CBS Report, Mysterious DoD Iran Attack Memo Does Not Exist and Is Not Part of Jack Smith Case Against Trump
June 27, 2023 | Sundance
I’m not going to say I toldyaso; I’m just smiling.
After a full media cycle of apoplexy and pearl-clutching, which included Andrew Weissmann appearing on MSNBC to declare “It’s the end of Trump,” CBS is now reporting there is no Defense Department memo about attacking Iran – the foundation of the media claims surrounding the leaked audio tapes from Special Counsel Jack Smith.
Worse still, and exactly as CTH previously outlined, despite the claims by CNN about how this audio would be used as the “central element” by the prosecution of Trump, the audio and mysterious memo are not part of the Special Counsel case.
So, why was the transcript of the audio recording used by Jack Smith in the indictment if the audio and nonexistent memo were never going to be used? Because it’s Lawfare, that’s why. Everything, yes including the specific language being deployed (ie “documents containing classification markings“), is hype for public consumption.
(Via CBS) – The Defense Department memo on Iran — at the heart of the now-public audio recording that captured a July 2021 meeting with former President Donald Trump — is not part of the 31 counts of willful retention of national defense information charged in special counsel Jack Smith’s indictment of the former president, a source familiar with the matter confirmed to CBS News.
[…] The document and recording are described in the indictment Smith’s team secured against Trump earlier this month, recounted as an alleged meeting with “a writer, a publisher, and two members of” Trump’s staff, “none of whom possessed a security clearance.” But according to a source familiar with the matter, Trump was not charged with unlawfully holding onto the Iran-related document discussed in the recording.
[…] Multiple sources familiar with the investigation previously told CBS News that defense attorneys were not certain the Iran memo in question was ever recovered and returned to the government. (read more)
There never was an Iran memo document. President Trump was discussing newspaper reports, “newspapers” and stacks of “papers”, as he originally told Brett Baier. Duh.
Reminder, in an interview with Fox News’ Bret Baier on June 19, Trump said that at the meeting with the book’s publisher, he was not referring to the document itself, but newspaper articles:
“There was no document… That was a massive amount of papers and everything else talking about Iran and other things. And it may have been held up or may not, but that was not a document. I didn’t have a document per se. There was nothing to declassify. These were newspaper stories, magazine stories and articles.”
IT WAS ALL A LIE: Dirty Jack Smith Leaked Trump Milley Audio to Fake News to Taint Jury Pool and Smear Trump – But It IS NOT Part of Bogus Indictments Against President Trump
By Jim Hoft Jun. 28, 2023
For weeks Special Counsel Jack Smith has been leaking allegations to the lemming media on alleged ‘classified’ information on a report discussed by President Trump to his associates and written by dummy Mark Milley, who surrendered Afghanistan to the Taliban and turned over $80 billion in US weapons to the terrorist group.
Milley wrote a report on his invasion plans into Iran that included the deployment of a “massive number of troops” into the Islamic State. This was obviously not taken seriously by President Trump or his staff. Trump was the first US president in decades to keep the US out of any new wars.
This recent leak by dirty Special Counsel Jack Smith involved Mark Milley and some nonsense he wrote about invading Iran.
The DOJ has been leaking the so-called classified information on the case to the mainstream media for weeks.
I’m beginning to read the indictment against Trump. But even three pages in, it’s clear that the leaks that preceded the indictment are far too close to what is actually being pleaded by DOJ to be a coincidence.
For example, in paragraph 6a on page 3, we hear about the recording… pic.twitter.com/HP7YErumRf
— Jeff Clark (@JeffClarkUS) June 9, 2023
Dr. Peter McCullough: Understand Spike Shedding Before It’s Too Late
Then on Monday Jack Smith leaked the audio to CNN to smear President Trump and taint the jury pool.
The CNN report went viral.
Legal expert and author Mark Levin called for Jack Smith to be jailed following his latest leak.
And now, according to CBS News, the Milley memo on Iran is not part of the 31 counts of willful retention of national defense information charged in special counsel Jack Smith’s indictment of the former president.
Paul Sperry called this back on June 10.
YOU READ IT HERE FIRST, June 10 … https://t.co/vzxZ7CuOoW
— Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_) June 28, 2023
The leaks were only meant to damage President Trump in the eye of the public.
CBS News reported:
Washington — The Defense Department memo on Iran — at the heart of the now-public audio recording that captured a July 2021 meeting with former President Donald Trump — is not part of the 31 counts of willful retention of national defense information charged in special counsel Jack Smith’s indictment of the former president, a source familiar with the matter confirmed to CBS News.
In the recording of the meeting at Trump’s Bedminster, New Jersey golf club, the former president can be heard apparently showing and discussing what he described as “highly confidential, secret” documents with aides. Sources say the documents were related to plans for a potential U.S. attack on Iran.
“It is like highly confidential, secret. This is secret information. Look, look at this,” Trump said in the audio tape obtained by CBS News. “See, as president I could have declassified, but now I can’t, you know…Isn’t that interesting? It’s so cool.”
The document and recording are described in the indictment Smith’s team secured against Trump earlier this month, recounted as an alleged meeting with “a writer, a publisher, and two members of” Trump’s staff, “none of whom possessed a security clearance.”
Dershowitz: Hunter Plea Deal Shouldn’t Be Accepted Unless Judge Calls Garland and Weiss to Testify
IAN HANCHETT 28 Jun 2023
On Tuesday’s broadcast of the Fox News Channel’s “Hannity,” Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz argued that the judge who has to approve of Hunter Biden’s plea deal needs to call Attorney General Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney David Weiss, and the six witnesses who whistleblower Gary Shapley’s legal team say can corroborate his statements before accepting the deal.
Dershowitz said, “[T]he judge who is sentencing Hunter Biden and who has to approve of the plea deal, must call Garland, must call Weiss, must call these six witnesses, and must say, look, Hunter Biden’s lawyers, we know you want the deal to go through. Justice Department, we know you want the deal to go through. But I’m a judge, I represent the people of the United States of America.”
He added, “The law provides that a judge need not accept a plea bargain agreed to by both sides if there is a problem here, and if he concludes, for example, that Weiss was denied the ability to investigate beyond Delaware, then the deal’s off. Because the deal probably ends any possibility of prosecution in the District of Columbia or in Los Angeles, and if those were foreclosed in violation of what Garland said would be available to Weiss, then the deal’s off, and you have to go back to square one, you have to conclude the investigation, and then you decide whether or not to make a plea bargain. Right now, the judge should not accept this plea bargain without hearing from Garland, Weiss, and the six witnesses.”
Follow Ian Hanchett on Twitter @IanHanchett
IRS whistleblower says he witnessed interference by Biden’s DOJ in the Hunter Biden criminal investigation.
Why Trump Had a Right to Keep the Documents
From WSJ:
The implications of the “Clinton Sock Drawer” case, laid out in my op-ed “Clinton’s Sock Drawer and Trump’s Boxes” (June 14), shouldn’t be derided. The Constitution and the Presidential Records Act aren’t as simple as former Attorney General Bill Barr and letter writer James Wendel (June 20) think.
Not every record created by a federal agency is an “agency record.” As then-Judge Merrick Garland and two of his colleagues on the D.C. Circuit concluded in 2013 (in another Judicial Watch case, concerning White House visitor logs maintained by the Secret Service), records created by an agency for the president and intended to be controlled by the president aren’t agency records. Why not? Separation of powers. As Judge Garland explained, if records requested and intended to be controlled by the president were agency records, “a potentially serious congressional intrusion into the conduct of the President’s daily operations” would exist.
The recent indictment implies that Donald Trump received the 31 records when he was president and that he intended to control them because he placed them in boxes, retaining them. At this point, only the government knows whether those records were created for President Trump. But that fact probably doesn’t matter. Another D.C. Circuit panel in 1993 explained that the purpose of the “agency record” exception in the Presidential Records Act was to prevent a president from defining “presidential records” as “all records produced or received by, or in the possession or under the control of, any government agency or employee of the United States.”
Read more here…
Related
NarrowPathMinistries 