You implied that he is a crook. I am saying that even though this may be true it has not yet been proved so. Of course you may be using the term "crook"in a less than literal sense.
Explain how I implied he was guilty?
| said he has been arrested (which is true). I went on to make a general comment about the relationship of Trump and crooks. At no point did I claim Stone was a crook.
As a matter of interest, what makes you think that the condition of being a crook is defined by whether the person in question has been convicted in court or not? I am pretty sure that Trump is a crook even though he has never been convicted. Famously, despite his assertion to the contrary, president Nixon was definitely a crook even though he was never even indicted.