Fox News' Tucker Carlson interviewed Roger Stone on Friday night following his arrest earlier that morning by FBI agents after being indicted in special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation.
"Stone has been indicted on seven counts: five counts of making false statements, one count of witness tampering, and one count of obstruction," The Daily Wire reported. "None of the charges include conspiring with Russian agents or WikiLeaks; instead, they are charges related to the process of the investigation, as is the case with most of the charges thus far brought by Mueller."
The FBI raid on Stone's home happened at approximately 6 a.m. and was recorded by CNN, who claimed that they were at the property because of their "reporter's instinct."
"First of all, it's disconcerting that CNN was aware that I would be arrested before my lawyers were informed," Stone told Carlson. "That's disturbing."
Stone highlighted multiple reasons that he believed that the raid was excessive use of force, including the fact that he was released just hours later on bond.
Immediately after being released on bond, Stone said that he would not testify against the president because that would require him to lie. Stone also denied working in any way with the Russians to help get Trump elected and also denied that anyone in the Trump campaign told him to contact WikiLeaks.
Full transcript provided via Fox News:
TUCKER CARLSON, FOX NEWS HOST: Roger Stone joins us tonight. He’s been in the news all day. He’s the author of new book called "The Myth of Russian Collusion".
Roger Stone, thank you for joining us.
ROGER STONE, POLITICAL CONSULTANT: Thank you. Good to be here, Tucker. I’m a little tired but I’m glad to be here.
CARLSON: So, just to get the mechanics of what happened this morning out of the way, we’ve seen the tapes by CNN, which remarkably was across the street from your house very early this morning. And we saw the very large number of armed federal agents bringing you out of the house.
Is there something we don't know? Do you have an arsenal at home? Had you made threats against prosecutors, threats of violence? I mean, is there context that we don't have?
STONE: No. First of all, it's disconcerting that CNN was aware that I would be arrested before my lawyers were informed. That's disturbing.
If it was a dangerous situation, which would merit the SWAT team, well then, CNN's camera men would be in danger. I don't know why they would be allowed to be there.
I had no firearm in the house. I don't have a permit for a firearm. I don't own a firearm. Only my wife, my two dogs and my three cats were at home.
I’m not a flight risk. In fact, I think my passport has expired or it will expire in a few days. I have no record of criminal past.
And, frankly, they just could have contacted my attorney and I would have voluntarily turned myself. In the proof of this is that, only hours later, the judge granted me a $250,000 surety bond, meaning on my signature with no funds put forward, because I’m not a flight risk.
And as far as the government's contention that they were concerned that I would destroy evidence, they have been in my email and my text messages and my phone calls for two years, probably longer because the "New York Times" reported on January 20th, '17 that I was among three people in the Trump campaign under active surveillance. Hopefully we will learn something about that in discovery of this case.
CARLSON: So, that’s actually -- that gets right to the heart of the charges against you which are primarily for lying to congress. One of the things you are accused of lying to Congress about is whether or not there was any evidence, you had evidence of communication between you and intermediary in Julian Assange.
Did you lie about that?
STONE: Yes, it --
CARLSON: And given that you knew they had your electronic communications and we know the answer already, wouldn't that be a stupid thing to lie about? What is this charge about?
STONE: Yes, indeed (ph). It's really simple.
I did forget that I had text messages from an old cell phone that were entirely exculpatory which proved that everything I had said about Credico being my source regarding the significance and the October release date of the WikiLeaks material was accurate. I believe he lied to the grand jury about that. That's been reported. But he appears not to be being prosecuted for perjury.
But, I forgot exculpatory information and, therefore, I will. If anybody had bothered to read my website, "The Stone Cold Truth", they would know that I basically refuted and documented the reputation of virtually every charge in this indictment. The indictment is thin, indeed.
So what is this about? It's about silencing me.
There is a war on alternative media. There is a war where they are trying to criminalize political expression. There is a war where they are trying to criminalize free speech.
The efforts to shut down my show at "Info Wars", the efforts to silence Alex Jones, who is one of my greatest supporters and proponents, are part of this war.
So, I intend to plead not guilty. I believe I will be vindicated.
It's funny to watch Preet Bharara on CNN say this is a slam dunk, calls me a liar. Here is a guy who a federal judge lashed for lying in the William Walton case. You are the liar, Preet.
So, and then, watching reporters jump to conclusions, Tucker, and say, oh, well, the Trump campaign official who directed Stone to find out about WikiLeaks was Donald Trump. No, it was not. There are several things in here in the indictment that are simply not true.
CARLSON: So, who was it if it wasn't the president? Who is that official?
STONE: Well, I have to speculate about that because -- since it never happened, it appears to me that they have composed testimony for someone. Perhaps Rick Gates, perhaps Steve Bannon. Perhaps someone is bearing false witness against me.
But, knowing what's in my email, and my text messages, there is no corroboration whatsoever for this. And as for my email exchange with Steve Bannon, everything I told him in the exchange was publicly reported information.
"Politico" reported that after Assange announced on October 1st that he had nothing that day but would have releases every week for the next 10 weeks and that all information on the election -- pertaining to the election would be released in the weeks before the election. That was public information. And it had also been reported that Assange had security concerns that day.
So, the two things I told Bannon were public information, not the slightest bit controversial. As for the claim that --
CARLSON: When and how did you learn that WikiLeaks had these stolen emails?
STONE: When Julian Assange said it on CNN on July 22nd, 2016, and then repeated it on FOX on August 24th. This was not a state secret.
Randy Credico was the source who told me the material was insignificant, dynamite, a bombshell and so on, and that it would be released in October. There is also, I think, a reference to Dr. Corsi in here, Dr. Jerome Corsi, who told me in an email when he was in Italy August 2nd that the WikiLeaks disclosure would come thereafter and there’d be another one immediately after that in August. That all turned out to be incorrect.
So there is no evidence that I received anything whatsoever from WikiLeaks, that I knew the subject or the content of this material.
CARLSON: Right, well, I mean, that’s --
STONE: This is being used to silence me.
CARLSON: That allegation is not -- that’s not even in here. The allegation as far as I can tell from reading it is that you lied to this congressional committee.
Have you spoken to the president about this?
STONE: I have not. But, again, if you watch CNN or MSNBC, you wouldn't know that because they act as if -- Stone acted as the conduit between the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks or between Donald Trump and WikiLeaks.
When the president answered the written interrogatories, he correctly and honestly said Roger Stone and I never discussed this and we never did.
CARLSON: So, it's clear, I mean, it's clear from reading the indictment and you have been saying it for at least a year, that the feds were spying on your texts.
STONE: There’s no question about it. There is no question about it.
CARLSON: I agree, based on the indictment that they released today. So, given that they are reading all of your texts, you text with a huge, I happen to know a huge number of journalists, including me, and some of them work for CNN. Even, maybe. All of those texts were being read by a federal prosecutor.
What do you think those journalists, some of whom are talking about this case right now on TV, think of that?
STONE: You know, that's the amazing thing is the press is not coming out and standing up against this war against free expression, this war against the First Amendment, which is really a war against the press.
Look, Tucker, I think we both know the game here. Wear Stone down financially, make sure he is broke so that he has to plead guilty to these charges, even though he didn't commit them. And then try to flip me against the president.
I’m facing $2 million now in potential legal fees. People can go to Stonedefensefund.com to help me. Stonedefensefund.com.
I’m in for the fight of my life. But I will not quit. I will not fold. I will not bend. I will not bear false witness against the president.
I intend to fight because this indictment is fabricated. This indictment is thin as can be. My attorneys are highly confident that they can win an acquittal if I can get a fair trial in the District of Columbia.
CARLSON: What are the potential consequences you face? What are your lawyers telling you they believe prosecutors will push for in terms of the sentence?
STONE: It's impossible to say. They have not yet had discussion.
The only other thing I do want to say is the FBI agents this morning were extraordinarily courteous after the initial confrontation in which I was handcuffed but I was then taken to the federal courthouse where I was shackled, hand and foot and went through -- had to sit in the holding cell before the judge. The judge was eminently fair issuing bond.
I’m restricted in my travel. I can only travel to the District of Columbia, New York City and southern Florida. But I’m not a flight risk. I’m 66 years old and I’m essentially broke since the leaks from the special counsel's office over the last two years have dried up my consulting business, since the censorship and shadow banning on Facebook have substantially dried up my book sales.
As you know I had to end my life and health insurance in December because I couldn't meet the premiums anymore. Every dollar I scrape up has to go to this fight but, still, I fight on.
TUCKER: I mean, do you notice a theme here? It seems like everyone who gets ground up in the gears of this investigation lacks the resources to really fight back. I mean, I noticed that no one -- Podesta has been pulled into this. But it's you who can't afford health insurance. It’s Papadopoulos who seems broke, Carter Page.
Who do you expect the prosecutor will indict next if anyone? Where is this going?
STONE: Well, I have no idea. They seem to be in hot pursuit of Dr. Jerry Corsi. Dr. Corsi said a number of things about me that are not true but he says he won't testify against the president.
I have the emails and text messages and metadata to prove that many of the allegations he has made against me are not true. But he clearly has referred to blindly, of course, in this indictment.
CARLSON: I mean, just take three steps back. Who cares? No offense to Jerome Corsi. He seems like a nice guy. But does anyone in America believe that Jerome Corsi is in any way, or any sense of threat to America's national security, our way of life or democracy? I mean, is he? That seems crazy.
STONE: I don’t think -- I don't think so, nor I do think that political or journalistic inquiry regarding what the topic of the WikiLeaks disclosure is should be criminalized. I never received any purloined material.
No, I never knew that John Podesta's emails had been stolen in advance and my tweet is not in reference to that. And research memo that Jerry Corsi wrote me regarding the Podesta's extensive and lucrative business dealings in Russia is not part of a cover-up because no cover-up was required. So --
CARLSON: So, let me ask you the last question. When you watch the clip that we played, I don't know if you had time to watch the coverage of you on television today or you read the Internet and see people cheering for you to get raped in prison or people celebrating your indictment, what do you make of that? Where does that come from?
STONE: Well, I must tell you, we're in a very bad place in terms of our politics. I get four or five death threats a week. I can't go out to a public restaurant or an airport or travel by myself now because people want to mix it up. They don't want to just yell at you. Some of them want to take a swing at you.
You know, I don't feel that way about them. I disagree with them, but I’m not for violence. I don't think violence solves anything.
CARLSON: I agree.
STONE: So, it means, again, now I need security for my family, for myself and that costs money, which is why I have asked the public for help.
CARLSON: Roger stone, we’ll be following it. Thanks for coming on.
STONE: Thank you very much. Thank you, Tucker.