Beware of Roger Stone

Andrea writes:

“You of all people Jefferson Morley should understand exactly who and what Roger Stone is and you should also understand your personal responsibility to educate the facts of who and what he is .

Richard Nixon and Roger Stone

Richard Nixon and Roger Stone

“Those facts would include who funded him since the 70s and how he manipulated our political elections for those who funded him for decades .Those facts would include his work with Richard Scaife and The Heritage Foundation which was Reagan’s Brain Trust .
“Those facts would include his use of cut outs and new trained ratfuckers that he trained in the same manner that Murray Chotiner and Roy Cohn trained him .

“Cut outs like your first commenter here Robert Morrow who has worked with Roger Stone to discredit the legacy of John Kennedy for years now .
“After Stone’s lifetime career of sabotage . dirty tricks and lobbying on behalf of the wealthy interests you claim to call attention to you are now suggesting that he will encourage transparency for this research?
“After Roger Stone spent his life and used all of your social media forums to rewrite the facts of Watergate and joined with the hatchet men of that administration like Colson and Magruder to move forward and create the political arm of the Christian Right that just completed their goal of destroying both political parties you suggest that he will be on your side?
“I used to respect your work Jefferson and thought you knew better.”

13 comments

  1. Darwin says:

    Totally correct of course. Stone is the lowest form of scum. It calls into question everything Morley says that he supports this person.

    • jeffmorley says:

      I disagree. I didn’t endorse what Roger Stone has ever said or done. I accepted his support for a worthy public policy goal. If that helps the cause of full JFK disclosure in 2017, I welcome it.

      • Excellent response. For God’s sake people have to put their own partisan choices behind them relative to JFK research, else it will become totally contaminated with paranoia. People of all political persuasions should be invited to be interested in this most critical event of our time, and researchers especially must try to be totally objective. This is a murder investigation not a political or religious ranting opportunity.

    • jeffmorley says:

      I did not and do not “support” Roger Stone. I find his politics and political tactics repellent.
      I solicited him to sign the JFK authors and investigators letter calling on President Obama and President-Elect Trump to endorse and ensure full JFK disclosure in October 2017. My thinking is that Stone’s influence with Trump might help secure this goal. The fact that I solicited Stone does not mean that I agree with him. I disagree with many of the authors and investigators on their interpretation of November 22. I have the old-fashioned view that people who disagree can still work together to achieve common goals.
      I also elevated Andrea’s comment to a blog post, and not just a comment, because I wanted to make sure a lot of people saw it. I don’t agree with her but I want people to know the arguments against my position. That’s old-fashioned too, I suppose.

  2. Jim Rose says:

    Should ease off on Jeff. The study of JFK Assassination, CIA, etc. can often be a swamp. There are so many tricksters, hustlers and such involved in the area, but you have to engage because even these types can trip over something useful. It’s a tough job, but again, when you’re looking for the holy grail, you can leave no stone (pardon the pun) unturned.

  3. RonnieWayne says:

    Potential influence with Trump freeing the files if that’s what Stone Really want’s would be great. His not siding with the uninformed Warren Omission conclusion of no conspiracy does help focus attention on that fact (IMHO it’s a Fact). However, his ‘LBJ orchestrated it’ book may well be a false flag on behalf of the ongoing Operation Mockingbird.

    https://www.bing.com/search?q=oeration+mockingbird&form=PRUSEN&mkt=en-us&httpsmsn=1&refig=0c4fa07c064a4dbb8c43c6f18fce1526&sp=-1&pq=oeration+mockingbird&sc=8-20&qs=n&sk=&cvid=0c4fa07c064a4dbb8c43c6f18fce1526

    I hope any affiliation with Stone or Morrow does not tarnish JFK FACTS perception or image in regards to pursuit of the Truth.
    FREETHEFILES

  4. I ask again as I asked in our forum , in the spirit of fairness you approve the link to my response to your making my comment a blog post .
    If you decline to post the link to my rebuttal explaining why I made my original comment I will have to question your claims of transparency . I will be forced to conclude that you elevated my comment to a blog just to gain support from your readers for your personal side of the argument . I will be forced to conclude that you used my comment as bait as you said “where more people would see it ” If that is the case , Shame on you . https://www.facebook.com/groups/476526069213261/permalink/594509380748262/

    • jeffmorley says:

      Your post is published here. Your post will be published in the blog, just as your previous post was elevated. You, like John McAdams, still seem to be laboring under the profound misconception that I don’t publish posts because I disagree with them or because I seek advantage to curry favor with readers. In fact, I curry favor with readers by publishing all points of view. You are reading the proof. You seem eager to shame me but you have no reason to.

  5. derek says:

    Joan Mellen said Stone threatened her, i assume it was over the Mac Wallace/LBJ evidence or lack thereof. Stone has scant evidence to support his LBJ claims and his book is along the lines of Barr McClellan’s “faction” nonsense.

  6. John Rowell says:

    Let me try to be as transparent as possible for Mrs. Skolnick. I don’t care if Roger Stone stole the Limburgh baby. With regards to releasing the files, he and I share a common interest. With regards to quite literally everything else, we don’t. Why is this so confusing?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

In seeking to expand the range of informed debate about the events of 1963 and its aftermath, JFKFacts.org welcomes comments that are factual, engaging, and civil. more