (points to Ally) we're working on it. We're working on it: lawyers, judges, technology,
LW: Governors?
RS: Some. But there aren't many with any guts.
LW: We got to use every lever we can.
RS: we are doing that. All right, nice to meet you.
LW: You're doing the Lord's work.
RS: Thank you.
Recording 2
AS: hi, Roger I'm such a big fan of yours. Rs: thank you.
AS: I genuinely think you're an American Hero--
Woman: Hi, pleasure to meet you!
AS: Yeah yeah, I wanted to ask you, it's such an important election year, and I wanted to get your take on this.
AS: What are we going to do this election you know because Democrats stole it last time.
RS: Yes, but we're gonna, between now and then, we're going to work very hard and very smart to try to make sure that doesn't happen. So far, given the incredible power they have and they will use ruthlessly, we are beating them as of today. [How?] So in the end-
AS: How are we beating them? Because at this point-
RS: The President's trial in Georgia is falling apart. I think the Judge is on the verge of dismissing the charges against him in florida. They're delayed in New York City and they're now delayed in Washington.
RS: So it's not clear that they can have a trial before the election, which is the absolute key to being able to convince people that the reason we lost was 'cause of the trial. Right now if they steal it, people will say "well that's not possible. Trump was leading in all the polls"
RS: They want to try him, suck up his money, suck up his time, and create the reason why their theft is plausible, believable. You see?
AS: what stops them from just like-voter fraud? Like ballot harvesting.
RS: In some states it'll be easier to stop. In other places, it won't.
RS: But at least this time when they do it, you have a lawyer and a judge, his home phone number standing by so you can stop it. We made no preparations last time, none.
AS: Well, I was at the Capitol on January 6 so I'm prepared to go back.
RS: Well, that that may not be necessary. There are technical, legal steps that we have to take to try to have a more honest election. We're not there yet, but there are things that can be done.
AS: Llike what?
RS: I, it's a long conversation. I'm working with a team-
AS: I'm just frustrated -
RS: Changes in state law, real-time voter list monitoring, going to court as we just did to challenge some of the vote laws. The election is not tomorrow. We challenged, we went into court to sue in Michigan over the hand (written) ballots.
RS: Remember, the Republican National Committee raised $200 million and they didn't spend any of it to try to get cleaner elections, or to look at what happened last time. We now finally have control of that (mechanism). Don't be discouraged, we're going to win.
AS: So they're going to spend, the RNC is going to spend more money now that Lara-
RS: Far more.
Woman: Do you want to get a picture?
RS: It will be enough...
Woman: Do you want to get a picture?
RS: Sure.
While this story continues to develop, it showcases the high stakes involved in the struggle between those seeking to uphold the principles of democracy and those attempting to undermine them for political gain. Stone's legal threat against Windsor must be viewed within this broader context, as it appears to be an attempt to silence a journalist who has exposed the troubling intentions of those within the former president's orbit.
This story also highlights the vital role of legal protections such as anti-SLAPP laws for journalists and whistleblowers. During a time when powerful figures increasingly use the threat of litigation (and litigation itself) to intimidate and silence critics, safeguarding the right to report on matters of public concern is more crucial than ever.
It is essential to prioritize the public's right to know and to support the work of journalists like Lauren Windsor and Nikki McCann Ramírez who bravely seek to uncover the truth and hold those in power accountable.
The preservation of our democratic institutions depends on the unflinching pursuit of transparency and the exposure of efforts to subvert the will of the people.