In the 40 years I have been in American politics I have encountered more than my share of fake news peddlers — poseurs who fancy themselves reporters but are, in reality, bent on twisting the truth and propagating falsehoods to serve ulterior (partisan) agendas. I am hard-pressed to recall one who better fits this description than Shelby Holliday of the once great Wall Street Journal.

Holliday’s selective coverage of small slices of the nonstop stream of false accusations against me, repetitively recycled over dozens of months through fake news media outlets from CNN to MSNBC to the New York Times and the Washington Post, makes it clear that Holliday is nothing close to an objective journalist.

A more accurate description for Holliday would be mouthpiece for the most deceitful manipulator and slimy demagogue in American politics today, the execrable Adam Schiff — the Democrats’ Russian collusion hoaxster extraordinaire.

In her April 2, 2018 WSJ article “Roger Stone’s Claim of a 2016 Julian Assange Meeting Draws Scrutiny”, which promoted the sophomoric Wikileaks-Assange angle of the collusion hoax, Holliday ignored all contrary facts and omitted any fair rebuttal from me, to falsely portray my House Intelligence Committee testimony about the confirming source I had for Julian Assange’s stunning June 2016 revelation on CNN that he had obtained and would publish bombshell e-mails concerning Hillary Clinton.

In short, Holliday’s entire story was essentially a spin-off of Adam Schiff’s fraudulent narrative casting my testimony as somehow incomplete or in some way not truthful, while pushing the absurd parallel narrative that my completely-sarcastic offhanded quip about “dining with Assange” was actually some sort of clue that I had, in fact, actually dined with political prisoner Julian Assange.

(I don’t even want to revisit just how epically-ludicrous (and utterly-humorless) that whole media-manufactured faux-controversy was. It was quite an insight into how badly the partisan corporate media has become either 1) utterly dense beyond any logical reasoning and common sense, or just 2) cynically hyper-literal wherever it suits their mania to rake muck from a puddle, seizing on literally anything they can, no matter how supercilious, to contort, distort and blow it up into fodder for a faux-serious wave of concern trolling and fake news.)

Out of Schiff’s vast portfolio of deceitful claims, this particular subcategory involves his false accusations first that I didn’t answer all the questions the Intelligence Committee asked of me because I didn’t initially provide the identity of my confirming source, Randy Credico; second, that my answers about my confirming source were not truthful because Credico flatly denied being the source; and third, that my testimony was not truthful, based on Credico’s claim that he did not actually meet Assange himself until a couple of weeks after my initial statements in August 2016 about having a backchannel to Wikileaks.

Schiff’s claims had no basis other than Schiff’s own say-so and the dodgy, shifting denials of Randy Credico himself.  These are not exactly pillars of credibility that anyone would want to bet the farm on.

Schiff has been a mindless robotic Clinton sycophant and apologist for as long as he has been in politics. Widely-reviled as a smug, self-serving leaker and serial fabricator of false claims and factual distortions in service to his dogmatic partisan zealotry, Schiff’s M.O. is to leak cherry-picked half-truths and then blow them up into an exaggerated melodrama that propagates his deceitful manipulations and cynical spin doctoring.

As for Credico, he refused to testify to the Intelligence Committee, or any other investigative entities, on the basis that he might incriminate himself by doing so. Credico’s statements about Wikileaks and me have been all over the map, many just plain incomprehensible and all of them evasive, at minimum. I have covered all of the facts concerning Credico and me, ad nauseum, on my own website. Notably, Holliday has reported that Credico, after first refusing to testify anywhere, has now rushed into the eagerly-awaiting arms of Intelligence Committee Democrats.

In contrast to these two, I voluntarily testified, under oath, for hours before the House Intelligence Committee. My testimony was completely responsive and entirely-truthful in all respects, and any claims to the contrary, such as have been spread around by certain Democrat members of the committee via their fellow traveler fake news media, are flatly false.

My testimony was not only factually-true, it is also wholly-consistent with every public statement I have made and every interview answer I have given since this defamatory faux scandal was first hatched out of the diseased power-crazed minds of John Podesta, Adam Schiff and other professional prevaricators doing the bidding of the Clinton Crime Family.

When the facts around Credico as my Wikileaks back channel finally came to light, the fake news narrative that Holliday had been peddling was shown to be no more than a pack of lies assembled by Schiff and enabled by Credico.

Despite the House Intelligence Committee’s closing of its investigation, having found no evidence to support the Democrat’s profane Russian collusion hoax, the deceitful vendetta-driven Democrats nonetheless labor on mightily, in hopes of re-inflating their collapsing collusion hoax narrative to further distract the public from the now-apparent Obama-Clinton-Brennan-Clapper-Comey-McCabe national security crimes.

The truth of the matter is that Schiff simply lied about my testimony, and continues to do so on national television on a regular basis. As to the first accusation that I did not answer fully in my testimony, Schiff omitted the key fact that the sole answer I declined to provide during my testimony – the identity of Credico as my confirming source  – was subsequently supplied to the Committee by my attorneys, at the urging of Congressman Trey Gowdy and other Committee Republicans.

My only reason for not initially providing this one, single answer, out of scores of questions put to me, was fear of reprisal against Credico for his involvement with Wikileaks. This attempt to protect my source from vindictive harm was nullified by the same people (Committee Democrats) to whom Randy Credico now (quite insanely) trusts his fate.

After my attorneys supplied Credico’s name to the Committee, head Democrat intelligence-leaker Adam Schiff promptly leaked Credico’s identity to his eager media lapdogs and, as I had feared would happen, Credico was immediately and summarily fired from his job as a talk show host at New York’s WBAI radio.

The truth of the matter is that Credico’s claims that he was not my confirming source have been belied by his own explicit admissions, now verified on record by the individuals to whom he made them. This is detailed in an interview Credico gave to longstanding progressive website ArtVoice, and further confirmed in recorded statements straight from Credico’s own mouth, now posted on the internet.

The truth of the matter is that Credico’s attempts to bolster his denials that he was my confirming source, saying he did not meet Assange until weeks after my first public revelation of having a Wikileaks back channel, were intentionally-misleading.

Credico conveniently omitted the critical fact that he had a 30-year relationship with a lawyer whom he told me worked for WikiLeaks.  In fact, Shelby Holliday’s latest WSJ story on emails between Credico and me, clearly show Credico referring to lawyers for Wikileaks as his source, not Assange himself.  At the time Credico was my source I simply assumed that Asssange was his source, based on Credico’s own boastings.

The upshot of all this is that Shelby Holliday, after obediently reporting these distortions, took absolutely no interest in numerous efforts I made with her to clarify these facts and dispel the underhanded manipulations engineered by Adam Schiff, using Randy Credico.

Holliday purposefully ignored an on-the-record statement by movie producer David Lugo (of the film A Good American, which chronicles the revelations of patriotic NSA whistleblower William Binney) that Credico  admitted to Lugo that Credico was indeed my confirming source.

Holliday also disregarded Credico’s ArtVoice interview and even the video of Credico himself admitting he was my source. Rather than correct the record, though, and report the truth, Holliday instead simply left standing the false Schiff narrative she had so eagerly published.

Holliday is also the reporter who actually said with a straight face on national television, after I debunked her report that I had dined with Assange on August 9th, producing my passport along with airline and hotel records to show I was in Los Angeles at the time,  that perhaps I had ‘dined’ with Assange via Skype — an assertion that is so laughably-ludicrous in itself that it blows Ms. Holliday’s credibility clean out of the water.

Holliday has now reported facts in a new WSJ story that confirm everything I have said all along. Naturally and quite expectedly, the story is framed as disingenuously as possible to further Holliday’s serial repetition of Adam Schiff’s bogus evolving narrative that continues his campaign to constantly cast false suspicion on me.

The story is misleadingly titled: “Roger Stone Sought Information on Clinton From Assange, Emails Show.”  Based on its contents, a truthful title for the story would be “Roger Stone Sought Confirmation of Clinton Libya Misdeeds from Journalist Connected to Wikileaks, Emails Show.”  Holliday proves that if you can’t make fake news, make fake news headlines.

Notwithstanding her attempt to shoehorn the Schiff-manufactured distortions into it, Holliday’s story not only demolishes all of her own deceptive reporting from April 2, and does so using materials provided by her own source, the hapless Randy Credico, but it actually validates and reinforces what I have said from the very beginning: that my only connection to Wikileaks was through an intermediary and that my only interest was as a journalist seeking to confirm information which I intended ultimately to publish on my own site and also report on InfoWars.

The emails covered in Holliday’s piece reveal my inquiries to Credico about whether or not Wikileaks might have any specific information pertaining to the fall of Libyan leader Moammar Qaddafi. At the time I asked for this information, I was, as any journalist would, exploring a claim by Reverend R.K. Paul, an evangelist and sometime rogue, that he and Congressman Walter Fauntroy, Jr., formerly Chairman of the House Banking Committee, had negotiated an agreement of terms for the Libyan strongman to abdicate power and flee the country with his life. Paul had also insisted that Congressman Dennis Kucinich was aware of these developments and their gestation.

According to Reverend Paul, he and Fauntroy had a phone conversation with General Wesley Clark about this agreement with Qaddafi, a call into which Secretary of State Hillary Clinton herself had been patched so she could sign off on the deal. In fact, Dr. Paul produced a document signed by Qaddafi himself, which appeared to be authentic. The story would have been, and still would be, a blockbuster, if verified.

Paul’s version of events was also confirmed by Fauntroy, who had endured a period of years “on the lam” after being tipped off that his knowledge of the Clinton-Qaddafi deal had marked him for assassination by the British intelligence service MI6. Fauntroy had previously been convicted of and served his time for passing a bad check, but had been continuing his work in the community at the time he resurfaced in the United States.

Of course, I knew I needed more evidence to confirm this story before I could write and broadcast it on the Stone Cold Truth or Infowars. So I certainly did prevail upon Randy Credico to find out if Wikileaks might be in possession of any documents that might do so.

These inquiries to Credico were in September, after Credico had interviewed Assange on his WBAI radio show in late August 2016. His Assange interview had undeniably confirmed my belief that my prognostications concerning coming Wikileaks email releases, per Credico’s confirmation, were in fact valid.

Returning to the larger picture, the phony Schiff-Holliday narrative casting me as some sort of murky agent of foreign collusion, playing fast and loose with the truth, has once again been demolished. Holliday did not succeed in her efforts to insinuate Schiff into the story to torture the facts, cast me in a false light and perpetuate some sort of generalized suspicion around me using Schiff’s duplicitous distortions.

Like Holliday’s selective reporting and factual omissions, Schiff’s serial lies and his campaign of defamation against me have been consistently debunked.  Once the truth and the facts come out, Adam Schiff’s deceptive cherry-picked leaks and maliciously-false accusations are invariably obliterated. Unfortunately, Schiff is a bottomless fount of deceit and manipulation so as soon as one set of lies is debunked he typically has a new concoction ready to roll out, though they are becoming increasingly bizarre and attenuated.

[I will take this opportunity to repeat my demand that California U.S. Representative Adam B. Schiff put his money where his big, slanderous mouth is and waive the Congressional immunity that he has grotesquely and cynically abused, to an arguably-criminal extent, as illegitimate cover for a systematic defamation campaign intended to inflict maximum damage to me and my livelihood.

Schiff’s campaign of baseless accusations and serial fabrications about me has become so ruthless in its tenor that it can no longer be explained away as merely some misguided partisan inquisition. No, Schiff’s slithery machinations are now decidedly in the realm of a malicious, maniacal, purposeful vendetta.

Waive your immunity, Mr. Schiff, ex-attorney and supposed former “prosecutor.” Let us have an impartial trier of fact decide if your constantly-schiffting narrative and false claims can be defended against my well-founded legal claims against you for damages and any other forms of judicial relief I can obtain.

Stop cowering behind the extraordinary legal protections afforded you by the public office with which you have been entrusted. It is high time for you to face the music in a forum where facts matter, evidence is required and your damn lies would constitute perjury.]

The facts now coming out (a bit too slowly from my view given the Democrats’ ongoing torrent of manufactured distortions about me) now conclusively prove the truth of the matter, as I have long stated: that my only relation to Assange or Wikileaks was merely as a journalist and broadcaster seeking to confirm information through another journalist and broadcaster, whom I believed had access to sources in the Wikileaks organization.

It is also noteworthy that Ms. Holliday’s reporting on emails between Credico and me shows that I  repeatedly pestered Randy Credico for confirmation about whether or not Wikileaks had information relevant to a potentially-explosive news story I was developing. The fact of this alone definitively militates against Adam Schiff’s and his media cohorts’ constant false light insinuations, amplified by the Democrat left’s media lynch mob, that I was somehow collaborating, working with or otherwise connected to Wikileaks or other nebulous forces of “Russian collusion” allegedly involved in the alleged DNC data hacking.

No one who could rely on any other source on the face of this earth would voluntarily or needlessly subject themselves to Randy Credico, as I had to do in trying to confirm information about a relevant, timely news story I was working at the time.

Given Credico’s shabby conduct and unstable, often-crazed persona, I might well have beelined directly to Wikileaks, and in a heartbeat, had I even a remote possibility of confirming the story I was developing by directly contacting them to inquire about the information I sought. I imagine such a risk might actually be worth taking if it meant not having to deal with Credico and his antics.

But the fact is that I did not and never had any direct contact or direct information from Wikileaks about any of their disclosures in the 2016 election. Such a connection simply never existed, no matter how far and how wide Adam Schiff lies about it to the contrary. And now this is further confirmed thanks to the emails Randy Credico provided the Wall Street Journal.

In retrospect, I wish the House Intelligence Committee’s request for documents had, in fact, inhered these particular emails because disclosing them last summer might well have spared me the subsequent months I have had to endure of being framed and defamed by duplicitous clownish partisan hoaxmaster Adam Schiff.

As for the fake news specialist, Ms. Holliday, it is clear she has no interest in letting facts or the truth get in the way of the phony narrative regularly supplied to her by Adam Schiff, lest it get in the way of a good fake news story — one from which the self-promoting wannabe journalist might actually score an invitation to go on one of the attack media programs to repeat her fake news lies to a nodding panel of Russian collusion fantasists.

Shelby Holliday epitomizes the fake news peddler, but now she is just plain busted. I suspect that having her work disintegrate as true facts emerge will not deter Holliday from continuing to pursue her ulterior agenda of serving as one of Adam Schiff’s media mouthpieces.

In fact, I would bet that Ms. Holliday will be promptly rewarded with an invitation to appear on MSNBC, where bullschiff like hers has been raised to an art form.