I can't find a version of the indictment I can copy from but the Guardian agrees with me

"a senior Trump campaign official was directed to contact Stone about any additional releases and what other damaging information [WikiLeaks] had regarding the Clinton campaign".

This direction was given to the senior Trump campaign official after 22 July 2016

I rewound to get the quote right

"Roger has a genuine affection, bordering on thesaurus love [gag].  I asked him one time if he considered Trump one of his closest friends.  He said he wasn't worthy of being Ne of Trumps closest friends.  That he saw himself as subordinate to a person as great as Trump"

IANAL, and I had never seen a dollar amount of bail when someone gets ROR.  
But this might be a federal-court practice that I had never noticed.  The ignorance of which you complain is probably common among those who are not trained in the law.  (Ignorance leads to such things as claims that Mueller is exceeding the scope of his current appointment - when understanding the single-page authorization is actually something that does not appear to require law-specific training.)

If the defendant is released without bail having been set, the defendants are released "on their own recognizance".  
On re-read, that does NOT really say that no bail amount is set for ROR, but many would interpret it the way I did.   The nature of Wikipedia makes it so you could expand/clarify the article, and get a lot of people up to speed in a single effort.

Nolo:

Simply put, OR release is no-cost bail.  

Since I mentioned The Washington Examiner, I also find an article that defends the FBI practices exhibited in this arrest.  I do not like the way that law enforcement escalates so many encounters, but I'd prefer that they treat suspects/warrants/family dogs based on something other than privilege.  
When Stone says, "This was the most harrowing and terrifying experience of my life," I can't tell if he is taking the side of everyone who gets the 6AM service-of-warrant, or just trying to make himself seem the victim of law enforcement practices that are standard for 7-felony-count arrest warrants.

Alex Jones and Roger Stone, a conservative pundit who has advised President Donald Trump for decades, visited a shooting range to fire weapons in preparation for a civil war in the event Trump is removed from office.

The visit was documented in a nearly one-and-a-half-hour-long December 19 video posted to Jones' YouTube channel with the title "Roger Stone Prepares For Civil War After Trump Is Removed From Office: LIVE AUTO GUNFIRE."

Jones set up the video by explaining that when Stone "was recently asked by TMZ what happens if Trump is assassinated or overthrown, he said it would cause a civil war."

Jones and Stone then entered the shooting area and fired an array of semi-automatic and fully automatic firearms, including one equipped with a silencer. At one point, Stone violated a basic safety rule by putting his finger on the trigger of an Uzi submachine gun before he was ready to shoot, causing the instructor to repeatedly remind Stone to take his finger off the trigger before physically removing it. Stone also remarked that he couldn't see where the safety was because of the glasses he was wearing. While firing the weapons, Stone and Jones joked about shooting "commie dogs" and making a "JFK throat shot," and Jones joked that Stone is "our Rambo" to "take on the globalists."

Stone does not own a gun nor does he even have a license to do so.

Not sure going to a range and renting multiple firearms and then bragging about being a prepper merits an escalation of force.  Especially if you are making a PR vid of the range trip.

I would be interested in knowing who made the decision to send heavily armed LEOs on a dawn raid and how those decisions are made.  There is a risk/reward in the decision and I see more risk than reward.  Since Stone was released on his signature the judge did not think he was a flight risk.  My guess is the FBI knew where he was and had eye balls on him.  A call to his lawyer for Stone to turn himself in could have been made with eyes on his home.  As I posted earlier it would be silly to think Stone was foolish enough to keep incriminating evidence in his home at this late date.  Hard to see where there was any reward except the PR event.  The risk of sending heavily armed men into a residential neighborhood seems obvious.

But the claims were also belied by the previous day's reporting. CNN had reported that indictments on Friday were likely because Mueller's grand jury had been convened for an unusual Thursday session. CNN, a massive media organization with a bureau in Miami, Florida, near where Stone lives, has the resources to stake out the sites of potential newsworthy events, even if they end up not materializing. And Stone has long been believed to be expecting an indictment from Mueller, so monitoring his home was a good bet.

Please remember that earlier in the case, rather than consolidate in one jurisdiction all the then-pending charges brought against him by two different grand juries, Manafort's attorneys opted instead to fight those charges in two separate trials, one in Washington and the other in Alexandria, VA. He was convicted at trial in the Alexandria case, and pleaded guilty in the Washington case before jury selection in that trial could be completed.

"I have seen actual deer in actual headlights who express themselves more clearly than the Attorney General of the United States," Toobin said

I did say that once Mueller submitted a report to the AG and the AG reviewed it there would be legal proceedings about when and what parts of the report could be released and that would drag out till 2020.