The statement came while being interviewed by Alex Jones at InfoWars.com following statements by Trump’s campaign manager Kellyanne Conway.
“I think when the President-elect, who’s also the head of your party, tells you before he’s even inaugurated that he doesn’t wish to pursue these charges, it sends a very strong message, tone, and content to the members,” Conway said. “And I think Hillary Clinton still has to face the fact that the majority of Americans don’t find her to be honest and trustworthy. But if Donald Trump can help her heal, then perhaps that is a good thing.”
She then added, “Look, I think, he’s thinking of many different things as he prepares to become the president of the United States, and things that sound like the campaign aren’t among them.”
Those statements followed Trump’s claim on 60 Minutes that the former “Crooked Hillary” was now “very strong and very smart.” He went on to say that the Clintons were “a very talented family” and when asked if he was actually going to appoint a special prosecutor as he promised the people of America, he said that “they’re good people” and he doesn’t “want to hurt them.”
Now, to many listening to this, it sounds exactly like he’s backing off his promise to do what he said and the statements sound eerily close to those he made about the Clintons prior to running for president.
However, some have theorized that he is playing nice and not showing all his cards till he gets in office. One of my friends actually theorized that Trump was keeping Obama at bay for granting Hillary Clinton a pardon, even though he said he could not point to a single time a pardon had been given to someone who had not be convicted of a crime.
Mr. Stone has been following all of this and responded by saying that he was “somewhat stunned and hopeful” that Conway is just incorrect in what she is saying.
“This is not a question immediately for the president,” he said. “It’s a question for the grand jury and either we are a nation of laws or a nation of men.”
“We were told over and over again during Watergate that no person was above the law,” he added. “In all honesty, the criminality of the Clintons is such that we don’t even have a full catalog of the crimes for which they could be prosecuted.”
“It dwarfs Nixon,” interjected Jones.
“Correct,” Stone affirmed.
Stone then blasted the claim by FBI Director James Comey that the 650,000 emails the FBI retrieved doesn’t contain any damning evidence is false.
Stone believes, as I do, that a special independent prosecutor must look at the Clinton Foundation, the email scandal (which we have already been told by Comey she is guilty of violating law on), and the 650,000 Weiner/Huma emails found on his computer to determine whether charges should be brought. Again, Comey has already declared she violated federal law, but decided not to recommend prosecution. That’s probably because he has made millions in his ties to Clinton Foundation donors.
On his website, Stone commented, “Now that Trump has been elected there is much pressure on him to back off his pledge in the second debate to ensure that Hillary and her husband are prosecuted for the multiple crimes they have committed while in government. Some in the Republican establishment are calling on Trump to give the Clintons a pass in the interest in healing the country after a divisive election. Failure to turn all evidence regarding the Clinton’s corruption at the Clinton’s foundation, the Clinton global initiative and in their personal financial dealings should be reviewed by a special prosecutor appointed by Trump’s Attorney General.”
“The failure to prosecute the Clintons would be yet another example of neat deviants; a phenomena under which some people are so connected, so powerful or so wealthy that the law does not apply to them,” he continued. “President-elect Trump will lose substantial credibility and support amongst his based voters if he gives in the siren songs of Washington telling him the Clintons should cop a walk.”
While some say this is an issue for the Attorney General, and I do agree to an extent, the Constitution clearly puts this issue on the shoulders of the president. Article II, Section 3 of the US Constitution charges that the duty of the president is to take care that the laws be faithfully executed. After all, he is the chief executive law enforcer.
So, when someone tells me it isn’t his job, I merely point to the job requirements of the Constitution. I hope he will follow through.