Garland Nixon: We’ve got Michael Krieger, who is the founder …
Lee Stranahan: And Roger Stone.
Garland Nixon: Roger Stone. Well, Michael Krieger’s on now. Roger Stone is a coming.
Lee Stranahan: Is coming right there. Hey, Michael. How you doing this morning?
Michael Krieger: I’m good, guys. How are you guys?
Lee Stranahan: Doing great. Happy to have you with us as usual. Michael Krieger publishes Liberty Blitzkrieg. He is a real independent thinker with both a Wall Street background but a spicy independence streak. He’s one of the few people with a Wall Street background … I don’t know. Maybe a few. Who wants people put in jail for the banking crisis. Right, Michael?
Garland Nixon: I fear, based on his article, BitCoin isn’t the bubble the global financial system is. That he’s going to tell us that we’re in a world of deep and serious trouble.
Michael Krieger: Oh, yeah. Right. Right. Right. We could talk all about that, but yeah, nothing was … I wrote actually my first opinion piece for The Hill on BitCoin, and yeah, the whole premise of the article was taking to bat a lot of the meme that everyone in the media says that BitCoin is just to the bubble and it’s going to blow up in everyone’s faces an cause disaster. But my point is it’s not the real bubble. The real bubble is actually the entire global financial system itself based on $233 trillion of debt.
Lee Stranahan: Now, by the way, joining us now, Roger Stone. Hey, Roger. How you doing this morning?
Roger Stone: Morning. How are you?
Lee Stranahan: Good. Hey, thanks for joining us. We have Michael Krieger on the line as well to finish out the week. Hey, Roger, I wanted to talk to you about one story that you’ve actually been talking about for a long time, which is Steve Bannon. Now, Bannon had a pretty amazing meltdown in the past few months, and just in the past two weeks.
Garland Nixon: Precipitance fall.
Lee Stranahan: Yeah, precipitance fall. A Charlie Sheen like mind blowing meltdown. But I got to say, Roger, you were very critical on Bannon months ago while Bannon was still in the White House, and you and I have talked about this a little bit privately. But you were public about it as well. So give us your insight. You’ve known Steve a while. Give us your insight. What was Steve’s mistake? Let’s not talk about the recent ones. What was his mistake … What was going on in the White House that was getting you upset?
Roger Stone: Well, he was never willing to help other Trump supporters get inside the administration, not at the cabinet level, not at the White House staff level. By the way, just to be absolutely clear, not talking about me. I have no interest in returning to public service or government job having done that under Richard Nixon. But he made enormous promises but then he would never use any of his political juice. There was a period in which he had substantial sway to help other real, genuine, early Trump supporters get into the White House. Therefore, when he got into trouble, he had no allies. He found himself surrounded by many of the same globalists that he had helped get hired. It was Bannon who promoted General Kelly who now seeks to cut the President off from all conservative, alternative media. It was Bannon who helped H.R. McMaster get inside. Therefore, I think that was his greatest single failing.
Lee Stranahan: No, I agree. Also, I’ll point out, not just getting inside the administration but you and I had talked about this, he was very non-responsive even with allies. He did not build any kind of coalition. What I said was when you saw Stephen Miller and Julia Hahn, who was one of the top reporters at Breitbart according to Bannon, turn against him, and this was reported months ago. I knew it was over for Bannon at that point because Miller’s a natural ally.
Lee Stranahan: Now, let me ask you this, when you talk about globalists, Roger, what do you mean?
Roger Stone: I mean people who not believe in American exceptionalism, American sovereignty, people who would move us towards some kind of world government or regional government. Someone who believes that our first responsibility is to the world rather than to our country. I’m a firm believer in America first, yet Steve, for example, promoted the candidacy of Rex Tillerson, the candidate of Condoleezza Rice, who is today your in facto Secretary of State. She spends an awful lot of time at the state department for somebody whose not on the payroll. It is a world view that was dominate in the Bush and Clinton White Houses and Donald Trump’s is a rejection of all that. A rejection of the idea that we shouldn’t put American interests and America’s future first.
Lee Stranahan: Now, Michael, you’re not really on the right. How would you characterize yourself?
Michael Krieger: Yeah, if I had to describe my political philosophy I would say I’m sort of like a de-centralist or someone who thinks that power should be at the most local level possible, probably at the city level with anything, and grass roots should be driving all policy as opposed to, let’s say, technocracy or oligarchy. So I’m really just one of these people who believes that power should be distributed as much as possible, and the biggest danger to humans, the human race, the human species is centralized power.
Lee Stranahan: So what do you think about what Roger’s saying? Roger’s a well known conservative firebrand, and by the way, he’s got a number of books out, there’s a film, Get Me Roger Stone. Is that the film Roger?
Roger Stone: Yeah. A Netflix documentary made by three hippie, beatnik, left-wing weirdos, but not a bad film after all.
Garland Nixon: Hey, Roger. I’m a hippie, left-wing, beatnik weirdo.
Lee Stranahan: He does have short hair though, Roger. But, Michael, what do you think of what Roger’s talking about with his concerns about people like Condoleezza Rice being a big influence on the state department. Do you agree, disagree?
Michael Krieger: I mean, Nikki Haley. I mean, all these crazy people. I want to actually offer my own definition of globalist because I think it is important to talk about this, and people should sort of describe how they see it. As far as I’m concerned, if I use the term in a pejorative manner, I think it’s someone who believes in two things that I’m completely against from the core of my being. One is imperialism. In other words, that the U.S. should be an empire as opposed a republic. That’s what the U.S. is right now. The U.S. is a global empires. It’s focusing almost all of its resources, talents, and energies on the rest of the world, on micro-managing the rest of the world, on bossing around the rest of the world, on taking resources from the rest of the world as opposed to harvering our own creativity and talent that exists in this country of 325 million people. We have so much to offer. We have so much that we’ve built already over the course of several centuries, and we’re just wasting it completely. All our money, all our treasure, all our talents on stupid empire, which we should completely move away from. So that’s one aspect. I think all globalists believe in the U.S. empire.
Michael Krieger: Number two, they believe in this thing that, which I alluded to earlier, which is this technocracy, this idea that you want these philosopher kings or these enlightened academics to rule the society, to raise interest rates to slow down the economy, to lower interest rates to speed up the economy, to basically meddle in every little affair of the people because they know best. That’s completely the opposite of the sort of government that I believe in, which is government where people are, for the most part, communities and people are left to their own business to create the sorts of communities and regions that they want, and to live in the way that they want and to have these so called enlightened people, these technocrats bosses them around and telling them what they can do in every little thing in life, is, again, I believe a key tenant of the globalist philosophy.
Michael Krieger: So that’s how I see them, and of course international finance is a huge part of their power, global banking system, etc.
Garland Nixon: So, Roger, let me ask you this question, Roger. I’m interested. So Steven Bannon had this idea that he was going to run some kind of an outsider revolt against the party, and that seems to have fallen through. How do you think the dynamic changes now that Steve Bannon and his, I guess whatever he wanted to call it, a movement … Now that that’s how of the picture, how does that change what’s happening with the Republican party going into the midterms or does it change it?
Roger Stone: Well, unfortunately, it hurts the movement. I was in basic agreement with what Steve was trying to do. Although, I think the selection of candidates could have been much, much better. Now, for example, we see Vice President Pence going to Indiana to campaign for Senator Heller, a guy who has stuck his knife in the back of this administration every chance he’s had. Makes very little sense. I’m not one of those who goes by party first. I go by philosophy first. I agree with everything Mike has said about the globalist, does this make me a left-wing hippie, beatnik weirdo? No. I don’t think so. But the point, I guess, is that Bannon was on to something in terms of the need to remake the party in the image of nationalism, which I’m for. Putting American interests first, and above all, ignoring this idea that we know what’s best for the world. We should worry about our own country. Bringing prosperity and a fine education and real opportunity to every American as opposed to worrying about every other country in the world.
Lee Stranahan: Now, I also want to bring up something because I’m doing this thing that I was just talking about with Garland, the Sloppy Steve Spike-A-Thon this weekend. Where I’m going to be talking about all the stories that Breitbart killed.
Garland Nixon: Why’d that sound like a porno flick?
Lee Stranahan: It does, but …
Garland Nixon: It really does.
Lee Stranahan: It’s all the stories that they spiked of mine when I was at Breitbart.
Garland Nixon: Okay. I feel better now.
Lee Stranahan: It’s about 25 stories, but the day I quit Breitbart, I was going to ask a question in the White House about Crowdstrike. Roger, the reason I’m bringing this up is, and you’ll remember this, Roger Stone had submitted an article about Crowdstrike and the DNC stuff to Breitbart. You remember this, Roger? When they turned down that article?
Roger Stone: Oh, yes.
Lee Stranahan: So they had submitted an article. Roger had submitted an article, and the editor-in-chief Alex Marlow asked me, “Should we print it?” I said, “Well, it’s Roger Stone on an article on an issue that he’s directly …” This was after Adam Schiff had been attacking you too, Roger. So that was the other factor that made me quit Breitbart that day when I did is I said, “They’re shutting down my reporting on this story.” So have you had a difficult time getting your side out in the right-wing media? Have you noticed this is a trend at Breitbart that they seem unwilling to publish stories that I thought would appeal to their reader base?
Roger Stone: They had a great tendency to loiter everything to death. They would often call and ask for a story on a sharp basis. We need 300 words, 500 words. We need it by five o’clock today. You would bust your butt to get it out and it would never see the light of day. Fortunately, because I appear on and I write for Info Wars, I’ve had little problem and pretty much an open market there in terms of saying what I want to say and publicizing those points I want to publicize. But many times I could not understand why Breitbart rejected the things they did. I would write thing that would seemingly be within their mission but that they would reject. Certainly I would trend that quality of writing when you say that.
Lee Stranahan: Yeah. It was exactly. We had Katie McHugh on earlier in the week. This is exactly what I experienced at Breitbart over and over again, and I got to say, you mention Info Wars. Roger appears frequently in Info Wars. David McKnight from Info Wars has had me on a number of times. We don’t agree on everything, but it doesn’t make any difference. They let me say my peace. They let me do what I’m doing, and I’m critical of some of the stuff on Info Wars. I don’t agree with everybody over there, but I got to say they have given me the freedom to talk about stuff the same way we have here. Michael Krieger, you published Liberty Blitzkrieg, are you concerned about the way the new media, meet the new media same as the old media, are becoming censors on stories?
Michael Krieger: Yeah. You guys are going to be more familiar with this than I am, but I believe it was, was it, Mercer that owns a lot of Breitbart?
Garland Nixon: Yeah.
Lee Stranahan: Yes.
Lee Stranahan: He’s a big …
Michael Krieger: So here’s the thing, right? With everything, particularly with centralized things where there’s an owner or CEO or big investors, we really need to be smarter about just knowing every single media organization, who owns it, who have the interests, who are the editors, what do they believe. How did they get paid before. Stuff like that is really important because at the end of the day, human beings are running these things. I’m not going to get all the way on the BitCoin topic. But the reason I love BitCoin so much, again, is no one runs it. No one’s in control of it. There’s no agenda there. It’s code. That’s what’s great about it.
Lee Stranahan: And it’s a currency that directly I can send you money without going through a bank or a service or PayPal, correct?
Michael Krieger: Peer to peer. Yeah. It’s censor-less. You can’t censor it. Censorship resistant. So yeah, exactly. That’s what’s so amazing about it. Again, because there’s nobody that can make that call because it’s just code. No one can say, “Okay. Well, Lee, you’re a terrorist. So you can’t send money. You can’t send BitCoin to Michael.” They can’t do that. That’s the beauty. There’s no one to pressure. There’s no management. There’s no company. So this is, again, like we’ve discussed this, this is the world I want to see in the future. 25 years from now I want to wake up and be like, okay. The social media I’m using. This is open source code. Anyone can look at the code and see that there’s no shady stuff going on because you know for sure in Facebook and Google and Twitter, there’s shady stuff going on because the code is completely secret. So that’s part of the open source code movement, which I’m a big part of and believe strongly in.
Michael Krieger: But, anyway, not to get off topic. The point is this humans are humans. Humans have opinions. They have biases. They have financial interests. When they’re in charge of things, they’re going to exsert their interests. So yeah, it’s a fundamental problem though. So I guess my bigger point is you’re never going to solve that problem until you get rid of having to trust people or trust investors. You get to situations where platforms are truly “de-centralized” and open source where there’s no point of failure and there’s no one in charge. That’s the world that I want to see.
Lee Stranahan: We’re joined by Michael Krieger and Roger Stone. Now, Roger, you’re a small government conservative. So I assume issues like anti-trust, generally speaking, you don’t want to see the government involved in business, but you also have been banned from Twitter. You’ve been kicked off Twitter. So when you look at that, when you look at the power that Amazon has with their $600 million contract with the CIA and Bezos owning the Washington Post. When you look at the power that Google has and clearly Eric Schmidt, huge Hillary donor, involved in the campaign. When you look at this high tech mafia, I don’t know how else to put it, with Washington connections, does it concern you, and do you think anti-trust is needed?
Roger Stone: Enormously. Look, I think unfortunately it’s maybe time for Twitter to be regulated like a public utility. In my case, I just believe that I’m being held to a standard to guidelines on an inequitable basis. So you can have people like Keith Olbermann go on Twitter as the case be a violent assassination of the President, and that’s perfectly all right. He’s not banned. But I hurt Jake Tapper’s feelings and I’m banned in perpetuity. I am going to be suing Twitter along with a group of others in multiple jurisdictions on multiple grounds, and frankly, when you’re going to open them up or we’re going to take them down. One or the other. But either everyone will have access or no one will have access.
Roger Stone: Yesterday, somebody posing as me was posting that I delight in beating my dumb c-word of a wife. I have to put up with that kind of crap. So they not only ban the real Roger Stone, but they let fake Roger Stone’s come online and post things that are defamatory, ugly, and more pornographic than that. It’s intolerable and their time is coming. Interestingly enough, Facebook posts last night about their new guidelines and their community outreach, which is the exact opposite. They even say within the new published guidelines, “You’ll be seeing less news and more of what we want you to see.” It’s deeply, deeply disturbing.
Garland Nixon: You know, Michael, one of the things that I said is that Google and Facebook and Twitter have become kind of informal government of the internet where people have to go through there, pretty much go through there to get on them. They’re kind of like running the internet like a government that has no restrictions. What are your thoughts on that take?
Michael Krieger: Exactly. I mean, it’s the backdoor was of censorship because under the constitution, government cannot regulate speech but private companies can regulate speech. So the government then goes behind the scenes and says, “Look, when you’ve got,” I’ve been thinking a lot about this. When you’re worth $1 billion, you’re actually kind of a slave because at $1 billion, you’re a slave to the government, you’re a slave to … They can shut you down in a minute. They can take your money. So it’s actually not an ideal amount of money at all. So that’s what happens with these companies. They get so big, they get so power, the CEOs are so rich that they’re then they have to listen to government and do whatever government says. So government can censor the internet or social media via private companies getting the run around the first amendment.
Michael Krieger: But, again, this goes back to the key point that I just want to address again. The problem here is that companies and people should not have the power, right. Should not have the power in the first place to make these calls. So we need to move as Americans, as humans, to platforms that are de-centralized, that have no central authority that can make these calls. Again, similar to BitCoin. No one can stop anyone from sending money to anyone else using BitCoin. We need to get to a point where no one can censor anyone else’s speech. We all have a right to speak. That is a human right and we need to be able to express it.
Lee Stranahan: Michael Krieger at Hey, Roger, where can people find your stuff and your newsletter?
Roger Stone: Well, they can go to They can go to I’m now up on both Gab and Mimes. I continue to have a presence at Facebook. Don’t look for me at Twitter, however.
Lee Stranahan: You can’t find him at Twitter. Hey, Roger Stone and …
Garland Nixon: Michael Krieger from Liberty Blitzkrieg. Thanks a lot.