Roger Stone Arrested For Prole Gape, Will Plead Collar Roll Defense

Political operative and clotheshorse Roger Stone was arrested this morning in the Mueller investigation. His coat did not lie flat against the back of his neck, possibly caused by posture issues due to a tattoo of Richard Nixon on his back. His lawyer plans to mount the negligent collar defense.

In spring 2017 contributing writer Eric Twardzik scored an exclusive interview with Mr. Stone for Ivy Style. Have a fresh look at it here. For more on Stone and the charges against him, visit Politico. — CC

57 Comments on "Roger Stone Arrested For Prole Gape, Will Plead Collar Roll Defense"

  1. Michael Brady | January 25, 2019 at 11:32 am |

    That toupe’ alone is grounds for indictment.

  2. You’re a creepy weirdo, VEA, you just haven’t been arrested yet.

  3. Charlottesville | January 25, 2019 at 11:46 am |

    @Steely Dan in a 2018 comment on the interview linked to above asked whether Brooks Brothers makes orange jump suits, noting that Roger may soon need one. Perhaps a prophetic statement.

  4. I’m getting sick and tired of this website’s obsession with conservative politicians! Or is it old school Democrats? I can’t remember if I’m supposed to be outraged by the appearance of WFB or JFK.

  5. Godspeed, Mr. Stone.

    AEV, do you make a living off of leaving nasty comments on online forums?

  6. CC, I guessed you would use “Feds collar Stone. Will he roll over on Trump?”

    As I’ve mentioned before, I’m a long-time political consultant, and Republican operatives have told me many a tale about him — especially when he and Paul Manafort were partners in a firm with Charlie Black. Their current legal difficulties are fitting codas for two men who are lower than a rattlesnake’s belly.

  7. No, something far dirtier.

  8. Extra charges for the hair and spray tan.

  9. At least VEA doesn’t have a fetish for drinking women’s bathwater like you do, Captain Obvious. Probably something you and known degenerate Roger Stone have in common.

  10. Old School Tie | January 25, 2019 at 1:07 pm |

    Wow! Reverse roots. Never seen that before….

  11. Those plugs are deplorable.

  12. You may address me as Oh Captain, My Captain.

  13. I am convinced that this whole story was arranged by Stone himself, a flamboyant attention-grabbing entertainer just like Trump. He has been goading authorities into apprehending him for months, and then when it happens the press is lying in wait to film it? For goodness sake, a men’s fashion blog is remarking on the story! Stone is a fascinating master of generating publicity. The new Zsa Zsa Gabor’s of Instagram have nothing on him.

  14. whiskeydent | January 25, 2019 at 2:51 pm |

    @Jerry
    If the reports about the evidence are true, he’s going to have a hard time dodging his own bullet.

  15. Someone call the fashion police! Slap some cuffs on him (one and five eighths inches).

    Whatever you think of Roger Stone’s ethics, his style was unimpeachable.

  16. “Prole gape” notwithstanding, I think the coat, shirt and tie combination look great. I think he is thoroughly enjoying the attention he is getting and will come out of this unscathed. The nineteen armored SUVs and twenty something heavily armed agents were definitely necessary for such a hardened criminal as Mr. Stone and his wife and dog. Preposterous. Would the same use of force be used for a serious criminal? I wonder.

    Disgusted in Virginia,

    Will

  17. Jonathan Wertheim | January 25, 2019 at 5:26 pm |

    @sacksuit – Well, the police didn’t shoot him on sight, and he has actually been charged with crimes, so I guess white privilege counts for something.

    The tasteful thing to do would have been to forget Ivy Style ever had anything to do with this hack. Whether you prefer Buckley or Kennedy, this gaudy, spray-tanned, The Penguin-meets-Gentleman’s Gazette #menswear wannabe is beneath all of us. Godspeed, indeed. Right into a minimum security prison.

    It’s no secret this site leans to the right (as much as Caustic Man is correct that the trolls come out of the woodwork for either side of the aisle). Just look at the number of comments on the two MLK day posts – not many compared to, well, literally any other post. But this is just pandering. Stone isn’t Ivy and shouldn’t be elevated by a site that at least pretends to keep the style’s banner flying.

  18. Caustic Man | January 25, 2019 at 5:58 pm |

    I don’t think the MLK Day posts are a good example because there wasn’t much written content to comment on, nor was there much in the way of Ivy style featured. There was a little, but you get what I mean. And other posts that similarly have had little written content have received few, or no, comments as well. However, I do think you’re right if you’re saying that the viewership of this site leans right (I’m not convinced that the site itself does).

    As for Stone, himself, I always felt deeply unsettled by his brand of politics. I mean, forget about the criminal allegations for a second, he just seemed like the opposite of a virtuous and honorable man. I strongly suspect that Chensvold would agree. Nevertheless, he does has an intriguing personality, if not an appealing one, and an appreciation for Ivy style even if he’s not a devotee necessarily. All in all, it’s pretty remarkable that Ivy Style published an exclusive interview and I wouldn’t name anyone for doing the same.

  19. Caustic Man | January 25, 2019 at 5:59 pm |

    name=blame

  20. @Jonathan Wertheim

    Very weak argument. You must be smarter than that.

    Cheers,

    Will

  21. Jonathan Wertheim | January 25, 2019 at 6:58 pm |

    Will – wasn’t really making an argument per se. Just presenting my perspective. If you want to have a real debate, this isn’t really the place – the commenting function is cumbersome and I doubt anyone else really wants to read it. If you want to continue elsewhere I’m more than happy to do so.

    However, I’ll give you one piece of relevant evidence as to why law enforcement arresting Roger Stone would need to be wary of violence:

    https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/2017/12/21/alex-jones-and-roger-stone-visited-gun-range-prepare-civil-war-if-trump-removed-office/218934

    Have a great day. Hope things are great on whatever planet you live on.

  22. Jonathan Wertheim | January 25, 2019 at 7:00 pm |

    @ Caustic Man – I largely agree with your post. Still, if we’re picking politically repellent and morally questionable political operatives to interview, why not Tucker Carlson, who is much more solidly trad/Ivy than Stone and has already been lauded for it here and elsewhere before? You have to draw lines somewhere, and as much as I personally dislike Carlson, I think Stone is beyond the pale. As I said, though, the majority of your response is well taken.

  23. @CM

    He just didn’t seem virtuous and honorable? What is this, the 13th century?

    What political figure in the public eye, left or right, strikes you as virtuous and honorable?

    On election day 2016, I tweeted a quote from Edgar Allen Poe about how democracy is a great political system — for dogs.

  24. Jonathan Wertheim | January 25, 2019 at 9:38 pm |

    @Christian – so because none are angels, they’re all devils? And we should just accept it? In the words of Ambrose Bierce, a cynic is “a blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are, not as they ought to be.” So politics is full of, er, dirty tricks. Does that mean that the unapologetic dirty trickster (Stone) is no different from someone who is at least trying to do the right thing or make life better for others? Even if they may elevate themselves in the process? Stone has elevated no one but himself and a man who seems determined to sink the rest of us. But he was elevated here at Ivy Style, all right – despite wearing mainly double breasted suits and being chummy with Milo Yiannopoulos and Alex Jones. Lots of misguided people follow Jordan Peterson – I don’t fault you for that. Many men are reactionaries against feminism and perceived threats to their protected status quo – you aren’t notable for that. Being conservative is no crime – there’s room enough here on Earth for all of us, and every private citizen is entitled to their own beliefs and opinions. But when it all gets added up – the hint of men’s rights, the Jordan Peterson preaching, the digs at snowflakes and safe spaces, the photo essays on Tucker Carlson, the interview with Roger Stone (pretending he can exist in a purely fashion context – yeah, okay)… The fact that you inject all of this politics (and I know some – maybe even you – will argue that this site is fair and balanced. Don’t kid yourself) – into a site which purports to bear the standard for Ivy style writ large is what irritates me. If you must invite political comments under your articles – by posting explicitly political pieces or making clearly political comments in the middle of otherwise innocuous ones – then you must make space for all sides of the debate. Yet your regular, commenting readership is (and remember that broad strokes are not necessarily inaccurate ones – I apologize to those regular readers who don’t fit this profile, but stand by my general portrait) reactionary, often prejudiced, and generally a real bummer that complains about millennials every chance they get. You could keep this from happening, but you don’t. You also always seem to show up in time to scold and denounce as trolls those who point out these flaws from the left side of the aisle. And that’s why I disagree with Caustic Man that this site doesn’t lean to the right, just the commenters. One begets the other, and your high and mighty attitude about it is a bad look.

  25. @VEA

    Compared to Stone and Trump, YOU’RE a saint.

  26. Well I’m flattered that in making this about me making it about Stone it’s all really about Trump.

    I “promoted” him on Ivy Style because he was the top news story of the day and because Ivy Style had actually spoken with the man in 2017.

    We’ve also posted about Mueller but I’ve stayed blind to that whole investigation thing and barely know who Stone is. Are you saying he’s a bad guy who should be no-platformed here?

  27. Jonathan Wertheim | January 25, 2019 at 10:45 pm |

    “Are you saying he’s a bad guy who should be no-platformed here?”

    I can just see the halo over your innocent little head. You published the interview with him – are you saying you didn’t do your due diligence as an editor to find out who he actually was? You just publish whatever someone sends you, on faith? You described him as a “political supervillain” but now are surprised that he might not be all that great a guy? I find all of that hard to believe.

  28. OK, so I had a busy day and put up this post this morning when I awoke to several messages in my inbox, including from reporter Twardzik, about the arrest and suggesting I repost the interview. I hadn’t taken a “fresh look” at it yet myself.

    I just did now. The interview is certainly newsworthy in light of events, but I can see how the Resistance would consider it “promoting.” To quote an old society doyenne, for people who think that way, that’s the way they think.

    Stone came up in conversation this afternoon while I was at J. Press doing an interview. One of the salesmen showed me his phone and a picture of him and Stone. I quipped that at least his orange jumpsuit will be well fitted. Tom Davis laughed.

    Mr. Davis and I concluded a third session of interviewing and spoke for two hours about race and politics. Stay tuned, you won’t want to miss it.

  29. Jonathan Wertheim | January 25, 2019 at 11:04 pm |

    @ Christian. Looking forward to the interview, probably more than you’re looking forward to my reaction to it. For the record, my long point above – which you seem not to have responded to directly – is about a lack of balance in the way your present certain people or topics, not that you are inherently incapable of doing so. I think that “promoting” (however you define the word) a wider range of figures – I remember your Mueller post, but to be honest, it’s outnumbered by the Carlsons and Stones – and perhaps actively discouraging some of the more reactionary trains of thought that repeatedly get picked up in your comments sections would have a good effect. I’m all for talking about politics, but it gets boring when every single comment thread is about the death of society because the kids these days are wearing jeans.

    You have a powerful outlet here – it is the most visible non-forum standard-bearer for Ivy and trad on the internet, and that’s important. But that means you, in my opinion anyway, have some more responsibility to represent either a range of viewpoints on politics, or no viewpoint at all. Otherwise you should rebrand this as a more personally opinionated blog.

    I can’t speak for some of the others here, but I’ll buy your last comment. I still am very skeptical that you didn’t now what you were doing with the Stone pieces (there have been three now). But I don’t think you’re a Russian bot, either 😉 Clothes are something we’ll always more or less agree on, anyway. Have a good evening.

  30. Jonathan, I ignored you because nearly every line in your two long posts can be flipped ironically against you. You’re young so please go back line by line as if you were the opposition. I’ll give you one example: you say however I’m defining what constitutes “promoting” Stone: how about what YOU (or VEA) consider “promoting,” which was MY point.

    Also, please don’t fall into the trap that’s been the case for many years that left readers say the comments are full of righties and then don’t do anything about it. Quit complaining about too many old reactionaries in the comments section and get more young leftists to comment! You know (or should) that I don’t have the time or inclination to monitor every single comment and prefer to give free rein and let people speak.

    As for the editorial, over 10 years I’m guessing we’ve had about 60 contributing writers. I never asked a single one what his politics were.

    Our last post was by Boyer, a self-described radical socialist.

    I’m open to contributions by anyone, assuming we can come up with a topic that is editorially strong with suitable reader interest. If you’d like to write something, please email me and I’ll work with you to develop it.

    Good evening to you,

    C.

  31. Too much mental energy being wasted here on a well dressed crook.

  32. Carl Forster | January 26, 2019 at 1:39 am |

    Not at all funny.

  33. Jonathan Wertheim | January 26, 2019 at 1:56 am |

    LOL. Well, my charitable reading of your comment is retracted. Same old, same old. And don’t patronize me – you’re no Grand Old Man to be talking down to anyone. Leave that to Richard Press or someone else with credentials to back it up (though you’ll find they don’t exercise that prerogative, because they don’t have to).

    Maybe more left-leaning Ivyists don’t comment here because they don’t like your politics, or your pretensions. I know a few I couldn’t pay to visit here. I certainly won’t be in future, under any name. You can have your fantasyland of Ivy. I’ll take reality.

  34. Forest Lacroix | January 26, 2019 at 5:19 am |

    Roger Stone has always seemed to me to be a fictional character.

  35. Cuff Shooter | January 26, 2019 at 9:30 am |

    I’m pretty sure the Roger Stone interview is what originally brought me to this site, and this site to a deeper interest in Ivy Style. Thanks, CC!

  36. Caustic Man | January 26, 2019 at 9:35 am |

    Jonathan, I am boycotting the comments section until there is equal representation of women, whose voices are sorely lacking in the menswear world. We need to send a message to the editor that we are not going to accept anything less than full equality, especially in light of his insistence on promoting right wing politicians whose weird obsession with menswear is clearly an expression of their white, cis-male privilege. Who else but a misogynist would be so obsessed with a category of clothing that excludes one gender almost entirely? Comment sections are an important sight of discourse in our society and this site’s insistence on silencing women is a major impediment to getting women’s voices into menswear. As for JBP, I’m still waiting for him to retract his so called “research” that demonstrates there are biological differences between men and women. It’s the 21st century, guys. Can we get past this outmoded patriarchal emphasis on “science” and focus on the really important issues like ousting climate change deniers from public offices?

  37. Richard Meyer | January 26, 2019 at 10:22 am |

    At least 3 columns so far about Mr. Stone
    Wretched excess.
    “ Godspeed “
    ?

  38. Bon Bon muncher and rainbow rider | January 26, 2019 at 11:54 am |

    First time comment, long time reader. Shocked how many left wing over sensitive snow flakes there are! CC can run a story without picking a side. Good or bad, Stone is a solid (but quirky) dresser. Shocked a clothing website would talk about a news story who dresses well…

  39. Vern Trotter | January 26, 2019 at 11:58 am |

    I have met Roger twice at the Woman’s National Republican Club near Rockerfeller Center. Always well turned out, bespoke suit, sans socks. Nixon’s tattoo was well covered. His talks are informative, if not Buckleyesque, at least reminiscent of H. L. Mencken, who some say I knew back in Baltimore. Not true.

    I think the time is right for another interview with Herr Stone. You could even parlay this into an appearance on Tucker’s show on Fox News. This of course might lead to a well deserved discussion of Mr. Mercer’s shirts, always desirable fodder.
    Democrat apparatchiks, those craven chapons of yesterday, will then truly turn out on these pages, although most are not Ivy attired.

  40. I just checked the stats for yesterday and this was the most highly trafficked post of the month.

  41. @Jonathan

    You make your reality. I extended an olive branch and gave you carte blanche to write whatever you want for the site, and you have turned it down out of arrogance or fear.

    All that troubles you finds its germ within you, my friend. “As within, so without,” according to the hermetic principle. “The world takes its shape chiefly as a man looks at it,” says Schopenhauer.

    If you have decided in your mind that I am evil, then evil I am.

    May you someday awaken from the bad dream you are living and find your way onto The Path.

    God speed, ; )

    Christian

    PS: It’s not to late to change your mind. Email me any time.

  42. whiskeydent | January 26, 2019 at 4:56 pm |

    We lefties are in a fighting mood. Many of us are looking to strike at most anything, which can, as in this case, lead to some misguided criticism.

    There were three Stone stories: the original Twardzik story, the resulting Twardzik-Stone interview, and then CC’s piece. Twardzik called him a villain in the first piece and, to my eye, didn’t kiss Stone’s ass in the second. CC made fun of Stone’s arrest in his. Nowhere is Stone’s work or character praised.

    Stone is a dirty-dealing-wife-swapping-money-grubbing-influence-peddling-self-promoting-freakshow who happens to have Trump’s ear. That makes him newsworthy, and I assume CC ran the pieces because of just that.

    As regards this blog, it does tilt right. I think the posters tilt right.I think CC tilts right, though he has written some admirable stuff about black jazz artists and MLK. But I said “tilts.” I’d guesstimate it’s a 55%-45% split, which, in my estimation, is probably representative of Ivy adherents at large. So damn what?

  43. The better you dress, the worse that you can behave.

  44. Can we separate the man, his politics, from his clothes? The simple reason Stone is over-profiled on this site may be that, unlike other politicos in Ivy garb who are more “serious”, e.g. Kennedy III, Sheldon Whitehouse, Tucker Carlson, Stone actually said “yes” to the interview request?

    On the matter of his supposed-bespoke suits, I find them quite ill-fitting.

  45. CC – “Our last post was by Boyer, a self-described radical socialist.” Wow! I did not know that. Not many working class Americans could afford to buy Boyer’s $600 RTW shirts from Marol of Italy.

    Is Bruce a hypocritical champagne socialist who believe that only the working classes should pay punitive taxes? That would make him a sartorial version of Al Gore or Bernie Sanders.

  46. whiskeydent | January 27, 2019 at 2:13 pm |

    @Dominic
    Note that I did not dwell on Stone’s politics; I wrote about his character. Issues of character transcend parties.
    @Kenny
    Congratulations for conjuring a truly original joke.

  47. @whiskeydent

    That’s fine, add personal ethics to the list. My point was that it’s possible to discuss someone’s clothes without getting hung up one anything else agreeable/disagreeable.

    As to Roger Stone the person, I wouldn’t trust him to open the door.

  48. @Dominic
    I get your point. My comments were part of a response about the site’s political leanings and some undue criticism. Have a good’n!

  49. G. Bruce Boyer | January 29, 2019 at 12:40 pm |

    Dear, may I call you Kenny,

    I have never been a “self-described radical socialist”. I don’t think of myself as a radical anything. Your sources are simply incorrect, and therefore your aspersions — if that’s what they are — are misleading. And, oh yes, the “champagne socialist” tag is a dusty term now.

  50. Dear Bruce,

    The source was me. Perhaps I misheard you.

    C.

  51. Henry Contestwinner | January 29, 2019 at 3:24 pm |

    Mr. Wertheim is absolutely correct that Ivy-Style is somewhere in the same neighborhood as Lucianne [dot] com and Stormfront. As evidence of the extreme right-wing slant of this website, I present the following posts:

    http://www.ivy-style.com/whos-this.html
    http://www.ivy-style.com/cast-your-vote-is-trad-politically-incorrect.html

    And let’s not forget the frequent comments & posts by that doyen of the alt-right, Richard Press.

    Ivy-Style über alles!

  52. MacMcConnell | February 2, 2019 at 1:57 pm |

    Of course Roger Stone is a bad guy. The government sent more people with guns to arrest him than they sent to kill Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad. 😉

  53. whiskeydent | February 2, 2019 at 2:17 pm |

    @MacMcConnell
    Wrong. NPR reported there were about a dozen FBI agents in the Stone arrest. The New York Times reported there were 79 DEVGRU commandos and a dog for Ben Laden.

  54. Chewco L.P. (Offshore) | February 2, 2019 at 7:37 pm |

    Roger Stone made a great video for the Daily Caller on how “How to Dress for Court.” It’s on YouTube.

    What do you think of his style? Everything is custom, including his shoes, which are 25 years old!

  55. MacMcConnell | February 5, 2019 at 2:45 pm |

    whiskeydent

    Relax, it’s called humor.

  56. whiskeydent | February 5, 2019 at 2:51 pm |

    @MacMcConnell
    I knew it was an attempt at humor, but I thought the dog for Bin Laden was a lot funnier.

  57. When did spray tans and hair plugs become “Ivy”?

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*