Mueller Doesn't Need Or Want Roger Stone As A Cooperating Witness

photo by David Keith

This morning after being asked by George Stephanopolous on “This Week if he'd cooperate with Mueller's investigation, this was Roger Stone's response: "You know, that’s a question I would have to... I have to determine after my attorneys have some discussion. If there’s wrongdoing by other people in the campaign that I know about, which I know of none, but if there is I would certainly testify honestly. I’d also testify honestly about any other matter, including any communications with the president. It’s true that we spoke on the phone, but those communications are political in nature, they’re benign, and there is... there is certainly no conspiracy with Russia. The president’s right, there is no Russia collusion."

Stephanopolous also had Chris Christie on as a guest this morning and asked his what he thought of Stone having characterized the indictment as "thin." Christie disagreed: "The fact of the matter is that every white-collar defendant in this circumstance, when they’re confronted with a bunch of documents of their own making, tries to say that they’re out of context. If I had a nickel for every time I had a defendant tell me when I was U.S. attorney that something was out of context, I’d be a rich guy and I’m not. The fact is that he's got a problem, because they've got all these e-mails and text messages that he created, that tell a pretty clear story and I think it’s going to be very difficult for a jury to listen to that and conclude that it wasn’t what he was trying to do."

On Saturday, former federal prosecutor Peter Zeidenberg (deputy special counsel in the Scooter Libby case), reporting for the Daily Beast, writer that the case against Stone is a slam-dunk and that no one believes anything he says so he'd be useless as a cooperating source. Short of a presidential pardon, he foresees Stone spending a long time in prison.

Unfortunately for Stone, and what makes fighting this case futile, is that the government will not need to rely on the credibility of any individuals to make its case. The email and text evidence laid out in excruciating detail in the indictment is not open to interpretation. Just one example: on the very day that Stone testified that he had never sent or received emails or text messages from Credico, the two men had exchanged more than 30 text messages. Good luck spinning that.

And if that were not enough-- and believe me, it is-- the case will be tried in D.C. There is a facile critique that liberals are soft on crime. That can be true where the defendants are perceived to be from a disadvantaged minority. But have pity on an arrogant, white-collar defendant who is in cahoots with a despised Republican president; you will witness righteous fury. The venire in D.C. reviles Trump, and they will find Stone loathsome. The only contentiousness will be during jury selection, as the potential jurors all fight to be chosen so they can “do justice.”

Finally, do not expect to see special counsel Robert Mueller make any attempt to flip Stone and have him cooperate. A defendant like Stone is far more trouble than he is worth to a prosecutor. Stone is too untrustworthy for a prosecutor to ever rely upon. He has told so many documented lies, and bragged so often about his dirty tricks, that he simply has too much baggage to deal with even if here to want to cooperate-- which seems unlikely in any event. Mueller, I suspect, would not even be willing to engage in a preliminary debrief with Stone to just test the possibility of cooperation out of concern that Stone would immediately go on television with his pals at Fox News to decry Mueller’s Gestapo tactics.

In short, Mueller does not need Stone to get to someone else and, even if he did, he could not rely on whatever Stone told him. Stone has nothing to sell that Mueller would be interested in buying.

Stone is clearly enjoying being in the spotlight now. He should enjoy it while he can. His remaining years won’t be nearly as pleasant.