Both former Trump advisors Peter Navarro and Steve Bannon have been convicted of contempt of Congress over their refusal to comply with subpoenas from the committee.
Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich on Friday excoriated the now-defunct House Jan. 6 Committee, contending that its findings were based on a “false product” and urging Congress to repudiate its activities.
“This committee, the J6 committee, was so fraudulent, that the current House should repudiate it, define it as an illegal or unethical, runaway investigation of no standing,” Gingrich said on the John Solomon Reports podcast. “[A]nd [it] should send a letter to both the Department of Justice and to the appropriate judges, saying that any action based on the J6 committee should be considered null and void and that people like Steve Bannon should not be going to jail because they want to fight with a committee which was literally operating outside the law.”
The Jan. 6 panel was an investigative committee run by the then-Democratic House that investigated the events of and leading up to the disturbance of at the U.S. Capitol on that date. The committee included only two Republicans, former Wyoming GOP Rep. Liz Cheney and former Illinois GOP Rep. Adam Kinzinger, both of whom voted to impeach former President Donald Trump.
Both former Trump advisors Peter Navarro and Steve Bannon have been convicted of contempt of Congress over their refusal to comply with subpoenas from the committee. Navarro is currently in custody at a Miami federal prison while Bannon has been ordered to report to prison next month.
“I think this is such a tainted and corrupted process,” he also said. “And I think it has to be repealed by the House, and repudiated by the House. And I think that the court and the Justice Department have to take into account that anybody who had a conflict with this committee was dealing with an out of control, illegal operation.”
“Their findings are based on a totally false product,” he said of the panel. “And the people who were subpoenaed by them who refused to agree, we now know, we’re on the right, that in fact, what you have here is a runaway select committee. That was totally dishonest.”
Gingrich took particular aim at Cheney, contending that she was motivated by her desire to take down the former commander-in-chief to such a degree, that she was willing to ignore the law to achieve that end.
“I mean, we’ve we’re in a period here where the establishment is just sick. And we have a chance to correct the record historically,” he said. “And I think people will be astonished at how bad was Cheney was, how much she broke the rules, and how basically, she wanted to destroy Trump so badly, that she didn’t care that in the process, she was breaking the laws.”
“This committee destroyed all of its records. Now. That is, that is totally illegal, because we have others talk about Trump and Biden and their records. While I tell you what the J6 committee did, deliberately and methodically, was 1000 times worse than anything either Trump or Biden had done in terms of records,” he contended.
“They did it deliberately. And they did it because they didn’t want other people to figure out what they’ve been doing,” he concluded.
On the day after the Mar-a-Lago raid in 2022, the FBI raided the home of Pennsylvania Representative Scott Perry. {DETAILS} Factually, there were a series of coordinated FBI raids and targeted inquisitions that were intentionally timed to trigger immediately after the August ’22 Trump raid.
What most people do not know was that President Trump’s former Chief of Staff, Mark Meadows essentially set up Scott Perry. After the DOJ framed the J6 events as a “national security threat,” Mark Meadows was essentially a walking FISA virus. Meadows sent Perry text messages via an encrypted Signal app, however, Signal was cooperating with the DOJ/FBI to give all communication to the targeting units of a weaponized surveillance state.
SIDEBAR: I believe Meadows knew his communication with Perry would be intercepted, because Meadows was an ¹operative for the Intelligence Community. I have pointed out the Meadows issues before. Additionally, Meadows was absolutely confirmed as John Solomon’s source from Congress and likely from the Oval Office. Meadows consistently leaked information to Hannity’s Tick Tock buddy, that the DOJ/FBI and IC wanted to see distributed.
¹Mark Meadows is a confirmed Deep State operative, and I would not bet against Solomon being a willing assistant and operative himself. [Chase his current storyline with that qualifier in mind, and you might have a different perspective. Seven years of “Breaking”, “Explosive”, “Game Changing”, “Exclusive”, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. All of it with ZERO “big boom” accountability outcomes – exactly as designed.]
SIDEBAR OVER – Back to Perry. Pennsylvania Representative Scott Perry became an FBI target in part because of his proximity to the epicenter of the AME church network voting fraud in Philadelphia [there’s a reason Biden goes there all the time], and in part because Perry was a supporter of President Trump and didn’t buy the illogical 2020 election outcome narrative. {NYT Link}
Well, last week House Speaker Mike Johnson appointed Scott Perry to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, or HPSCI as it is known. Despite the MAGA reps supporting this selection, my hunch is that President Trump was the voice who leveraged Johnson to make this happen. Now, the non-MAGA professional Republicans in the House are going bananas.
The backlash against the appointment of Perry to the HPSCI is a remarkable dose of sunlight upon all of the Republican deep state operatives in the House of Representatives. Texas Rep Dan Crenshaw is so filled with rage he can’t see straight.
WASHINGTON DC – […] Crenshaw, a member of the Intelligence panel, added: “The speaker needs to remember that there isn’t only one group that can threaten them. … Just do not teach the lesson that the only way for us to be effective here is threatening, because I’ll take the lesson and I’ll do it.”
[…] Beyond Crenshaw, a person familiar with the sitdowns said two separate groups of Republicans met with Johnson this week to share their frustrations about Perry’s appointment. That includes members of the Intelligence Committee who plan to meet with him on Thursday.
One Republican, who was granted anonymity to speak candidly, said no previous committee assignment has sparked as much internal anger as Johnson’s decision about Perry.
Another GOP member added that Perry’s appointment “was the talk for a day or two” among Republicans during their recent trip to France because of how “angry” lawmakers are.
“There’s a lot of pissed people. A lot of angry people. (read more)
Pour in the sunlight…. This is good stuff. We need to find out exactly which Republicans are angered by the appointment of Perry to the HPSCI. The problem is much bigger than the insufferable Dan Crenshaw.
Beyond the details of this story, stand back and look at the larger picture of how the HPSCI seats were historically assigned, against the background of how stunningly bad the HPSCI has been at holding the HPSCI Democrats like Adam Schiff to account. Let yourself think about this.
Everyone gets frustrated by the insufferable ineptitude of the House Republicans who appear on committees, and as a consequence appear on television asking the wrong questions. Well, overlay the silo problem with the reality that Republican House accountability processes (committee assignments) are determined by seniority and who plays nicely in DC.
…”a lot of people who have worked hard to be good team players feel like they are getting passed over,” (link)
PICTURED: ~ The Average DC Republican ~
Things make sense now?
The Big Ugly needs to get BIGGER and UGLIER before the boil can be lanced and the puss drained.
The Truth Has No Agenda. However, this sunlight is progress.
Say what you want about Trump’s political instincts, but his new-age media savvy is excellent. President Trump continues giving long-format podcast interviews to some of the most watched independent channels on the internet.
In this relaxed and informal interview, President Trump again connects to an audience in a way that is direct, conversational and relatable. The topics with Logan Paul include debating Joe Biden in the 2024 election, raising $140M as a convicted felon, the Paul Brothers fighting each other, friendship with Vladimir Putin & Kim Jong Un, Logan Paul Vs Bradley Martyn, brutally honest thoughts on Dana White & Elon Musk, Trump deepfakes, if he believes in aliens & more. WATCH:
Timestamps: 0:00 Welcome Donald Trump! 0:55 Jake Paul Vs Mike Tyson! 1:50 Trump Gives Logan a Gift.. 2:35 Felony Conviction & Raising $140M 7:47 Joe Biden Debate! 11:01 Jake Paul Vs Logan Paul? 12:27 Logan Paul Vs Bradley Martyn (Who won?) 16:13 Dana White & Khabib Relationship! 19:05 Vladimir Putin Friendship & Russia Vs Ukraine War 27:21 Gaza Conflict 31:03 Trump’s Advice for People 33:39 Drug Crisis & Trump Plugs Mike’s Book 39:15 Logan Invites Biden on the Podcast in Front of Trump! 41:11 Does Trump Believe in Aliens? 44:40 Elon Musk & Trump’s Relationship.. 45:41 Trump Getting Deepfaked 50:24 “You’re Fired!” 51:53 Trump’s Viral TikTok!
When it comes to smearing Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, the liberals have already lost.
With major court decisions due to drop any day now — from former President Donald Trump’s immunity claims to abortion and gun rights cases to other huge issues — liberal attacks are piling on with the publication of undercover recordings of Alito speaking in what were supposed to be private conversations.
But as “sting” videos making the news this week show, the leftists are only proving how right Alito is.
As National Review senior writer Dan McLaughlin pointed out in a column published Tuesday, the recordings, made by a liberal documentary maker posing as a conservative to try to lure Alito into some click-bait stupidity, ended up doing the opposite: Alito comes across as a man of acumen and honesty — and humility.
His questioner, on the other hand, is clearly a lying grifter.
The documentary maker in question — identified by a cheerleading Rolling Stone piece as Lauren Windsor — approached Alito at a fundraising event for the Supreme Court Historical Society.
Her language was appallingly dishonest — she pretended sympathy for the public pressures Alito has been undergoing, especially concerning the groundbreaking Dobbs decision last year that overturned the legal and moral monstrosity of Roe v. Wade.
It was clearly designed to elicit some emotional response from the justice, one that could be twisted to prove the court is only one good abortion case from pushing the country into the “Handmaid’s Tale” nightmare of the left’s most fetishistic fantasies.
“As a Catholic and as someone who, like, really cherishes my faith, I just don’t, I don’t know that we can negotiate with the left in the way that, like, needs to happen for the polarization to end,” she said. “I think that it’s a matter of, like, winning.”
Alito, like, agreed. But not, like, in a way that any, like, mature person could, like, disagree with.
“I think you’re probably right.” he said. “On one side or the other — one side or the other is going to win. I don’t know. I mean, there can be a way of working — a way of living together peacefully, but it’s difficult, you know, because there are differences on fundamental things that really can’t be compromised. They really can’t be compromised. So it’s not like you are going to split the difference.”
Is there any honest American who could disagree with that?
One side or the other is going to win — because when two irreconcilable forces are in active conflict, one or the other will eventually win. Alito didn’t predict which side it would be. He didn’t even, strictly speaking, state a preference (though his authorship of the Dobbs decision — and its tone — make that pretty clear).
He merely stated a fact.
It’s also important to point out that there is a way of “living together peacefully” — more or less in the state of the country as it is — but in the long term, something is going to give.
And then, playing her role to the hilt, Windsor went as far as to invoke “godliness” (the judgmentally minded might call it a kind of blasphemy, considering she was lying through her leftist teeth).
“I think that the solution really is, like, winning the moral argument,” she said. “Like, people in this country who believe in God have got to keep fighting for that, to return our country to a place of godliness.”
“Bingo!” cried the editors at Rolling Stone, slapping a summary headline on the piece: “Supreme Court justice says he ‘agrees’ that the U.S. should return to a place of godliness.”
If wishing a county to be in a state of “godliness” isn’t damning, what is?
But Alito also knows it isn’t the court’s job to determine whether the United States is a place of godliness — that’s up to Americans and the representatives they elect.
In a video from 2023 Windsor intercut, she recorded Alito describing his view of the Supreme Court. Again, it was exactly what a normal American would want to hear:
In that portion of the video, in where Windsor again cited the “polarization” of the country and what can be done about it, Alito lamented the role of “the media” in eroding the public trust in the court (like Eve lamenting the serpent, under the circumstances), but also made it clear the court has limits that are inherent in its creation.
“We [the justices] have a very defined role, and we need to do what we’re supposed to do,” he said.
“But this is a bigger problem. This is way above us. So I wish I knew the answer. I do.”
The humility of the words “way above us” is not in any liberal politicians’ makeup — whether they’re on or off the court.
What Alito was describing was the will of the American people and — probably — the will of God.
The Democratic Party and the American left in general have spent decades proving they have scant respect for either. But it’s exactly the kind of humility the country needs from the men and women on the highest court in the land.
In another video, a Windsor colleague identified as Ally Sammarco — “who identifies as a former Republican turned Democratic strategist,” according to The Washington Times — expresses crocodile tears of sympathy to Alito for the “attacks” he’s facing in the media. Then she asks him what he thinks is behind it.
Justice Alito rants on ProPublica and minimizes Justice Thomas’ extraordinary ethics breaches as “any little thing they can find" pic.twitter.com/HXFlaxRpWm
Again, Alito’s response defied the desires of Democrats for clickbait quotes.
“I think it’s for a simple reason. They don’t like our decisions,” he said. “And they don’t like how they anticipate we’ll decide some cases that are coming up. That’s the beginning and the end of it.”
Again, is there an honest American who can disagree? The fact that these recordings even exist proves his point.
Justice Clarence Thomas, a man whose public rectitude is irreproachable, is another constant target — as a black conservative with a towering intellect, even his existence is an insult to the fringe left.
It’s going to be a massive final sprint for the conservative-majority court, and liberals are already launching preemptive attacks, with Alito in the crosshairs.
Every Supreme Court justice makes history with every day on the job, of course. But Alito is different. His authorship of the Dobbs decision puts him in the rarefied company of Supreme Court justices whose landmark decision have etched a place in the chronicles of the country. (For good or ill: Chief Justice Earl Warren, author of the Brown v. Board of Education decision is in that group, along with Roger Taney of Dred Scott and Harry Blackmun or Roe v. Wade.)
He knows what place he has; he knows the power that he has, but he also knows that that power is sharply limited by the very Constitution that created it.
That’s a lesson every American politician should learn and live by. It’s a lesson most sorely needed by big-government, Democratic politicians from President Joe Biden on down to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and her squad.
Liberals trying to smear Sam Alito might think they’re hurting him and the court, but all they’re really doing is showing how much he belongs there.
A very interesting day is described by everyone in Washington DC, as President Trump strategically attends both House and Senate Republican conferences. Magnanimous Trump arrived to heal wounds, appeal for unity and build a larger support network ahead of the Republican National Convention.
It would appear the Dr. Phil approach was attempted as promised. According to media reports, in the upper chamber President Trump even spoke warmly with Republican Leader Mitch McConnell and the 16 Wall Street DeceptiCons who are insistent upon his permanent removal from politics.
(Politico) – “Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and former President Donald Trump set aside their years-long cold war during a private meeting with Republicans Thursday, a gathering McConnell described as “really positive.” (more)
Not surprisingly, Senator Rand Paul refused to endorse President Trump, preferring to talk positively about Robert Kennedy Jr. so far.
Factually, regardless of what any of them say, the Brutus delegation within the Senate will be sharpening their scorpion tails quietly and wait for the most vulnerable opportunity to strike. All sixteen DeceptiCons, soon to be led in 2025 by Senator John Thune, will sting viciously and simultaneously. This is the one political constant in an ever-changing universe.
[…] Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.) said Trump’s message was “all positive” when talking to the conference and centered on keeping Republicans unified headed into the fall elections. Tuberville sat next to Trump antagonist Romney (R-Utah) but said the former president didn’t take aim at the senators who have not endorsed him — nor did they criticize him.
“I haven’t seen that Republican group as strongly united on all of those policy issues in a long, long time,” Rounds said. (read more)
It does not matter how much President Trump appeals to their best nature; the sixteen Republican DeceptiCon senators hate him with the intensity of a white-hot supernova. They want to see President Trump destroyed by any means necessary, and John Thune has promised them he can deliver.
Over on the House side, Magnanimous Trump even tried to smooth things over with the two remaining Republican representatives who voted to impeach him.
(POLITICO) – […] Donald Trump made a small peace offering Thursday to the remaining House Republicans who voted to impeach him after the Jan. 6 Capitol attack, according to three members in the room.
[…] There are two GOP members left in the chamber who voted for that impeachment: Reps. Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.) and David Valadao (R-Calif.). Trump seemed to be referring to Valadao, who had skipped the meeting. Newhouse had attended but dismissed Trump’s comments when reporters asked if he read them as a dig at him, saying “he didn’t mention me at all.” (read more)
When President Obama famously told incoming President Trump the largest foreign policy concern was the potential for near-term military conflict with North Korea, Trump curiously asked Obama, “Well, have you talked to Kim Jong-un?”
President Trump has never revealed how Obama responded to that question; however, given the nature of the circumstances, what we know about DC and the background involved, we can assume the Obama reply was akin to the lightbringer telling Trump, “Things just are not done that way.”
We know what happened next; President Trump engaged directly with Chairman Kim, met with him several times and even crossed into the demilitarized zone as a physical expression of a new approach.
This was only one example of President Trump’s policy doctrine, which ran completely counter to the traditions of the professional administrative state. This was/is part of the reason why DC hated Trump.
The bureaucracy of DC exists to sustain the career influence and affluence of a group of people who would never survive in the private sector. Their weak work ethic, selfish worldview, insufferably annoying character traits, flawed logic, silly outlooks and disconnected opinions, created in a bubble that has no relationship to reality, are only useful within their echo-chambered system.
President Trump has a skillset of commonsense accomplishment that runs completely counter to the mindset of the administrative state. President Trump thinks like you and me; Trump finds optimal solutions. Washington DC simply cannot fathom successful policy outcomes that do not come from their creation. Trump succeeded with a doctrine that was entirely unfamiliar to the DC bureaucracy. {GO DEEP} It is absolutely critical that we never forget this.
It is important to remind ourselves of what is possible in a positive way, because everything discussed about our challenges is framed from the perspective of a flawed and corrupt DC system. From the traditional perspective, the challenge seems overwhelming, but that’s really a misnomer.
Here’s the key – The DC challenges are not overwhelming when you take a non-traditional approach toward finding solutions.
Consider the issue of SSI supplemental benefits and budgets. Yes, from the traditional perspective the financial drain on the system can collapse the federal budget. However, if we double the size of the economy and/or modify import tariffs, we can increase tax revenue and resolve the SSI budget problem. The problem for DC is that no one knows how to double the economy or leverage tariffs to expand the domestic pie. President Trump does.
Again, we mistakenly view our problems through the prism of how they were created.
This paralysis by analysis is emphasized by tradition, by DC punditry and by the media complex who exist to talk about the problems. But thankfully, President Trump views our problems through the prism of how to solve them. President Trump doesn’t look backward, he looks forward; it is a very unique and effective approach.
We look at the problem as if we individually are given an elephant to eat. President Trump looks at the problem as if there needs to be more of us with forks. It is, essentially, the feed a man a fish or teach a man to fish conversation. Which one creates the larger economic pie?
Despite the naysayers, backbiters and backseat drivers, we must continually remind ourselves that Trump’s optimal solution approach works. We have the history of the Trump Doctrine (2017 through 2020) to review as a reminder. It just works.
So, with that in mind…. here’s a little back-and-forth that might help break the funk and remind us to smile.
[Via Unseen] – “If Trump wins, he will be handed a country in basically a depression for a majority of its people, on the brink or actually in ww3, a wide open border and a 5th column of millions of anti-American military aged men within that border, a deteriorating military, a nation so in debt it will struggle to raise capital, a country with fragile supply lines for most of the goods it needs, a divided population with half brainwashed by the media to hate the concepts the country was founded on, and a government staffed with people who will be actively fighting everything he does. Pray for our country because regardless of who wins, it’s going to be a long, hard fight to keep this country together, let alone make it great again.” (link)
My quick ‘elevator‘ reply – “Which is exactly why Donald J Trump is the best man for the hardest job of this era. Trump will end the wars in Ukraine and Gaza within a week. Restart U.S. energy independence. Tariff China and EU, pull out of NATO, eliminate Green New Deal and then…. (2+2) along with the immediate closure of the southern border, Trump will collapse the infrastructure of Chinese EV’s in Mexico…. Then he’ll call MbS, have a Big Mac and Diet Coke and plan for day two.” (link)
Now, granted I am being a little brief and big picture in retort, but the substance of what I am sharing is completely doable. All is not lost. It is entirely possible to reverse course and Make America Great Again.
[Anne Hyatt] – “While I like that plan, fingers crossed, I don’t see how he can end the War in Gaza.” (link)
Again, THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX – “Did you follow the Trump doctrine in ’17 through ’20?
After talking to MbS, Trump will call Egypt’s President al-Sisi, and tell all regional players that fighting immediately stops and Sisi is now leading the reconciliation effort. Likely Hamas will balk. POTUS Trump will then tell Qatar to kick out the Hamas/MB leaders (“Drive them out” 2.0) or they will face economic sanctions. Erdogan will be told to stick a sock in it, and he’d better not give a home base to Hamas again. Trump will tell Hamas leadership they need to live in Gaza; like actually live in the region they presumably lead. Trump will tell Sisi to make part of the deal a regional rule that all Gaza political leadership must live in Gaza. Syria, Jordan and Kuwait will think Trump is nuts but keep quiet because Trump might be willing to prove he’s nuts,…. and eventually everyone will call Fattah Abel al-Sisi to find out the date for the peace summit.
After lunch, Trump calls Putin because that one is easier. (link)
♦President Trump’s foreign policy approach brought North and South Korea together away from the table of conflict. ♦President Trump’s foreign policy approach brought Serbia and Kosovo together away from the table of conflict. ♦President Trump’s foreign policy rallied the Gulf Cooperation Council to stop Qatar’s support for Islamic extremists via the Muslim Brotherhood. ♦President Trump’s foreign policy brought Turkey and the Kurdish forces together away from war and conflict. ♦President Trump’s foreign policy created a ceasefire to stop the bloodshed in Syria. President Trump mediated a cessation of hostilities between India & Pakistan in the Kashmir region. ♦President Trump’s foreign policy brought Israel and the UAE together… and then Bahrain… and then Sudan in the Abraham Accords.
President Trump executes a clear foreign policy, a unique doctrine of sorts, where national security is achieved by leveraging U.S. economic power. It is a fundamental shift in approaching both allies and adversaries – summarized within the oft repeated phrase: “economic security is national security.”
The Trump Doctrine, using economics to achieve national security objectives, was/is a fundamental paradigm shift. Modern U.S. history provided no easy reference for the effective outcome, and fearing irrelevance, Washington DC was furious at how effective he was.
President Trump is the one guy who can do it again.
Author, Beyond Repair: The Decline and Fall of the CIA
The following is adapted from a talk delivered at Hillsdale College on October 3, 2023, during a conference on “U.S. Intelligence: History and Controversies.”
We need the CIA, but we also need to recognize the uncomfortable reality that the CIA is not performing at the level we require. It is not keeping us safe. It must be repaired, and it must be repaired quickly.
The CIA was created after World War II with one overriding primary mission—to prevent a reoccurrence of what happened at Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. We were never going to allow an enemy to surprise us on that scale again. We were never going to find ourselves blind regarding a threat of that magnitude and immediacy. We would be forewarned and forearmed.
Then came 9/11. Members of Al Qaeda hijacked four airliners. They crashed three of them into their targets. They were prevented from succeeding with the fourth only by the heroism of the brave American passengers.
Al Qaeda was not some unknown entity. It had been around for years. Osama Bin Laden had threatened to attack us on our own soil for years. Al Qaeda had blown up two of our embassies in East Africa. Al Qaeda had almost sunk the USS Cole in Yemen. Al Qaeda had tried once before to take down the World Trade Center.
Yet we had not a single source inside that organization capable of warning us of the 9/11 attacks that would kill almost 3,000 Americans.
On May 2, 2011, U.S. special operations personnel attacked a compound in Pakistan and killed the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. That operation in and of itself was clearly a success. But the fact that it took us almost ten years after 9/11 to find and kill Bin Laden should give us pause.
Bin Laden fully understood the technical capabilities of American intelligence. After his escape from Afghanistan, he established himself in a compound with no internet service. He had no cell phone. He communicated with his organization via a courier system and dealt with those couriers face to face. There were no emails, text messages, or phone calls for us to intercept.
Finding Bin Laden meant getting a source inside Al Qaeda at a level high enough to know his physical location. It took almost a decade for the CIA, with all its resources, to acquire such a source, even though this was probably the CIA’s single highest priority.
More recently, in 2020, we found ourselves amidst a worldwide pandemic that originated in China. Despite attempts to characterize this as a natural outbreak of a disease found in bats, it has become abundantly clear that COVID-19 was the product of gain-of-function research in a bio lab in Wuhan, China. It has also become clear that there were numerous warning signs regarding the dangers of the work and substandard lab practices in Wuhan.
Biological warfare threats are real and have been considered so for many years. Collecting intelligence about both state-sponsored and terrorist biological warfare programs is one of the CIA’s top priorities. The existence of the lab from which COVID emerged was not a secret. Neither was the fact that the Chinese were working overtime to make coronaviruses more dangerous to humans.
Yet we received no warning prior to the outbreak of the pandemic. When people began to get sick here and around the world, the CIA could apparently provide no useful information regarding the origins of the disease. Even now, years later, it seems unable to tell us precisely how the pandemic began. We had no sources inside China’s top bio lab. We apparently have no sources there now.
Why is that? Why is an organization staffed with highly talented people and provided with unparalleled resources failing to perform its core functions?
There are two reasons: bureaucratization and politicization.
BUREAUCRATIZATION
Forget for a moment all the gadgets and technology. The core business of the CIA is recruiting spies inside target organizations, handling them securely, and producing intelligence for policymakers in Washington, D.C.
At its heart espionage is a very old business. Its essence has remained unchanged for thousands of years. And it is not a science—it is an art. There is a reason intelligence officers talk about tradecraft. Espionage requires innate skills. Not everyone can do it.
CIA case officers may be called upon to do many things during their careers, but when it comes down to it, their primary job is spotting, assessing, developing, and recruiting spies. That means getting close to people who are often very objectionable, figuring out what makes them tick, and convincing them to help you by betraying their colleagues and their countries and to trust that you can keep them alive while they do so.
That means getting a Russian intelligence officer to take actions he knows will result in his execution and the disgrace of his family if he is caught. It means persuading an Iranian nuclear scientist that working with you will make his countrymen safer and their future better. It means convincing a member of Al Qaeda that you are not the enemy of Islam and that you know your trade well enough to keep him from meeting a grisly fate.
All of this requires someone who has impeccable gut instincts, can make decisions on the fly, and can navigate through a maze of mirrors and tolerate extremely high degrees of ambiguity. When you are face to face with a very dangerous person on the street in a slum in South Asia or in a desert in the Middle East, you do not have time to deliberate. You can’t phone CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, for guidance. You must know intuitively what to do and take immediate action.
The people in charge of our government, including those who run the CIA, have forgotten this. They have done their best to turn the CIA into just another federal agency. Recruiters no longer search for intangibles or focus on the key psychological traits critical to success in the world of spying. They look at academic degrees, existing levels of language proficiency, and increasingly at things like skin color and sexual orientation.
Training has been softened and is increasingly formbook in nature. We act as if anyone can be taught to conduct espionage—as if this is no longer an arcane craft to be practiced by a select group of unique people.
We have buried operations under endless layers of middle management. Case officers in the field may spend days just trying to complete the requisite paperwork for a single asset meeting. Every moment they are sitting behind a desk is a moment they are not out meeting sources, recruiting new sources, or learning the environment around them.
In Washington, the management ranks are increasingly filled with individuals who seldom travel far from Langley and have never demonstrated that they can accomplish anything on the street. They have laughed at the boss’s jokes. They have demonstrated their fealty to the prevailing groupthink. They have moved paper, attended meetings, and climbed the corporate ladder. But in large measure, they have no idea how to run an op or recruit a source.
At its core the CIA is meant to do what everyone else considers impossible. It is supposed to be run by people who want to steal the crown jewels and will do so if asked. Not anymore. Now it is run by people who look for ops with no possible downside and, therefore, no particular upside either.
The CIA has proved unable to put a source inside a Chinese bio lab, within the leadership structure of the Taliban, or next to Vladimir Putin. Those kinds of operations require the willingness to take risks and the ability to manage those risks. We no longer have either.
POLITICIZATION
On September 11, 2012, two American compounds in the Libyan city of Benghazi were attacked by a well known Islamic militia with a history of attacking Western targets. One of the compounds, occupied by the Department of State, was overrun. The American ambassador to Libya, who was visiting from Tripoli at the time, was killed.
The other compound was occupied by CIA personnel and was better prepared to resist. Those inside held out long enough for an ad hoc relief force from the embassy in Tripoli to arrive and for the CIA personnel to be evacuated. No military relief force was sent by the Obama administration.
Throughout the attacks on the compounds, a continuous stream of reporting was sent to Washington from the field. All that reporting told the same story: a large-scale assault had been launched on two American-occupied compounds by a heavily armed Islamic terrorist group.
Nevertheless, in the immediate aftermath of the attacks, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and others in the Obama administration began to peddle the narrative that a peaceful demonstration in Benghazi had simply gotten out of hand—that this was not an act of terrorism. The backlash against this transparent lie was immediate. The Obama administration came under scathing criticism.
Enter Mike Morell, acting director of the CIA, who stepped forward to take the blame for the erroneous claims of a peaceful demonstration. Analysts at the CIA, Morell said, had written an assessment to this effect, and he had passed it on to the White House. Obama and company were blameless. The CIA had given them bad intelligence.
This was absurd on its face. CIA analysts do not review a mountain of reporting about ongoing attacks using heavy machine guns, mortars, and rocket-propelled grenades and then write up an assessment saying, “We think they meant this to be peaceful.” Nor, obviously, has any evidence of such an assessment been produced.
In short, the Director of Central Intelligence had injected himself into a domestic political dispute, covering for a blatant lie concocted by the administration. He did so, presumably, because he believed that Secretary of State Clinton would become the next president and that he would be named to a senior post in her administration. Interestingly, when Clinton lost in 2016, Morell was given a post with a six-figure annual salary at a Washington think tank aligned with the Democratic Party.
In the runup to the 2016 election, people within Clinton’s campaign concocted the idea of smearing Donald Trump with false accusations of colluding with Russia, based on a dossier filled with lies, gossip, and innuendo. When this failed to prevent Trump’s election, they carried on the deception with an eye to destabilizing the Trump presidency and perhaps even removing Trump from office.
The involvement of the FBI in this effort, known by its FBI codename Crossfire Hurricane, has been extensively documented. What has been much less talked about is the CIA’s role.
The extensive investigation of what transpired during Crossfire Hurricane has shown that American intelligence sought the involvement of a number of allied intelligence services, most notably the British. It has also shown that with the passage of time, the British in particular became decreasingly enthusiastic about their involvement as it became clear to them that this activity was inappropriate and illegal.
Such interaction with close allies doesn’t happen without the involvement and assistance of the CIA. That is not the way it works. If you are in London, for instance, meeting with British intelligence and counterintelligence services, you are doing so not only with the knowledge of the chief of station in London, but also with his or her permission and assistance.
John Brennan, the CIA’s director at the time, not only had to know about Crossfire Hurricane; he also had to approve it. When Brennan stepped down as head of the CIA, he was replaced by Gina Haspel. She had been the chief of station in London throughout Crossfire Hurricane and had to have been directly involved in the interactions with the British services that were part of this plot.
We should also note that when news of Hunter Biden’s “laptop from hell” threatened to derail Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign for the White House, 51 former intelligence officers came forward and signed on to a now infamous letter branding the laptop as a product of Russian disinformation. I have seen the contents of that laptop and retain a copy to this day. I can assure you it was immediately obvious in looking at the laptop’s contents that it was real and that it suggested strongly that Joe Biden himself was compromised by a number of foreign actors—chief among them the Chinese Communist Party.
Five former directors or acting directors of the CIA were among the 51 signatories to this letter, whose clear purpose was to bury the contents of the laptop and get Joe Biden elected. Both Mike Morell and John Brennan were among those five.
SOLUTIONS
If the CIA is critical to our survival—and I believe it is—we need to appoint someone to run it who knows the terrain. The new director will have to understand what is meant in describing espionage as an art. Some of what is needed can be taught—for instance, you can send people to language schools. But you can’t teach the critical skills required to reach across cultures, connect with people who belong to an organization that exists to murder people like you, and then get them to follow your orders. That takes raw physical courage. It takes perception. It takes instinct, insight, and immense self-confidence.
The new director will also need to have the full support of the president. When Wild Bill Donovan set up the Office of Strategic Services (the precursor to the CIA) in 1942, he faced intense opposition. He succeeded because everyone in Washington knew he had a direct line to President Franklin D. Roosevelt and would pick up the phone if he had to. A director seeking to reform the CIA today will need an equal level of backing.
The new director must, from the very beginning, make crystal clear that there is no more business as usual, that the organization is returning to its roots and getting back to basics, that there will be zero tolerance for any involvement in domestic politics—and that individuals who involve themselves in politics will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
A significant number of senior officers should be removed immediately. Some of those officers are complicit in the actions I detailed above. Many others have stood by silently as a great organization has decayed and laws have been broken. There must be a clear sea change. Everyone in the organization must understand that real reform is underway and there will be zero tolerance for foot dragging, slow rolling, or internal resistance.
The records of every single person in a command position in the CIA—both at Langley and in the field—should be reviewed. Those individuals who made rank by playing it safe and currying favor with superiors should be immediately removed. They should be replaced by individuals with the brains, guts, and audacity to do what is needed. If they don’t get the job done, they should be replaced in turn.
There can be only one measure of success—results. We must not be interested in more PowerPoint presentations or wiring diagrams. We must be interested solely in intelligence that gives us a decisive advantage over our adversaries.
Recruiting must be completely revamped. Quotas are absurd. Focusing on color, gender, and sexual orientation is at best irrelevant. We want the best, and that means those people who possess the unique blend of skills and abilities that enable them to do what everyone else considers impossible.
Training must be toughened. The world is getting more dangerous by the day. If we are going to expect the case officers in a retooled CIA to crawl into the belly of the beast, get the intel we need, and come back alive, they will need to be tough enough and well-trained enough to do that.
The structure of the CIA must be flattened and simplified. The organization must be field-centric. It is not the job of those in the field to wait for people in Langley to finish rounds of meetings and reviews before moving. It is the job of people in Langley to keep up. Anything and everything that impedes those in the field in the accomplishment of their missions must be eliminated.
All this needs to happen immediately upon the appointment of a new director. There can be no more blue-ribbon panels or interminable outside reviews. We know what the problems are. We know how to fix them. What we have lacked until now is the willingness to do what is needed.
Somewhere in the world right now a terrorist group is planning a deadly biological attack on the United States. The Afghan and Pakistani Taliban organizations are conspiring to seize functioning Pakistani nuclear weapons. The Chinese are putting the finishing touches on a plan to blockade Taiwan and crash the global economy. The Venezuelans are discussing with the Russians the idea of putting hypersonic missiles on their soil that can carry nuclear warheads.
The only organization that has a prayer of providing the necessary insight into these and many other threats is the CIA. We needed it in 1947. We need it even more today. We have no time to waste in returning it to fighting form.
The granular issue of this specific whistleblower story pertains to an FBI investigative employee who had his security clearance suspended after officials within the FBI discovered he attended a speech given by President Trump.
However, the bigger issue uncovered during a review of that punishment was written FBI instructions from within the sector of the FBI that investigates and issues security clearances. In essence, the FBI has a documented standard that political ideology determines who will get security clearances approved.
If a person supports President Trump, holds conservative views, or does anything that would identify themselves as not being in alignment with the leftist worldview, their security clearance application or renewal would be denied. Put another way, the FBI has written policy examples that discriminate against political views.
This should not come as a surprise. Factually, when CTH outlined how the Obama administration began to implement the process of filtration and purging of government agencies, we pointed out how the FBI security clearance investigative section was the first sector changed. Obama and Eric Holder then began the process of denying security clearances. {GO DEEP – Fourth Branch of Govt}.
Tucker Carlson points out the larger issues of the FBI using almost identical context from our prior research outline. WATCH:
Biden Puts Conservatives on Notice: “If They Wanna Think to Take on Government if We Get Out of Line … Guess What? They Need F-15s! They Don’t Need a Rifle!” (VIDEO)
Joe Biden delivered a speech at Everytown’s Gun Sense University at the Washington Hilton after his son Hunter was found guilty of three federal gun felonies.
You just can’t make this stuff up.
Biden’s 20-minute speech was a total disaster. He incoherently rambled about banning ‘assault weapons.’
There is no such thing as an ‘assault weapon.’
He mocked the ‘tree of liberty’ Second Amendment supporters and threatened millions of conservatives.
“If they wanna think to take on government if we get out of line … guess what? They need F-15s! They don’t need a rifle!” Biden said.
WATCH:
BIDEN (slurring heavily): "If they wanna think to take on government if we get out of line … guess what? They need F-15s! They don't need a rifle!" pic.twitter.com/9Lh28W52bU
This isn’t the first time Joe Biden has threatened millions of conservatives.
Biden previously threatened millions of Trump supporters at the National Action Network Martin Luther King, Jr. Day breakfast.
“I love my right-wing friends talking about how the tree of liberty is watered with the blood of patriots. If you want to take on the federal government, you need some F-15s. You don’t need an AR-15,” Biden said.
In August 2022 Joe Biden went off-script and threatened “right-wing Americans” in a speech in Pennsylvania.
“For those brave right-wing Americans… if you want to fight against the country, you need an F-15. You need something little more than a gun,” said Biden.
“I’m not joking!” he added.
Imagine the headlines if Trump said this about BLM.
Trump’s campaign took a moment to comment on the recent conviction of Hunter Biden, who was found guilty on all three felony charges related to gun possession after a three-hour jury deliberation. Hunter now faces up to 25 years behind bars.
Following the conviction, Trump’s campaign National Press Secretary, Karoline Leavitt, released a statement:
“This trial has been nothing more than a distraction from the real crimes of the Biden Crime Family, which has raked in tens of millions of dollars from China, Russia and Ukraine. Crooked Joe Biden’s reign over the Biden Family Criminal Empire is all coming to an end on November 5th, and never again will a Biden sell government access for personal profit.”
Screenshot: Team Trump
Matt Gaetz also weighed in on these charges, saying, “The Hunter Biden gun conviction is kinda dumb tbh.”
The Hunter Biden gun conviction is kinda dumb tbh.
Hunter Biden is guilty. Everyone in the world has known that for a long time. Today a jury in Delaware found him guilty. But do not take the bait, I plead with you. The media is going to say this is the rule of law working. It’s even.
What’s happened with the lawfare with President Trump and all of their conservatives is now okay because because they got Hunter on this one thing. That’s not true. They charged him with the lowest level thing they could find, okay. This is about lying on a form to buy a gun, that he was addicted to drugs. Clear as day. Everyone knows that. They did not charge him with running an international pay-to-play influence peddling scheme with his father as the product. His father’s awareness of it with some of the most corrupt corners of the world, the CCP, the corrupt corners of Ukraine…
Joe Biden has repeatedly said that he will not grant a pardon to his son, Hunter Biden, should he be convicted of illegal gun possession or any other related charges. During a recent interview, when questioned about the possibility of pardoning his son, Biden’s response was concise and definitive: “Yes,” according to Politico.
We’ll see if Biden stands by his word. As Democrat Minority Leader Rep. Hakeem Jeffries said, “Biden commented as a loving father as I would hope any loving father would do.”
Biden also released his statement following the conviction of his son.
“I will accept the outcome of this case and will continue to respect the judicial process as Hunter considers an appeal. Jill and I will always be there for Hunter and the rest of our family with our love and support. Nothing will ever change that.”
If America’s schools are to impart principles of freedom and democracy to future generations, they must start by respecting the constitutional rights of their students
Take the case of Lucas Hudson.
With all the negative press being written about today’s young people, it’s refreshing to meet a young person who not only knows his rights but is prepared to stand up for them.
Lucas is a smart kid, a valedictorian of his graduating class at the Collegiate Academy at Armwood High School in Hillsborough County, Fla.
So, when school officials gave Lucas an ultimatum: either remove most of his speech’s religious references from his graduation speech—in which he thanked the people who helped shape his character, reflected on how quickly time goes by, and urged people to use whatever time they have to love others and serve the God who loves us—or he would not be speaking at all, Lucas refused to forfeit his rights.
In coming to Lucas’ defense, attorneys for The Rutherford Institute warned school officials that their attempts to browbeat Lucas into watering down his graduation speech could expose the school to a First Amendment lawsuit.
Thankfully for Lucas, the school backed down, and he was able to deliver his speech as written.
It doesn’t always work out so well, unfortunately.
Over the course of The Rutherford Institute’s 42-year history, we have defended countless young people who found themselves censored, silenced and denied their basic First Amendment rights, especially when they chose to exercise their rights to free speech and religious freedom.
In case after case, we encounter an appalling level of ignorance on the part of public school officials who mistakenly believe that the law requires anything religious be banned from public schools.
Here’s where government officials get it wrong: while the government may not establish or compel a particular religion, it also may not silence and suppress religious speech merely because others might take offense.
People are free to ignore, disagree with, or counter the religious speech of others, but the government cannot censor private religious speech.
Unfortunately, you can only defend your rights when you know them, and the American people—and those who represent them—are utterly ignorant about their freedoms, history, and how the government is supposed to operate.
As Morris Berman points out in his book Dark Ages America, “70 percent of American adults cannot name their senators or congressmen; more than half don’t know the actual number of senators, and nearly a quarter cannot name a single right guaranteed by the First Amendment. Sixty-three percent cannot name the three branches of government. Other studies reveal that uninformed or undecided voters often vote for the candidate whose name and packaging (e.g., logo) are the most powerful; color is apparently a major factor in their decision.”
More than government corruption and ineptitude, police brutality, terrorism, gun violence, drugs, illegal immigration or any other so-called “danger” that threatens our nation, civic illiteracy may be what finally pushes us over the edge.
As Thomas Jefferson warned, no nation can be both ignorant and free.
Unfortunately, the American people have existed in a technology-laden, entertainment-fueled, perpetual state of cluelessness for so long that civic illiteracy has become the new normal for the citizenry.
Not even the government bureaucrats who are supposed to represent us know much about civics, American history and geography, or the Constitution although they take an oath to uphold, support and defend the Constitution against “enemies foreign and domestic.”
Those who gave us the Constitution and the Bill of Rights believed that the government exists at the behest of its citizens. The government’s purpose is to protect, defend and even enhance our freedoms, not violate them.
It was no idle happenstance that the Constitution opens with these three powerful words: “We the people.”
Those who founded this country knew quite well that every citizen must remain vigilant or freedom would be lost. As Thomas Paine recognized, “It is the responsibility of the patriot to protect his country from its government.”
You have no rights unless you exercise them.
Still, you can’t exercise your rights unless you know what those rights are.
“If Americans do not understand the Constitution and the institutions and processes through which we are governed, we cannot rationally evaluate important legislation and the efforts of our elected officials, nor can we preserve the national unity necessary to meaningfully confront the multiple problems we face today,” warns the Brennan Center in its Civic Literacy Report Card. “Rather, every act of government will be measured only by its individual value or cost, without concern for its larger impact. More and more we will ‘want what we want, and [will be] convinced that the system that is stopping us is wrong, flawed, broken or outmoded.’”
Education precedes action.
As the Brennan Center concludes “America, unlike most of the world’s nations, is not a country defined by blood or belief. America is an idea, or a set of ideas, about freedom and opportunity. It is these ideas that bind us together as Americans and have kept us free, strong, and prosperous. But these ideas do not perpetuate themselves. They must be taught and learned anew with each generation.”
Lucas Hudson would have passed such a test with flying colors.
On graduation day, Lucas stepped up to the podium and delivered his uncensored valedictorian speech as written, without any interference by school censors.
As Lucas’s father relayed to The Rutherford Institute:
“In the end, Lucas got to give his entire speech the way he wanted to give it, and everybody was paying attention. Nobody got hurt. Nothing bad happened. It was just a young man using the First Amendment rights to speak his mind regarding his personal beliefs. [Lucas] never thought a few sentences in a speech would create such a controversy in his world, but this speech turned into a defining moment for him. He will never be the same after this experience, but this permanent change is a good thing. When it mattered, Lucas stood up for himself, and when those he stood up against tried to push him down, [The Rutherford Institute] came to his aide and backed him up to make it a fair fight. I am comforted to know you are defending the rights of the people. These fights matter. Every time you defend the rights of one person, you defend the rights of every person. You helped my son fight for his rights against the school, and, in doing so, Hillsborough County Public Schools will think twice before infringing on the rights of future students. Your defense of Lucas became an inspiration for the students in his school and sparked a healthy and meaningful debate among the teachers, students, and parents about the value of the First Amendment and the need for limits on government control over our personal beliefs. You are fighting for good and doing important work. Don’t ever stop. Thank you, Rutherford Institute, for being there for my son when he needed you most.”
America needs more freedom fighters like Lucas Hudson and The Rutherford Institute.
It’s up to us.
We have the power to make and break the government.
We the American people—the citizenry—are the arbiters and ultimate guardians of America’s welfare, defense, liberty, laws and prosperity.
We must act—and act responsibly.
A healthy, representative government is hard work. It takes a citizenry that is informed about the issues, educated about how the government operates, and willing to make the sacrifices necessary to stay involved.
When the extreme leftists cannot get their way by manipulating the legal system through Lawfare, they come unglued.
The tribal leadership of Norm Eisen, Mary McCord, Andrew Weissmann and the larger Lawfare community have been waging an open media campaign against Florida Judge Aileen Cannon because in the Jack Smith documents case Judge Cannon is not giving them what they want.
It’s somewhat personal to the Lawfare crew because from the outset it has appeared that Eisen, McCord and Weissmann write the briefs and motions that Jack Smith files with the court. If the Lawfare effort is being rejected, dismissed or diluted by Judge Cannon, the Lawfare tribe takes it personal and make appearances on leftist media networks, broadcasts and social media telling their followers to file judicial complaints against her.
In response to what the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals calls an “orchestrated campaign,” Chief Judge William Pryor of the 11th CCA has published a blistering order [SEE HERE], informing the clerk of the court not to accept any more complaints and to trash them.
Making matters worse for the Lawfare pearl clutchers, Chief Justice Pryor tells the court’s clerk not to even respond to the complaints, just publish this order. In the larger message the 11th CCA is essentially telling the Lawfare activists to knock it off, and this approach can have profoundly negative implications for Jack Smith’s ability to use the appeals court as a tool to target Judge Cannon.
“The Chief Judge for the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals is putting an official end to the THOUSANDS OF COORDINATED COMPLAINTS against Judge Aileen Cannon. Democrats are totally hysterical when they can’t control a courtroom (or a SC Justice like Alito).” ~ Mark Mendlovitz
After we checked on Sunday following President Trump announcing his TikTok account he had 800,000 followers. Today at the same time he has over 3.8 million followers; that is a gain of approximately 3 million followers in the past 24 hours and growing.
Additionally, according to the Trump campaign and Eric Trump, donations have flooded into the campaign as the American public show their contempt for the judicial Lawfare with their wallets and support. As noted by Eric Trump approximately 30% of the donations came from people who had never donated to a political campaign before, and $70 million of the initial funds raised were small donors (under $250).
After Trump Verdict, Megyn Kelly Urges Republicans to Give Democrats “a Taste of Their Own Medicine”
Theme joined by others, including John Hinderaker at Powerline: “If Trump wins in November, his Department of Justice should immediately indict Biden, and Biden should be hounded until the day he dies or goes to prison, whichever happens first.”
The Trump guilty verdict has got many people on the right very angry and for good reasons. Some prominent voices are even calling for payback.
Now that Democrats believe this tactic is working, they will keep using it until it doesn’t work anymore. One of the only ways to make them understand why this is a bad thing, is to make it hurt for them.
Megyn Kelly understands this. She recently spoke about it on her podcast.
MEGYN KELLY: This whole scheme, and here it is the proper word is corrupt. It’s a before and after moment for America. What just happened today is a line we can’t uncross, and these Democrats will rue the day they decided to use lawfare to stop a presidential candidate.
I’m not talking about violence; I’m talking about tit for tat. You just wait, and it won’t be Hunter Biden next time; it’s going to be Joe Biden. It could potentially still be Barack Obama. It could still potentially be Hillary Clinton. We’re going to have to look at what the statutes of limitations are on the various crimes they surely committed.
We’re going to have to look at passing laws to revive those dead crimes, felonies, or misdemeanors so that those cases can be brought out of time. That’s what may be in the interest of justice, just like they did for E.J. Carroll with the New York State law that was passed so that she could sue him. That’s what happened.
Turnabout is fair play. And John Yoo, an amazing lawyer who worked in the Bush administration Department of Justice, has a great piece out today talking about how that’s the only way they’ll learn.
The only way to save the Republic now is to give them a taste of their own medicine. That’s it. That’s it. They tasted blood today. They’re the wolves with the bloody piece of meat in their mouths. That doesn’t stop the wolf from coming back for more. The only thing that will stop him is if he loses a limb of his own.
Watch the clip below:
🚨 NEW: Megyn Kelly suggests a reckoning is coming for Biden, Obama, and Clinton after Trump verdict.
“You just wait, and it won’t be Hunter Biden the next time. It’s going to be Joe Biden. It could potentially still be Barack Obama. It could still potentially be Hillary… pic.twitter.com/VCl9DxBKwL
The Federalist CEO Calls For Republicans to Draw Up Lists of Democrats to ‘Put in Prison’ After Trump Verdict
Sean Davis, the CEO and co-founder of the the right-wing website The Federalist, called on Republicans to draw up lists of Democrats to “put in prison” in a social media post reacting to Donald Trump’s conviction on Thursday evening.
“In 2016, the presidential race was decided based on candidates releasing lists of potential Supreme Court nominees,” wrote Davis. “In 2024, I want to see lists of which Democrat officials are going to be put in prison.”
“This is what happens when you cross the Rubicon,” he added.
In 2016, the presidential race was decided based on candidates releasing lists of potential Supreme Court nominees.
In 2024, I want to see lists of which Democrat officials are going to be put in prison.
If you’re a Republican running for office, you can just go ahead and throw away all of your elegant little policy proposals for this or that corporate exclusion or tax subsidy. Give me a list of which Democrat officials you’re going to put in prison, or get lost.
Even John Hinderaker over at Powerline is talking this way:
What to do now? First, it is now absolutely essential that Trump be elected president. The Democrats cannot be allowed to get away with this effort to turn America into a banana republic.
Second, the Democrats understand nothing except the raw exercise of power. Therefore, Republican attorneys general and district attorneys should bring criminal charges against Democratic officeholders wherever possible. No Democratic officeholder should be allowed to retire, in any jurisdiction with Republican law enforcement, without facing criminal charges. There can’t be a single Democratic official in America against whom a criminal case can’t be brought that is better than this case against Trump. It should be open season on Democrats in the criminal courts.
Third, the criminal prosecutions should begin with Joe Biden. Unlike Trump, Biden is actually a criminal. He is already known to be guilty under the federal bribery statute, to the tune of at least $20 million. If Trump wins in November, his Department of Justice should immediately indict Biden, and Biden should be hounded until the day he dies or goes to prison, whichever happens first.
We are no longer in the realm of William F. Buckley and intellectual discussions.
The Democrats have crossed a line, and they will not stop until they are forced to do so.
From Judge Merchan reversing the order of final arguments before the jury, so the prosecution went last and could not be rebutted by the defense, to the outrageous and unprecedented instructions that all 12 of the jury need not agree on the guilt of the defendant, the fix was in from the moment the Biden Administration’s No. 3 man at the DoJ magically appeared as a line prosecutor working for Alvin Bragg in New York.
Add to that the judge illicitly donating to the Biden campaign and an anti-Trump PAC, and his daughter raising $93 million dollars off her father’s trial for the Democrats, this was a political operation not even thinly veiled as a judicial proceeding. A dark day indeed. (For my eye witness story from how it looked on the inside see the account of my day in court with the President).
Judge Juan Merchan poses for a picture in his chambers in New York, Thursday, March 14, 2024. Merchan could become the first judge ever to oversee a former U.S. president’s criminal trial. He’s presiding over Donald Trump’s hush money case in New York. (AP Photo/Seth Wenig)
On the obverse, there are several conclusions which are also already clear but which bode very well for the President, his supporters and all Patriots.
After the the verdict was reached, within minutes the Trump website crashed and stayed crashed for hours. Why? Was is hacked? Hardly. It crashed because of the overwhelming numbers of Americans who have had enough and wanted to donate to the President’s re-election campaign.
It is likely that in those few hours, the total amount he garnered will exceed his previous historic record of $54 million raised in one day. Strikingly as well, as you can see on my X feed, there are countless Democrats who have publicly stated that they too have donated to the Republican candidate and have decided to vote for President Trump on November 5th.
At the moment the President remains a free man who left the courtroom in his armored Secret Service SUV and motorcade and slept in his own bed last night and will remain free until his sentencing, which will occur, of course, just four days before the Republican Convention. Politics again.
But whatever Juan Merchan doles out matters on sentencing – matters not in any Constitutional sense, since the Democrat Party may be fueled by hatred and be well-organized, but they seem not to have done their homework.
There are only three requirements for any American to become President, beyond obviously winning the Electoral College vote, they are: 35 years or older, natural born citizen, and 14 years a resident of the United States. There is no exclusion based upon having a criminal record. So, yes a felon can be the President. (Sadly many Conservative voters don’t know this. Please educate them).
In this April 21, 2017, file photo, President Donald Trump poses for a portrait in the Oval Office in Washington after an interview with The Associated Press.Andrew Harnik / AP
So, the President is politically rich and more powerful than he has ever been since he came down the escalator in Trump Tower all those years ago. If the election were today, and if we were to have a free and fair election, he would win. But five months is a long time in politics and we must take nothing for granted.
These are all the obvious consequences of what happened yesterday, but that misses the real historic consequence of what we witnessed less than 24 hours ago. Yesterday isn’t about one man, one party, or even one election. It’s about the very fabric of our very system, the compact of the people and their political elite, judiciary and organs of state.
Yes, the President will appeal the decision, but appeals are designed to correct mistakes. Yesterday was no mistake. It was deliberate in every minute detail. The system was deliberately perverted. As a result America was changed.
Our society is predicated on our differences being settled in a civilized fashion. What happens when the citizens of a nation have no trust in the justice system? Even if the innocent man wins the 2024 Presidential election, millions of people will never trust the legal system that has power over them. How does a nation ever fix that?
In the meantime, when it comes to President Trump, the real verdict will come on November 5th.
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
The Qualifications Clause set forth in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 requires the President to be a natural-born citizen, at least thirty-five years of age, and a resident of the United States for at least fourteen years.1
Like the age requirements for membership in the House of Representatives2 and the Senate,3 the age requirement for the presidency set forth at Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 ensures that persons holding the office of President will have the necessary maturity for the position as well as sufficient time in a public role for the electorate to be able to assess the merits of a presidential candidate.4 In his Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, Justice Joseph Story stated: Considering the nature of the duties, the extent of the information, and the solid wisdom and experience required in the executive department, no one can reasonably doubt the propriety of some qualification of age.5
The Framers appear to have adopted the requirement that citizens be natural born citizens to ensure that the President’s loyalties would lie strictly with the United States. By barring naturalized citizens from the presidency, the requirement of being a natural born citizen, as Justice Story explained, protects the United States from ambitious foreigners, who might otherwise be intriguing for the office; and interposes a barrier against those corrupt interferences of foreign governments in executive elections, which have inflicted the most serious evils upon the elected monarchies of Europe.6 Article II, however, provided an exception for foreign-born persons who had immigrated to the colonies prior to the adoption of the Constitution.7 Justice Story explained that this was done out of respect to those distinguished revolutionary patriots, who were born in a foreign land, and yet had entitled themselves to high honors in their adopted country.8
While the Constitution does not define natural born Citizen, commentators have opined that the Framers would have understood the term to mean someone who was a U.S. citizen at birth with no need to go through a naturalization proceeding at some later time.9 British statutes from 1709 and 1731 expressly described children of British subjects who were born outside of Great Britain as natural born citizens and provided that they enjoyed the same rights to inheritance as children born in Great Britain.10 In addition, in the Naturalization Act of 1790, the First Congress provided that children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond the sea, . . . shall be considered as natural born citizens . . . .11 Consequently, under the principle that British common law and enactments of the First Congress are two particularly useful sources in understanding constitutional terms,12 it would appear likely that the Framers would have understood natural born citizen to encompass the children of United States citizens born overseas.13 Such an interpretation is further supported by the presidential candidacies of Senator John McCain of Arizona, who was born in the Panama Canal Zone; Governor George Romney of Michigan, who was born in Mexico, and Senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona, who was born in Arizona before it became a state.14
The Framers appear to have adopted the fourteen-year residency requirement to ensure that the people may have a full opportunity to know [the candidate’s] character and merits, and that he may have mingled in the duties, and felt the interests, and understood the principles, and nourished the attachments, belonging to every citizen in a republican government.15 Justice Story further explained that the fourteen-year residence requirement is not an absolute inhabitancy within the United States during the whole period; but such an inhabitancy as includes a permanent domicil in the United States.16
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
President Trump is running a smart media blitz approach following the ridiculous guilty verdict from New York City. The Trump campaign is visibly hitting multiple vote demographics simultaneously by targeting communications, appearances, advertising and interviews through platforms primarily used by those demographics.
Despite personally considering Ruper Murdoch an adversary, President Trump appears on Fox and Friends Weekend show to deliver his message to the segment of the GOP base that still review traditional cable media. This is the same network anchored around Brett Baier, who is one of the most Machiavellian anti-Trump pundits (perhaps only eclipsed in slime level duplicity by Salem’s Hugh Hewitt).
President Trump discusses the outcome of the trial with the Fox News Weekend team. WATCH:
1. Unconstitutional Gag Order that prevented President Trump from criticizing the trial, exposing the many conflicts that should have forced the judge to recuse himself, and the railroading of his fundamental due process rights.
2. Judge Merchan’s many, many conflicts of interests – all of which were disqualifying. His daughter, Loren Merchan, is President of Authentic Campaigns, a political consulting firm that hires the likes of the Biden-Harris Campaign, Adam Schiff, Ilhan Omar, and many other far left Democratic lawmakers. Loren’s firm has made tens of millions off these clients – Juan Merchan, through his daughter, had a direct financial stake in the outcome of this trial, a flagrant breach of the canons of legal ethics, both under the ABA and NY State, that under any other judge would have been grounds for a recusal.
3. Judge Merchan’s wife was previously employed by Letitia James, the Attorney General of New York State who campaigned on “getting” Donald Trump.
4. Bragg’s Lead Prosecutor was Matthew Colangelo, the former #3 official at the DOJ. We are told Colangelo graciously decided to step down from his prestigious office to work for a lowly state DA’s office – of course, a reasonable inference would be that he was directed to do so by the Biden Regime to persecute his leading political opponent in Donald John Trump.
5. Statute of Limitations (2 years, NY State) had long expired for the business records falsification scheme that served as the primary charge brought against Trump. For this reason, the case was passed over by the DOJ and even Alvin Bragg over seven years because it was so weak. Only once Bragg felt political pressure, externally via Clinton attorney Mark Pomerantz, who previously worked in Bragg’s office, and internally via Colangelo, a Biden lackey, did Bragg buckle under the political weight and press charges.
6. Venue in bright-blue Manhattan, a borough that voted for Joe Biden over Donald Trump at almost a 9 to 1 clip, prevented the President from ever getting a fair trial, because the pool of jurors was naturally biased against the 45th President, and could not possibly rule fairly and impartially (8 of the 12 cited the NY Times as their main source of news). Any pro-Trump jurors who were considered chose to self-select out themselves because they claimed they “could not rule fairly.” Case in point: no way in hell is the burden of proof met on any of these charges, and yet the jury pool consisted of two lawyers, who evidently believed just that. No reasonable juror, and especially no reasonable lawyer-juror, would have found that the elements of every single crime brought against Trump met the burden of proof of beyond a reasonable doubt.
7. Election Interference: This was not a new case: it had been circulating in various court systems, federal and state, for years. These charges were only brought this year to interfere with the 2024 presidential race, period. President Trump is now the leading presidential candidate, by every reputable poll, and the frontrunner by significant margins, a gap that has only expanded over time. There is no reason why this case should be brought now, six months before Election Day, unless there was a conspiracy to prevent President Trump from being on the campaign trail in key swing states, like PA, MI, AZ, and GA, which is exactly what occurred.
8. Stormy Daniels’ Testimony was unnecessarily detailed and flagrantly prejudicial against President Trump. Bragg’s Prosecutors asked her about her impressions on the Access Hollywood Tape, which should have never been allowed and have absolutely no bearing on anything. They also probed her on intimate, irrelevant details about her alleged affair with the President, including such inappropriate, salacious, and prejudicial questions as whether he wore protection, and where she testified to a “power imbalance” – all part of a character assassination campaign to smear his image before the jury.
9. Greatest Liar of All Time Michael Cohen’s Testimony, on which the entirety of the Prosecutor’s case was based, was unreliable, prejudicial, and grounds for reversible error; he contradicted himself and committed perjury on the stand in this proceeding. He admitted to lying and committing perjury in the past, which resulted in his prosecution and imprisonment. He admitted to waging a political vendetta against Donald Trump because of his previous conviction; he admitted to stealing tens of thousands of dollars from the Trump Organization, lying before a Congressional Committee, and financially profiting off this ongoing trial – and verdict, among other serious crimes.
10. Bragg’s Theory of The Case was flawed from start to finish – and unconstitutional. He claimed, under NY state law, that ordinarily the business falsification charge is deemed a Class A misdemeanor under the State penal code, which had expired by the SOL. However, by combining that misdemeanor with another misdemeanor, under the same law, Bragg claimed you can elevate the underlying crime to a felony, which has a longer statute of limitations than a misdemeanor and thus, in his view, is still actionable. The problem is that nothing in the NY State penal code spells this out expressly, or even implicitly: there is nothing that says combining two misdemeanors is sufficient to contrive a felony. This is a bespoke crime intended to fit a one defendant and one defendant only: Donald John Trump.
11. Several other problems persist with the above: 1) whether combining two class A misdemeanors to create a class E felony is supported by any legal precedent at all, or logically makes sense (it doesn’t);
12. 2) whether combining two misdemeanors to contrive a felony is constitutionally lawful – i.e., does not violate due process or is constitutionally operative as an unlawful bill of attainder, etc.; and
13. 3) even if that combination establishes a theory of liability to raise a misdemeanor into a felony, whether doing so to circumvent a long-expired SOL does not also violate due process?
14. The Second alleged crime, that Bragg combined with the business falsification crime, to contrive a felony, is inapplicable to President Trump. Bragg maintained that President Trump violated state campaign law. But that is problematic for at least two reasons:
15. 1) President Trump ran for President, a federal office, and not state office – and thereby, state campaign law does not apply to him;
16. 2) to the extent state campaign law does apply or is controlling, it is preempted (i.e., barred) – based on President Trump’s office and acts – by federal campaign law. In short, this matter should have been brought under the FEC or DOJ, not state court. Merchan’s court had no jurisdiction whatsoever to prosecute the matter.
17. The State Election Law, to the extent it was lawfully controlling, established a predicate crime scheme that is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court ruled in Ramos v. Louisiana that non-unanimous jury verdicts are a violation of fundamental due process rights. This is well-settled law. Federal precedent applies with equal force to state criminal court proceedings. Thus, the “mix and match” or “buffet” scheme that Merchan laid out, allowing the jury to select one of three predicate crimes under the relevant statute to reach a guilty verdict, is a flagrant violation of President Trump’s due process rights.
18. The three predicate crimes that Bragg’s theory of the case lays out: FECA violation, tax law violation, or record-keeping violation, each cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
19. The FECA violation should’ve been tossed out immediately, because a state court has no jurisdiction over the matter. The Federal Election Commission (“FEC”) has its own rules and procedures for administering election law violations, as well as a doctrine of sequencing that it is required to employ to administer disputes. This sequencing doctrine would require that Merchan refer any such FECA allegations to, for instance, the Federal Election Commission first, which might have primary jurisdiction over the matter, and then from there, the FEC might coordinate with the DOJ to prosecute any potential crimes. The point is: order matters; a rogue state court judge cannot unilaterally take up an issue belonging in federal court.
20. To the extent an alleged FECA violation controls here, there are a number of problems: 1) what statute are we talking about;
21. 2) how do we know that the alleged violation can be prosecuted as a crime, and isn’t just a civil matter;
22. 3) even if the alleged violation is a crime, how do we know
23. 1) such crime is a felony; and
24. 2) that crime can be adjudicated independently by an independent agency of the United States? In other words, does the FEC have the power to prosecute crimes unilaterally, and independently of the DOJ? That alone is sufficient grounds for a due process violation.
25. Again, we run into the issue of how 2 misdemeanor crimes mysteriously turn into an underlying felony. Is the law that any two misdemeanors creates a felony? Does it matter if the misdemeanor is a state crime versus an alleged federal crime? It cannot possibly be the case that all misdemeanors are created equal – nor can it be the case that if a jury found President Trump guilty of the predicate FECA misdemeanor, that the business falsification statute incorporates a federal misdemeanor to contrive a Class E felony. When has that ever been done before? Never!
26. Merchan has no knowledge of Federal Election Law. Typically, federal election law issues (FECA issues) are preempted by federal court. Putting all that to one side, however, considering that Merchan ignored all of that, and was hellbelt on prosecuting this nebulous crime in state court, he should have at least allowed an expert witness to opine on federal election law-related matters. That expert witness, former FEC Commissioner and government lawyer, Brad Smith, should have been allowed to testify on federal election law, a notoriously complex and highly specialized area of law. But Smith was not permitted to testify, because Merchan did not want the jury to hear expert testimony from someone competent in the relevant body of law. That prohibition of Smith’s testimony is prejudicial, and grounds for reversible error.
27. In addition to the FECA predicate crime issue, which is teeming with due process and other constitutional violations, both the alleged tax law violation, and general bookkeeping violation are also laden with due process problems.
28. Merchan has absolutely no authority to say that President Trump can be found guilty of violating “tax laws” or erroneously reporting a tax filing as a legal expense (when in fact, legally and definitionally, it was a “legal expense”); these two miscellaneous predicate crimes are constitutionally overbroad and cannot for those reasons alone satisfy the requisite burden of proof – due to concerns of being overbroad, Bragg’s theory of criminal liability violates due process as well.
29. Nondisclosure Agreements, Hush Money Payments, and “Catch and Kill” schemes are and have always been perfectly lawful; none of these things can serve as a basis for criminal liability, however controversial they might sound – nor too does consensual sexual activity, including out of wedlock sex, even with a pornstar, ever, ever impute criminal liability or the pretext of criminal liability upon the one doing the act. All of these acts are lawful, case closed.
30. Running for President of the United States, even if your name is Donald Trump, is lawful. It is not a “conspiracy” to run a presidential campaign, nor is it conspiratorial – let alone criminal – to take lawful measures to win a campaign. Under Bragg’s twisted theory, however, every single political campaign ever carried out in the history of the United States would be considered unlawful – including the presidential campaigns of Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama.
31. Stormy Daniels denied an affair with Donald Trump, in writing, multiple times over many years. That said, the Daniels-Trump story had long been in the public domain years before the 2016 presidential election. The NDA at issue was formalized in 2011, five years before the 2016 presidential election. How it is even possible that a 2011 NDA can be a component of a larger conspiracy to criminally manipulate the results of the 2016 race was never addressed. At trial, through the testimony of Hope Hicks and Madeleine Westerhout, what became crystal clear was that any such nondisclosure agreements were to protect President Trump’s family and had no bearing on the 2016 election.
32. Indeed, it is unclear just how the dissemination of the Daniels story, which was already widely distributed in the public domain by the time President Trump launched his 2016 campaign, would have impacted the race. By conflating the Daniels story with the Access Hollywood Tape, which was frequently referenced in the examinations of several key witnesses, Merchan allowed undue prejudice into his courtroom – providing a basis for reversible error. Stormy Daniels and Access Hollywood have absolutely nothing to do with one another; Access Hollywood had no bearing on any NDA agreements signed between President Trump’s counsel, and Stormy Daniels, Karen McDougal, or anyone else. Asking Daniels, during her testimony, about her impressions of the Access Hollywood Tape was completely inappropriate for a courtroom and prejudicial. Conflating these facts, many of which were wholly inappropriate to bring into the courtroom, unfairly prejudices the jurors – because they serve no other purpose than to smear President Trump’s character.
33. The alleged bookkeeping error that was the basis for this entire criminal trial – marked as “legal expenses” – of which the President had no knowledge, as revealed in the testimony of Robert Costello and others, occurred after the President won the 2016 presidential election! How could the President unlawfully conspire to promote or prevent his election after he had already been elected to federal office? This entire trial operated like a bill of attainder, unlawful to the core.
34. The judge conducted this trial unfairly from start to finish, and treated the defendant, his attorneys, and his witnesses horrendously. He prevented President Trump and his lawyers from bringing in key expert witnesses. He admonished President Trump’s lead attorney, Todd Blanche, on the stand, and cast multiple, unnecessary wanton barbs at him. He excoriated the only pro-Trump witness he allowed to testify, Robert Costello, an experienced lawyer of the SDNY; at one dramatic point, in a complete and unprecedented breach of the code of judicial ethics, Merchan lost his composure and vacated the entire courtroom, press included, because he did not like Costello’s “tone” and “mannerisms” from the witness stand. Merchan allowed Bragg Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass to go on for hours in his summations – allowing Steinglass to explain fundamental aspects of the law, including the burden of proof, for the jury, even though he previously admonished President Trump’s lawyers from making even the slightest reference to the law. He also allowed Steinglass to go on wild tangents unrelated to anything having to do with the alleged crime, allowing discussions of “Bill Clinton” and “Monica Lewinsky” to enter the courtroom. Merchan had previously declared, like a tyrant, that only he can interpret the law in his courtroom. But then he allowed Steinglass to explain the law at great length, over and above the objections of President Trump’s attorneys. Merchan also buttered up the jurors to win over their sympathy, complimenting random things like their “note-taking” skills, attention, and timeliness. All these factors, in addition to everything stated above, are egregious breaches of professional and judicial ethics and serve as grounds for a mistrial.
UPDATE, PART ONE: Merrick Garland Approved Use of Deadly Force at Mar-a-Lago Raid — Made Plans for Casualties — Brought Medic — And Handed Out Directions to Local Trauma Center (VIDEO)
Armed FBI agents storm President Trump’s home at Mar-a-Lago in August 2022 looking for incriminating documents – reportedly about them. The Biden DOJ authorized deadly force for the raid.
Part One– Judge Aileen Cannon on Tuesday unsealed numerous motions related to Jack Smith’s classified documents case against Trump. The documents included evidence that Joe Biden was ready to have his main political rival Donald Trump and his family killed for a publicity stunt!
Of course, if ANY OTHER SH*THOLE COUNTRY did this to a political rival the Biden regime would be lecturing that country about human rights. Joe Biden has single-handedly destroyed all civilized norms for this great nation.
FBI agents scattered Trump’s personal papers around the floor for their photos.
This is an absolutely shocking development.
Cristina Laila reported earlier that one filing revealed Biden’s FBI authorized the use of deadly force during their raid on Mar-a-Lago authorized by US Attorney General Merrick Garland in August 2022.
Tons of new unsealed filings on classified docs case–I will try to post as much as I can (there goes the workout) but this is mind-blowing.
But there is even more shocking information included in the released report.
The Biden regime not only approved deadly force at President Trump’s home where Secret Service members are stationed every day but they also made plans for casualties.
The Biden DOJ and Chris Wray’s FBI also set up a triage unit and notified a local trauma unit to prepare for casualties.
The FBI also authorized agents to raid the guest rooms at Mar-a-Lago and terrorize the guests there.
It now looks like our government is now the American people’s number one enemy.
Investigative reporter Julie Kelly joined Steve Bannon on The War Room on Tuesday afternoon to discuss this shocking development.
Julie Kelly: Part of this disclosure today, as I’m reading through this, Steve, and I really had to read it a few times to believe it, is that in the FBI operations plan, they give guidance on the use of W-4 at Mar-a-Lago. This is part of this 20-page whatever plan that the FBI and enforcement put together. In addition to that, they discussed how these agents, they had about 30 agents, 25 from Miami, four from Washington Field Office, who were armed. They had weapons, they had ammo, They had handcuffs, and they talked about what would happen if Donald Trump showed up at Mar-a-Lago during this raid.
Steve Bannon: I want to go back for a second to number one, the use of deadly force. Didn’t I also see in your Twitter stream that they also had a plan for triaging people if they had casualties and they actually had notified or they had a place to take people if they had casualties? Did I read that incorrectly?
Julie Kelly: No, you read it correctly. With the FBI team, Embedded was a medic, and they talked about in another form how to treat anyone who is injured during the raid. They identified a trauma center about 18 miles from Mar-a-Lago, and they inserted a map of how to get from Mar-a-Lago to this trauma center if anyone was injured or hurt during the raid.
Steve Bannon: Okay, don’t bury the lead. There’s one lead, and this is it. They actually got authority for use of deadly force, and they had plans for casualties. They brought a medic. They had plans for casualties. They had a trauma center set up, and they had a map to the trauma center. That’s all part of a component of one thing, I take it, Julie Kelly?
Julie Kelly: Correct. This is part of the plan to conduct the nine-hour raid, armed raid of Mar-a-Lago. I know some other people are extrapolating that this was a plan to harm the former president or someone at Mar-a-Lago. Staff, the God forbid, his family. I’m not so sure that that is where this leads, but it’s not hard to come…
Steve Bannon: Hang on, why use a deadly force against a former President of the United States who just had an election stolen from him? Yes, a year before. Hang on for one second… Times of Turbulence. Julie Kelly walks through these documents, these are the documents that have been hidden from view. This is why Judge Canon is so furious… We keep going down this route. It’s going to be the End of the American Republic.
UPDATE PART TWO, BIDEN’S ARMED & DANGEROUS MAR-A-LAGO RAID: FBI Took DOZENS of Photos in Melania Trump’s Room – Were Focused On Her “Binders” – And They Were Ready to Kill (VIDEO)
Armed FBI agents storm President Trump’s home at Mar-a-Lago in August 2022 looking for incriminating documents – reportedly about them. The Biden DOJ authorized deadly force for the raid.
Part Two:
Judge Aileen Cannon on Tuesday unsealed numerous motions related to Jack Smith’s classified documents case against Trump. The documents included evidence that Joe Biden was ready to have his main political rival, Donald Trump, and his family killed for a publicity stunt!
Of course, if ANY OTHER THIRD WORLD COUNTRY did this to a political rival, the Biden regime would be lecturing that country about human rights. Joe Biden has single-handedly destroyed this nation’s cultural norms and historic precedent in less than four years.
Cristina Laila reported earlier that one filing revealed Biden’s FBI authorized the use of deadly force during their raid on Mar-a-Lago authorized by US Attorney General Merrick Garland in August 2022.
But there is even more shocking information included in the released report that we reported earlier. The Biden regime not only approved deadly force at President Trump’s home, where Secret Service members are stationed every day but they also made plans for casualties. The Biden DOJ and Chris Wray’s FBI also notified a local trauma unit to prepare for casualties.
The FBI also authorized agents to raid the guest rooms at Mar-a-Lago and terrorize the guests there.
Julie Kelly reported more details from the reports that were released on Tuesday.
The Biden regime took several photos in Melania Trump and Barron Trump’s bedrooms – and they were interested in the binders in Melania’s room.
Steve Bannon: What hat they did to Melania’s suite, Melania’s Room, and Baron’s Room.
Julie Kelly: There’s another filing disclosed by Trump’s team, and this is an FBI document categorizing all the photos that were taken.
There are dozens of photos taken out of Melania’s Room, and several taken out of Baron’s Room. I don’t know exactly what they were. It just refers to the location. But what? And there’s actually, and I’m going to be posting this in Mike Davis, your ears are going to be burning as soon as I say this, there are probably 15 citations of pictures of binders in Melania Trump’s suite. ‘Binder,’ that’s the word that they use. Now, I know what Mike Davis is going to say, which is what he’s been saying from the beginning, that this whole thing was based on trying to retrieve Trump’s copy of the Crossfire Hurricane’s document. So what were they doing in Melania’s suite? And why were they taking pictures of binders that she had in her bedroom? So that again.
But whoever said that the FBI was spoiling for a fight, that is Absolutely what this looks like. And we are lucky that no one was hurt during that raid because they were prepared for a fight.
Here is the video from the War Room
This is exactly what The Gateway Pundit has been reporting since the week of the Mar-a-Lago raid in August 2022.
In February, sources close to the high-profile investigation revealed that the FBI’s raid on Mar-a-Lago was specifically aimed at recovering a “missing top-secret binder.”
This document is rumored to contain damning evidence of former President Barack Obama’s CIA’s involvement in initiating the Russia collusion narrative against President Trump.
Fox News host Jesse Watters discussed these details on his show, citing reporting by investigative journalists Michael Schellenberger and Matt Taibbi.
President Trump declassified a binder on January 19th, 2021 that contains hundreds of pages about the Crossfire Hurricane scandal. It contains damaging information about the corrupt actors involved with our government. Two different DOJ Attorney General’s have defied President Trump’s direct lawful order to publish the binder in the Federal Register. It’s been 19 months as the DOJ defies the order, and every FOIA request to make it public.
The DOJ had already made redactions to protect sources and methods and returned the binder back to the White House. But the corrupt FBI also wanted to hide names. So at the last minute, the DOJ demanded the binder comply with the 1974 Privacy Act. The Act requires any “agency” that releases records to also hide personal or identifiable name information. The DOJ knew this Act doesn’t apply to the White House, it was a stall tactic. The courts decided this 22 years ago that the Privacy Act was based around FOIA requests, and the White House is not an agency.
Hours before Trump left office on January 20th, Chief of Staff Mark Meadows gave the binder back to the DOJ, along with this memo. He asked the DOJ to make any Privacy Act redactions “out of an abundance of caution.” In the memo, he asks them to expeditiously release the binder when finished. Meadows foolishly expected this would take 3-4 days. It’s over three years now and it’s still not released. Just the News recently obtained the Meadows memo from the National Archives, who also denied having a copy of the declassified binder.
Meadows admitted in interviews that various agencies often stalled or defied Trump’s orders. Meadows knew better than to rely on the DOJ to release this damaging binder after they left the White House. He should have released the binder to the public himself. But in doing so, there was a chance he would become a target of the DOJ and FBI. The memorandum below is what Mr. Meadows sent to the DOJ Attorney General on January 20th, 2021.
Details from the Mar-a-Lago raid offered an explanation on what the FBI was looking for and why the FBI has not released the Spygate documents as they were ordered to when President Trump left office.
Investigative reporter Paul Sperry had his Twitter account taken down for the second time after he tweeted about the Mar-a-Lago raid and what the FBI was looking for.
According to Paul Sperry, the FBI agents spent 9 hours looking for details President Trump took with him on the Crossfire Hurricane FBI spying scandal.
The FBI and DOJ cannot let the American public know the truth of their criminal acts and attempted coup against President Trump. So they raided his home, looking for the documents that may indict the organization.
Twitter has suspended journalist Paul Sperry after he made several tweets about this week’s FBI raid on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence, where they spent up to 9 hours rifling through the former president’s private office, Melania Trump’s wardrobe, and eventually took 12 boxes of material…
Sperry: “DEVELOPING: Investigators reportedly met back in June w Trump & his lawyers in Mar-a-Lago storage rm to survey docs & things seemed copasetic but then FBI raids weeks later. Speculation on Hill FBI had PERSONAL stake & searching for classified docs related to its #Spygate scandal.”
Sperry also tweeted a list of “conflicted” DOJ officials who were “briefed on the Mar-a-Lago raid”, and noted that “CNN is admonishing reporters not to call the FBI raid of Trump’s home a “raid,” but instead to term it as a “judge-approved search.”
— ULTRA MAGA ENRIC0 SUAVE (@anaelena12345) August 9, 2022
He also tweeted: “Funny, don’t remember the FBI raiding Chappaqua or Whitehaven to find the 33,000 potentially classified documents Hillary Clinton deleted,” adding “And she was just a former secretary of state, not a former president.”
Some People Surprised – The FBI Was Prepared to Use Deadly Force Against Trump Security Detail During Mar-a-Lago Raid to Regain Deep State FBI/DOJ Secrets
Some people are expressing shock that the FBI was prepared to use deadly force against President Trump and his Secret Service security detail during the DOJ raid on Mar-a-Lago. Julie Kelly has the DETAILS HERE.
I am not surprised in the least. Remember, the objective of the FBI raid was to resecure the physical evidence that President Trump had showing how the DOJ and FBI action in 2016 was targeting him using the power of their law enforcement and intelligence agencies. The origination of all the DOJ/FBI/IC issues goes back to the ’15/’16 FBI exploitation of the NSA database; this is not a contested discussion issue – it’s just continually forgotten.
The FBI was using their access to the NSA metadata of all Americans, to conduct surveillance on political candidates that might be a threat to the power structures that exploited the secrets within the electronic records of all Americans. The FBI was/is conducting domestic surveillance and tracking just like the German Stasi or Soviet KGB. It’s still happening, but we are not supposed to remember or something.
The raid on Mar-a-Lago, just like the Robert Mueller investigation, was part of the long standing coverup operation. The FBI was looking for what Trump took with him as evidence of the weaponized system that targeted him. The FBI wanted that back. The FBI was willing to use deadly force to get it back if that’s what it took.
The raid involved 25 Miami FBI agents, four Washington FBI agents, one unidentified individual from FBI Headquarters, one DOJ attorney, and the assistant U.S. Attorney from the Southern District of Florida. (MORE)
Yes, apparently the FBI was prepared to engage in a gun battle or kill people in Mar-a-Lago in order to retake the evidence against them. I know it sounds scarey, but that’s the reality of our modern FBI. These are not good people. Remember also that AG Merrick Garland said he authorized every facet of the raid.
I keep trying to drive the point home, these are not good people…. yet, many refuse to accept, pretend it just can’t be that bad, or keep forgetting the real examples that prove how bad the FBI is.
The modern FBI is the police agency of a weaponized U.S government, with a direct and purposeful mandate to keep the American people under control through strict surveillance and a violent police state.
Understand and accept this with great seriousness, there are no honorable “rank and file” inside this organization.
Every member of the FBI is a participant in the weaponization of power and government. The members are jackboots recruited from ideological college campuses for exactly the purpose of supporting a Stasi-like police state.
Through the past several years, we have discovered how the FBI worked inside Twitter, Facebook and social media to control information, remove content and manipulate opinion on behalf of the U.S. government – all activity political.
We have also learned the FBI took active measures to suppress information about the Hunter Biden laptop and control any negative consequences for the Biden regime – again, political. These are not disputed realities.
The U.S. Dept of Justice and FBI are now political institutions that have abandoned their originating mission in order to become the domestic equivalent of the Soviet-era FSB. Their joint targeting mechanisms have been redesigned to support the interests of corrupt DC politicians, specifically the interests of Democrats.
It was in June 2022, when Senator Chuck Grassley sent a letter [pdf HERE] to Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Chris Wray, notifying them of whistleblower allegations from within the FBI that senior leadership in both Main Justice and FBI are involved in a coordinated effort to cover up criminal activity related to Hunter Biden.
The whistleblower allegations, in combination with the documented history of DOJ and FBI misconduct, culminate in Senator Grassley stating:
“If these allegations are true and accurate, the Justice Department and FBI are – and have been – institutionally corrupted to their very core to the point in which the United States Congress and the American people will have no confidence in the equal application of the law. Attorney General Garland and Director Wray, simply put, based on the allegations that I’ve received from numerous whistleblowers, you have systemic and existential problems within your agencies.” (LINK)
Grassley was admitting what has been visible for years.
Senator Grassley is telling the corrupt DOJ-FBI leadership that people in the organizations are outlining the detailed behavior of their corrupt leadership. However, with zero oversight involved, and with Democrats in charge of all committees that would be responsible for such oversight, and with institutional media in alignment and agreement with the corrupt institutional intents of the DOJ/FBI, the frustrating question becomes, “and“?
I mean, who are we kidding? If Republicans were in charge of the Senate Judiciary, Reform/Oversight, or Intelligence committees, do we really believe that anything would be different? Before responding to that cynicism, remind yourself, they were for four years, January 2015 through January 2019, Republicans in charge of oversight.
It was exactly when Republicans were in charge of Main Justice and FBI oversight that Main Justice and FBI were targeting political candidate Donald Trump.
In July 2021, the DOJ OIG produced an absolutely damning Inspector General investigation of FBI conduct in the rape and sexual assault of U.S. Gymnasts, revealing how FBI agents facilitated Nassar’s sex crimes by taking no action despite numerous witness statements to them.
Worse yet, the FBI never reported the sexual assaults to local law enforcement… and to top it off, the rank and vile FBI agents lied during the investigation of their conduct, and the DOJ under AG Bill Barr, and now under AG Merrick Garland, refused to prosecute the FBI liars.
The entire IG report [Must Read pdf Here] reveals layer-upon-layer of FBI wrongdoing, misconduct and false statements in an effort to cover up their activity when the internal investigation of their conduct began. This report is a total condemnation of the FBI rank and file. It really is quite stunning.
BACKGROUND on FBI – As we discovered in January of 2023, the FBI was fully aware of the terrorist who was planning to shoot the synagogue in Colleyville, Texas, and yet they did nothing.
The FBI knowledge of the shooter, Malik Faisal Akram, who was known as Faisal Akram, was confirmed by The Daily Mail. Akram ranted, prior to his travel to the U.S, that he wished he had died in the 9/11 terror attacks. He was a regular visitor to Pakistan, and reportedly a member of the Tablighi Jamaat group set up to ‘purify’ Islam. To say the U.S. intelligence system knew Faisal Akram would be an understatement.
The FBI was also fully aware of the Boston Marathon bombers, the Tsarnaev brothers, before they executed their plot. The FBI took no action. The Russian police twice warned the FBI that the Tsarnaev brothers were going to carry out a domestic terrorist attack on the USA, the FBI did nothing.
The FBI knew in advance of the Pulse Nightclub shooter (Omar Mateen) and were tipped off by the local sheriff. The FBI knew in advance of the San Bernardino Terrorists (Tashfeen Malik). The FBI knew in advance of the Boston Marathon Bombers (the Tsarnaev brothers) tipped off by Russians. The FBI knew in advance of the Parkland High School shooter (Nikolas Cruz). The FBI knew in advance of the Fort Hood shooter (Nidal Hasan), and the FBI knew in advance of Colorado grocery store shooter Ahmad al-Aliwi Alissa. The FBI took no action.
The case of the first recorded ISIS attack on U.S. soil was in Garland, Texas in 2015.
The FBI not only knew the shooters (Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi) in advance, BUT the FBI ALSO took the shooters to the venue and were standing only a few yards away when Simpson and Soofi opened fire. Yes, you read that correctly – the FBI took the terrorists to the event and then watched it unfold. “An FBI trainer suggested in an interview with “60 Minutes” that, had the attack been bigger, the agency’s numerous ties to the shooter would have led to a congressional investigation.”
Remember, shortly before the 2018 mid-term election, when Ceasar Syoc – a man living in his van – was caught sending “energetic material that can become combustible when subjected to heat or friction”, or what FBI Director Christopher Wray called “not hoax devices”?
Remember how sketchy everything about that was, including the child-like perpetrator telling a judge later that he was trying to walk back his guilty plea, because he was tricked into signing a confession for a crime he did not create.
Or more recently, the goofball plot to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer that involved 18 suspects, twelve of them actually working for the FBI as the plot was hatched? And we cannot forget the January 6th. DC protest turned insurrection effort, which is clearly looking like an FBI inspired and coordinated effort; and unlike Syoc, despite the numerous CCTV cameras and resources in the area, they cannot find who placed the pipe-bombs?
Have we forgotten the Atlanta “Olympic Park Bombing”, and the FBI intentionally setting up transparently innocent, Richard Jewel?
What about the FBI failing to investigate the assassination of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens in Benghazi. Did we forget when Robert Mueller’s FBI waited 19 days after the Benghazi attack before showing up at the compound?…. Journalists from the USA were walking around the compound after 48 hours, but it took the FBI another two weeks before the first investigator arrived…. All evidence long destroyed.
Then, there’s the entirety of the FBI conduct in “Spygate”, the demonstrably evident FBI operation to conduct political surveillance against Donald Trump using their investigative authorities; and the downstream consequences of a massive institutional effort to cover up one of the biggest justice department scandals in the history of our nation. The original effort against Donald Trump used massive resources from the DOJ and FBI. Heck, the coverup operation using the Mueller/Weissmann special counsel used more than 50 investigative FBI agents alone.
And of course, the FBI still had 13 extra agents available to rush to a NASCAR racetrack to investigate a garage door pull-down rope that might have been perceived as a noose; but the serial rape of hundreds of teenage girls, eh, not-so-much effort – even when they are standing in front of the FBI begging for help.
[At this point, I am increasingly convinced by evidence there are elements within the FBI that are enablers involved in sex trafficking, human smuggling, abduction, counterfeiting and money laundering as part of their operational mission.]
The FBI didn’t make a mistake or drop the proverbial ball in the Olympic gymnast case, they intentionally and specifically maintained the sexual exploitation of teenage girls by doing absolutely nothing with the complaints they received. This is not misconduct, this is purposeful.
Then, as if to apply salt to the open wound of severe FBI politicization, what did the FBI do with the Hunter Biden laptop?
More recently, the FBI executed a search warrant on the home and office of Project Veritas and the founder James O’Keefe. While the raid was taking place, a New York Times reporter called O’Keefe to ask him about his thoughts on getting raided. The same New York Times journalist, a few days later, then begins writing about the confidential attorney-client privileged information illegally retrieved then leaked by the FBI during their raid.
♦My point is this…
What the Federal Security Service (FSB) is to the internal security of the Russian state, so too is the FBI in performing the same function for the U.S. federal government.
The FBI is a U.S. version of the Russian “State Police”; and the FBI is deployed -almost exclusively- to attack domestic enemies of those who control government, while they protect the interests of the U.S. Fourth Branch of Government. That is the clear and accurate domestic prism to contextualize their perceived mission: “domestic violent extremists pose the greatest threat” to their objective.
Put another way, “We The People”, who fight against government abuse and usurpation, are the FBI’s actual and literal enemy.
Let me be very clear with another brutally obvious example. Antifa could not exist as an organization, capable to organize and carry out violent attacks against their targets, without the full support of the FBI. If the FBI wanted to arrest members of Antifa, who are actually conducting violence, they could do it easily – with little effort.
It is the absence of any action, by the FBI toward Antifa, that tells us the FBI is enabling that violent extremist behavior to continue. Once you accept that transparent point of truth, then you realize the FBI definition of domestic violent extremism is something else entirely.
The FBI is not a law enforcement or investigative division of the U.S. Department of Justice. The FBI is a political weapon of a larger institution that is now focused almost entirely toward supporting a radical communist agenda to destroy civil society in the United States.
The FBI set up the operation in Michigan to give the illusion that domestic threats were attempting to kidnap Governor Gretchen Whitmer, everything about the events were an FBI construct. The same thing with the January 6th events in Washington DC and the pipe bombs. These are domestic FBI operations. Think about the precarious nature of what this type of activity indicates.
The current mission of the FBI appears to be preserving and protecting institutional power by protecting the administration of Joe Biden.
Anyone who continues to push this insufferable and fraudulent “honorable FBI rank and file talking point”, is, at this point in history, willfully and purposefully operating to deceive the American people on behalf of government interests who are intent on destroying us.
It is not a difference of opinion any longer. Personally, I have lost the ability to sit comfortably or intellectually with anyone who pushes or accepts the ‘mistakes are made’ nonsense. The FBI is not making mistakes, they are doing well what is important to them.
To me, it comes down to a simple matter of accepting what is continually staring us in the face.
Additionally, as we watched the outcome of the Michael Sussmann trial, we should never lose sight of the fact that 40 FBI agents were involved in the Mueller-Weissmann probe to investigate the fraudulent construct created by Hillary Clinton and crew. 40 agents? And, according to the outcome of the Sussmann trial, the FBI knew it was all a ruse.
This is why and how the Fourth Branch of U.S. Government is now the superseding apparatus above all other branches. {GO DEEP} This is why and how Barack Obama, John Brennan and Eric Holder created it, cemented it, and made it impervious to any effort to remove it.
Remember when Henry Cuellar was critical of the Biden administration open border policies that were hurting his Texas district? Less than a month after going public with his criticisms, the FBI raids on his home and office began. The same FBI that raided the home of James O’Keefe while coordinating their search with the New York Times.
The Fourth Branch of Government is corrupt; heck, the J6 committee was defending the corrupt FBI, participating with the corrupt FBI, selling a joint J6 operation that involved the FBI. The corrupt media have aligned with the corrupt FBI, and the justice institutions in/around this legal framework are self-aware and fully autonomous.
As the Twitter files show, the DOJ and FBI, through the authority of DHS, now have the ability to monitor every single aspect of every life that might seek to challenge or destroy the corrupt system.
In essence, Skynet -the ultimate end game of political surveillance and targeting outlined by Edward Snowden- has been activated. We the People are the enemy of the state.
Jackboots are very real, and they are wearing FBI logos on their shirts.
ANOTHER US HUMILIATION, SURRENDERS AGAIN!: Joe Biden Agrees to Remove Remaining US Troops from Niger in Sept – Abandon $100 Million Airbase – As Russian Forces Move in to Same Base
The Biden administration agreed this week to remove the remaining US troops from Niger by September. The approximately 1,000 troops will leave the two US military bases in the country to the new regime. Russian forces are already in country and actually share the same base now as US troops.
This is one of Joe Biden’s greatest foreign policy failures among many and is of course being ignored by the US fake news conglomerate.
The BBC reported on the latest deal in Niger. It appears the Biden regime paid off the regime to save face as they were forced out of the country. You can bet that money was exchanged for this communication.
The US and Niger have agreed that American troops will leave the country “no later” than 15 September, they announced in a joint statement on Sunday.
They said the two countries had “reached a disengagement agreement to effect the withdrawal of U.S. forces, which has already begun”.
…
The military junta which seized power last year has already ordered French troops to leave, while moving closer to Russia.
The statement commended the “joint sacrifices of Nigerien and U.S. forces in the fight against terrorism”, adding that the withdrawal would not affect the continuation of US-Niger relations.
“The United States and Niger are committed to ongoing diplomatic dialogue to define the future of their bilateral relations,” it read.
That is complete lie. The US was forced out. Russians are already on the US base.
The Gateway Pundit has reported on this American humiliation since April. In case you missed our previous reporting here is a recap.
Molly Phee, Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, did a bang up job in Niger. Now US forces are being told to leave the country pivotal to US national defense.
Another Biden disaster: US State Department’s top official for African affairs, Molly Phee, lecturing in Niger in December 2023 and Niger protesters calling on the US to leave their country in April.
Nigerien Prime Minister Ali Mahaman Lamine Zeine recently spoke to reporters and blamed US State Department official Molly Phee of threatening the current leaders while negotiating US military presence in the country.
The Nigerian leader blamed Phee for the complete breakdown in relations. Zeine described his reaction to Molly Phee when she came to lecture the Nigerien leaders in March, “You have come here to threaten us in our country. That is unacceptable. And you have come here to tell us with whom we can have relationships, which is also unacceptable. And you have done it all with a condescending tone and a lack of respect.
In April we learned about Joe Biden’s most recent foreign policy disaster in Niger, Africa. US troops are trapped in the country allegedly without water and medicine at the time. The Army was likely hiding this to protect itself from the embarrassment. Deployed Americans were in limbo and unable to do their jobs and the Biden State Department was completely outmaneuvered once again.
Thanks to brilliant negotiating skills by Biden appointed diplomats US military will leave Niger and leave behind a $100 million airbase to the current anti-American rulers.
The USA confirms it will pull out of Niger.
1000 soldiers will leave after having been told to get out by the new Russian-friendly military junta
They will leave the $110 mln airbase built a few years ago from which the US has been running its drone operations against AQ & ISIS pic.twitter.com/UwCLn79acW
This is another humiliation of US troops by Joe Biden.
Now we find out it was US diplomat working for Joe Biden who destroyed this important relationship with Niger. Via Stars and Stripes.
A crucial military relationship between the United States and its closest West African ally, the country of Niger, ruptured this spring after a visiting U.S. official made threats during last-ditch negotiations over whether American troops based there would be allowed to remain, according to the country’s prime minister.
In an exclusive interview, Prime Minister Ali Mahaman Lamine Zeine put the blame for the breakdown squarely on the United States, accusing American officials of trying to dictate which countries Niger could partner with and failing to justify the U.S. troop presence, now scheduled to end in the coming months. Niger has been central to efforts to contain a growing Islamist insurgency in West Africa.
The rift between the former allies has created an opportunity for Russia, which has moved quickly to deepen its relationship with Niger, dispatching troops to the capital, Niamey, last month to train the Nigerien military and supplying a new air defense system. Russian and U.S. troops now occupy opposite ends of an air base.
After a military coup d’état ousted Niger’s democratically elected president last year, the United States froze security support as required by U.S. law and paused counterterrorism activities, which had involved intelligence gathering on regional militant activities from a massive drone base in the country’s north. The United States has kept more than 1,000 military personnel in place while negotiating with Niger over their status and urging the junta to begin restoring democracy…
Stars and Stripes then reveals the genius in the Biden State Department who destroyed US relations with Niger and how she did it.
He said the Nigerien leaders took particular umbrage at remarks by Molly Phee, the State Department’s top official for African affairs, who he said had urged the government during a March visit to Niamey to refrain from engaging with Iran and Russia in ways objectionable to Washington if Niger wanted to continue its security relationship with the United States. He also said Phee had further threatened sanctions if Niger pursued a deal to sell uranium to Iran.
“When she finished, I said, ‘Madame, I am going to summarize in two points what you have said,’” recounted Zeine, who has led negotiations with the United States. “First, you have come here to threaten us in our country. That is unacceptable. And you have come here to tell us with whom we can have relationships, which is also unacceptable. And you have done it all with a condescending tone and a lack of respect.”
Florida Senator Rick Scott was seated in the front row of the courtroom gallery today as he showed support for President Trump in New York City.
Many of President Trump’s supporters in politics understand he is under a gag order and unable to speak in his own defense. It is good to see those who understand the dynamic show up in New York to say the things President Trump cannot.
In his media remarks the former Florida Governor and current Senator Rick Scott, outlined the background of the key participants who are targeting Trump via these ridiculous political Lawfare tactics. Strong and truthful remarks by Senator Scott. WATCH:
Judge Arthur Engoron is now under investigation after claims surfaced that he received unsolicited advice from a prominent New York City real estate attorney, Adam Leitman Bailey, weeks before ordering former President Donald Trump to pay a hefty $454 million judgment.
This investigation by the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct seeks to determine whether Engoron violated judicial conduct rules, NBC New York reported.
In March, Engoron ordered Trump to pay more than a $355 million fine and barred Trump “from serving as an officer or director of any New York corporation or other legal entity in New York for a period of three years.” Trump was also required to pay interest on the penalties, bringing the total amount to $454 million.
Engoron claimed Trump and each of the defendants “participated in aiding and abetting the conspiracy to commit insurance fraud by their individual acts in falsifying business records and valuations, causing materially fraudulent SFCs to be intentionally submitted to insurance companies.”
Eric Trump and Don Jr. were also ordered to pay $4,013,024 each.
Letitia James sought $370 million in ‘damages’ when there was no victim in this fraud case, and she also sought to ban Trump and his sons from operating any businesses in New York. She accused Trump of inflating his assets and defrauding lenders and insurance companies, despite having no evidence or rationality.
Bailey stated publicly that he spoke with Judge Engoron three weeks before the decision, advising him to “get it right.” Although Engoron has denied any influence from Bailey, the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct is reportedly investigating whether Engoron violated judicial conduct rules, according to NBC New York.
“I actually had the ability to speak to him three weeks ago,” Bailey told NBC New York on Feb. 16. “I saw him in the corner [at the courthouse] and I told my client, ‘I need to go.’ And I walked over and we started talking … I wanted him to know what I think and why…I really want him to get it right.”
Bailey maintains he has no personal connection to any lawsuits involving Trump and is not a fan of the former president. He claims to have advised Engoron that a ruling imposing such a substantial fine could damage New York’s economy. Bailey also mentioned that Engoron “had a lot of questions, you know, about certain cases” during their conversation.
In response, Judge Engoron’s spokesperson Al Baker vehemently denied any impropriety, stating that “No ex parte conversation concerning this matter occurred between Justice Engoron and Mr. Bailey or any other person. The decision Justice Engoron issued on February 16 was his alone, deeply considered, and wholly uninfluenced by this individual.”
The Latin term ex parte means “from one party”. In legal terms, it refers to a legal proceeding that is conducted without the presence or notice of the other party. It can also refer to improper contact between a judge or party and a lawyer.
New York State Rules of Judicial Conduct explicitly prohibit judges from engaging in ex parte communications, except when seeking advice from a disinterested expert.
According to New York law, “If a judge inadvertently receives an unauthorized ex parte communication bearing upon the substance of a matter, the judge shall make provision promptly to notify the parties of the substance of the communication and provide the parties with an opportunity to respond.”
The New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct will now consider whether the rules of judicial conduct were violated in this instance, according to sources familiar with the matter.
The commission’s administrator, Robert Tembeckjian, declined to comment, citing a statute on confidentiality.
Christopher Kise, a member of the Trump defense team which has repeatedly criticized Engoron’s handling of the case, said if Bailey’s claims are true, it casts doubt on the integrity of the process.
“The code doesn’t provide an exception for ‘well, this was a small conversation’ or ‘well, it didn’t really impact me’ or ‘well, this wasn’t something that I, the judge, found significant,” Kise said. “No. The code is very clear.”
Several experts consulted by NBC New York said the rules are meant not only to prevent outside influence, but also any appearance of outside influence.
A true courtroom stunner came just days ago when Jack Smith, prosecuting President Trump for having government documents from his presidency in his home, admitted his team lied to the public and the court in the case.
Regarding the evidence.
Trump turned blunt, calling for Smith to be arrested over his admission, in a court filing, that he lied to the court about the documents seized from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home.
“ARREST DERANGED JACK SMITH. HE IS A CRIMINAL!” Trump said in a Truth Social post this weekend.
The issue is that in a court filing, prosecutors admitted thee lied to the court, confessing that the FBI messed with the boxes containing those materials, and now not even Smith can be sure of the order or placement of the documents, which could be a critical factor in the case.
Now a Declassified report from famed investigative journalist Julie Kelly notes that the situation is “potentially case-killing.”
FBI photo of documents seized in the raid of former President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate.
She explained, “New court filings in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s espionage and obstruction case against Trump and two co-defendants conclusively demonstrate that the government used the cover sheets to deceive the public as well as the court. The photo was a stunt, and one that adds more fuel to this dumpster-fire case.”
She noted Jay Bratt, who is assigned to Smith’s team, earlier claimed: “[Thirteen] boxes or containers contained documents with classification markings, and in all, over one hundred unique documents with classification markings…were seized. Certain of the documents had colored cover sheets indicating their classification status.”
The FBI staged a photograph of documents, and released it to the public to create public interest in the case.
But Kelly continued, “The DOJ’s clever wordsmithing, however, did not accurately describe the origin of the cover sheets. In what must be considered not only an act of doctoring evidence but willfully misleading the American people into believing the former president is a criminal and threat to national security, agents involved in the raid attached the cover sheets to at least seven files to stage the photo.”
She explained, “Classified cover sheets were not ‘recovered’ in the container, contrary to Bratt’s declaration to the court. In fact, after being busted recently by defense attorneys for mishandling evidence in the case, Bratt had to fess up about how the cover sheets actually ended up on the documents.”
She said his latest explanation is: “[If] the investigative team found a document with classification markings, it removed the document, segregated it, and replaced it with a placeholder sheet. The investigative team used classified cover sheets for that purpose.”
Kelly noted that the FBI’s use of those “cover sheets” just before they were used as placeholders.
“Agents apparently used them as props. FBI agents took it upon themselves to paperclip the sheets to documents—something evident given the uniform nature of how each cover sheet is clipped to each file in the photo—laid them on the floor, and snapped a picture for political posterity,” she noted.
The immediate result was that Judge Aileen M. Cannon has further delayed the next steps in the case, meaning it might not even come to trial until after the November election, which polls show Trump is likely to win.
Kelly called the FBI’s staged photograph the “the picture that launched a thousand pearl-clutching articles.”
She suggested that the behavior of the investigators raises “many troubling questions … about the FBI’s handling of the alleged incriminating documents.”
“For example, who made the on-site determination as to the classification level appropriate for each document? Did agents have security clearance and expertise related to classification? Did the agents know whether the document had been declassified by Trump while still in office?”
And she noted that defense lawyers have pointed out Smith’s office handed out inaccurate information about the evidence.
And Bratt conceded that was correct, confessing the FBI has not been able to determine which document “with classification markings” goes with which placeholder.
“This is a potentially case-blowing mistake, particularly if the document in question is one of the 34 records that represents the basis of espionage charges against Trump,” Kelly charged.
Bratt also had confirmed to the judge that the boxes of documents are “in their original, intact form as seized,” citing only that classified docs were replaced with placeholders.
Guest post by Joe Hoft at JoeHoft.com – republished with permission
Andrew Weissmann led the Mueller sham investigation against President Trump. Now he’s a top Deep State player behind DA Bragg’s bogus Manhattan case against President Trump.
Andrew Weissmann is the face of DOJ corruption. He has been overturned by the Supreme Court and he’s been behind most all the efforts to attack President Trump through lawfare.
DA Bragg’s case against President Trump is a mess. There is no crime and yet the DA charged President Trump for 34 felonies that were all made up. The crimes aren’t even clear. It’s a total disaster which is why it is likely a plot by leftist mastermind Andrew Weissmann.
In a tweet this pst weekend, Weissmann shares that he believes that a defendant in the US must prove their innocence. This is third world communist stuff.
He was quickly outed as a moron for his ignorance of the law.
Shipwreckedcrew tweeted: You are a moron. Trump doesn’t have to prove anything tor the jury to acquit. You repeatedly mis-state fundamental premises of the criminal justice system.
You are a moron.
Trump doesn't need to prove anything for the jury to acquit.
You repeatedly mis-state fundamental premises of the criminal justice system. https://t.co/zsJkUuu2fS
Attorney Jeff Clark points out that “enough to acquit” is not a legal principal in the US.
Can we make sure “enough to acquit” is a phrase forever associated with Andrew Weissmann? It’s right from the lips of a government statist whose baseline is not liberty and thus the presumption of innocence but instead subjection to raw government power and a presumption that prosecutors are always right. He’s a walking-talking evil inversion.
Can we make sure “enough to acquit” is a phrase forever associated with Andrew Weissmann?
It’s right from the lips of a government statist whose baseline is not liberty and thus the presumption of innocence but instead subjection to raw government power and a presumption that… https://t.co/nMcQmz2EVW
House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan Launches Investigation into Special Counsel Jack Smith’s Admission of FBI Evidence Tampering in Trump Mar-a-Lago Case
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) has launched an investigation into Special Counsel Jack Smith following recent admission that some of the evidence in President Trump’s ‘classified’ documents case was altered or manipulated after being seized by the FBI during its raid on Mar-a-Lago.
The Gateway Pundit reported that Jack Smith’s admission came in response to Trump’s co-defendant, Walt Nauta’s, legal team’s concerns about discrepancies in the evidence’s organization.
Walt Nauta, a former White House valet and Navy veteran who later served as a personal staffer at Mar-a-Lago and was indicted alongside Trump last year, claimed through his attorney that the order of items in the seized boxes did not match their scans provided during discovery.
In a late Friday filing, Smith conceded that the FBI had indeed moved documents around within the boxes that contained ‘classified’ information. This directly contradicts earlier Department of Justice (DOJ) assurances to the court that the contents’ arrangement had been preserved intact.
According to a footnote in the motion reviewed by The Gateway Pundit, the FBI messed with the boxes containing the ‘classified’ documents they seized from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate.
Footnote 3: The Government acknowledges that this is inconsistent with what Government counsel previously understood and represented to the Court. See, e.g., 4/12/24 Hearing Tr. at 65 (Government responding to the Court’s question of whether the boxes were “in their original, intact form as seized” by stating “[t]hey are, with one exception; and that is that the classified documents have been removed and placeholders have been put in the documents.”
In August 2022, the DOJ lied to the Court by asserting that the red, blue, and yellow sheets displayed in the widely circulated photo of the ‘classified’ documents indicated their classification status. It turns out they were “slip sheets” the FBI used to replace the so-called classified documents.
The DOJ lied, claiming, “Evidence, thirteen boxes or containers contained documents with classification markings, and in all, over one hundred unique documents with classification markings-that is, more than twice the amount produced on June 3, 2022, in response to the grand jury subpoena were seized. Certain of the documents had colored cover sheets indicating their classification status. See, e.g., Attachment F (redacted FBI photograph of certain documents and classified cover sheets recovered from a container in the “45 office”). The classification levels ranged from CONFIDENTIAL to TOP SECRET information, and certain documents included additional sensitive compartments that signify very limited distribution.”
The FBI admitted they messed with Trump’s documents! The FBI used cover sheets as placeholders for the classified documents.
“After the boxes were brought to WFO, the FBI created an index to correlate the documents with classification markings to codes (e.g., document “bb”) and labeled the classified cover sheets in the boxes with the codes for the seized documents. The FBI also generally replaced the handwritten sheets with classified cover sheets annotated with the index code, but regardless, any handwritten sheets that currently remain in the boxes do not represent additional classified documents—they were just not removed when the classified cover sheets with the index code were added. In many but not all instances, the FBI was able to determine which document with classification markings corresponded to a particular placeholder sheet.”
Jack Smith also claimed the FBI found so many classified documents that they ran out of ‘slip sheets.’
“The investigative team used classified cover sheets for that purpose, until the FBI ran out because there were so many classified documents, at which point the team began using blank sheets with handwritten notes indicating the classification level of the document(s) seized,” Jack Smith laughably claimed.
In response to these revelations, President Trump took to Truth Social, calling for the arrest of Jack Smith, labeling the prosecution a “sham.”
“ARREST DERANGED JACK SMITH. HE IS A CRIMINAL!” Trump said in a Truth Social post this weekend.
Chairman Jim Jordan expressed grave concern about the justice system’s impartiality and adherence to professional standards within the DOJ.
In a letter addressed to Jeffrey Ragsdale, Counsel of the Department of Justice’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), Jordan stated, “This acknowledgment presents grave concerns about the Department’s commitment to impartial justice, whether the Special Counsel’s Office misled a federal court, and whether the Special Counsel’s Office strenuously upheld the highest professional standards of the Department of Justice.”
Jordan demanded that the OPR investigate Jack Smith, Jay Bratt (a senior member of Smith’s office), and other attorneys involved, citing serious ethical lapses in the prosecution.
The House Judiciary Committee has demanded to produce the following documents and information:
All documents and communications referring or relating to any allegation of ethical impropriety or any OPR investigation concerning the conduct of Jack Smith, Jay Bratt, or any other attorney assigned to work with the Office of Special Counsel Jack Smith;
All documents and communications referring or relating to the manipulation of documents seized from President Trump’s residence at Mar-a-Lago; and
All documents and communications referring or relating to Jay Bratt interactions with Walt Nauta’s defense counsel, including allegations that Bratt attempted to coerce Mr. Nauta’s cooperation with the government by leveraging the prosect of a judgeship for his counsel.
The deadline set for the DOJ to respond to the Committee’s demands for information and a briefing is 5:00 p.m. on May 20, 2024.
#NEWS: @Jim_Jordan investigates Jack Smith’s acknowledgment that some of the evidence in President Trump’s classified documents case was altered or manipulated after it was seized by the FBI in its raid on Mar-a-Lago. pic.twitter.com/9Qn6h9D3h5
Judge Aileen Cannon on Tuesday afternoon indefinitely postponed Jack Smith’s classified documents trial against Trump.
As previously reported, Judge Cannon on Monday night postponed a key deadline in the classified documents case after Special Counsel Jack Smith admitted to tampering with evidence.
Cannon on Monday evening temporarily stayed a May 9 deadline for President Trump and his co-defendants Walt Nauta and Carlos de Oliveira related to CIPA.
On Tuesday afternoon, Judge Cannon set a second set of pre-trial deadlines to manage pending discovery and disclosure matters.
The Judge vacated the May 20, 2024 trial date. It may be several months until Judge Cannon sets a new trial date.
“The Court also determines that finalization of a trial date at this juncture—before resolution of the myriad and interconnected pre-trial and CIPA issues remaining and forthcoming—would be imprudent and inconsistent with the Court’s duty to fully and fairly consider the various pending pre-trial motions before the Court, critical CIPA issues, and additional pretrial and trial preparations necessary to present this case to a jury. The Court therefore vacates the current May 20, 2024, trial date (and associated calendar call), to be reset by separate order following resolution of the matters before the Court, consistent with Defendants’ right to due process and the public’s interest in the fair and efficient administration of justice,” Cannon wrote in an order reviewed by The Gateway Pundit.
In a motion filed late Friday, Jack Smith admitted the FBI messed with the boxes containing “classified” documents they seized from Trump and can’t be sure the order or the placement of the documents.
Jack Smith in his Friday night response admitted the FBI moved the classified documents around.
According to a footnote in the motion reviewed by The Gateway Pundit, the FBI messed with the boxes containing the ‘classified’ documents they seized from Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate.
The DOJ previously assured the Court that the placement of classified documents as originally found had been maintained – THEY LIED!
Footnote 3: The Government acknowledges that this is inconsistent with what Government counsel previously understood and represented to the Court. See, e.g., 4/12/24 Hearing Tr. at 65 (Government responding to the Court’s question of whether the boxes were “in their original, intact form as seized” by stating “[t]hey are, with one exception; and that is that the classified documents have been removed and placeholders have been put in the documents”
The DOJ in August 2022 lied to the Court when they claimed the red, blue and yellow sheets shown in the viral photo of the classified documents indicated their classification status.
The FBI admitted they messed with Trump’s documents! The FBI used cover sheets as placeholders for the classified documents.
“After the boxes were brought to WFO, the FBI created an index to correlate the documents with classification markings to codes (e.g., document “bb”) and labeled the classified cover sheets in the boxes with the codes for the seized documents. The FBI also generally replaced the handwritten sheets with classified cover sheets annotated with the index code, but regardless, any handwritten sheets that currently remain in the boxes do not represent additional classified documents—they were just not removed when the classified cover sheets with the index code were added. In many but not all instances, the FBI was able to determine which document with classification markings corresponded to a particular placeholder sheet.”
Judge Aileen Cannon has issued an order [SEE HERE] canceling the original trial date and suspending the trial proceedings pending resolution of multiple pre-trial issues. Lawfare is big mad.
(Via Politico) – […] The date had been widely expected to move amid a tangle of pretrial conflicts between special counsel Jack Smith and Trump’s attorneys. Smith had urged Judge Aileen Cannon to reschedule the trial to begin on July 8, but an order from the judge on Tuesday afternoon suggested that she is unlikely to even decide on a new trial date before late July.
[…] “[F]inalization of a trial date at this juncture — before resolution of the myriad and interconnected pre-trial and [classified evidence] issues … would be imprudent and inconsistent with the Court’s duty to fully and fairly consider the various pending pre-trial motions,” Cannon wrote in the five-page order.
That reshuffling further clouds the picture for Smith, who is also awaiting a Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity that could determine whether his other case against Trump — charges in Washington D.C. for attempting to subvert the 2020 election — can move forward this year. (read more)
Jason Foster has filed an interesting “motion to intervene” in a court filing against the DOJ effort to keep the legal rationale for a 2017 subpoena hidden. tldr version HERE
Mr. Jason Foster was one of Chuck Grassley’s congressional lawyers on the Senate Judiciary Committee, and a key Grassley research staffer when the background of the DOJ/FBI Spygate operation against Donald Trump was at its apex.
In a COURT FILING, Jason Foster notes, in September 2017, the DOJ requested and received a court order which it leveraged against Google and Big Tech to gain access to the phone and electronic data of House and Senate staff members. The DOJ then filed Non Disclosure Orders (NDOs) blocking the notification of the target(s), in this example Mr. Foster himself. Foster wants to know what justification the DOJ gave the judge to get the warrants and subpoena.
I find this motion/filing exceptionally interesting, because the originating DOJ action was in September ’17, when the Mueller cover-up was in full bloom; the Mueller team essentially controlled all of Main Justice (per Rosenstein testimony), and the effort of the DOJ was to keep a bag over the FBI/DOJ activity in the 2016 election.
As Jeff Carlson notes, the “DOJ has kept sealed their “legal rationale” for targeting the communications of congressional staff attorneys for GOP oversight committees.”
Foster notes, this DOJ subpoena appears related to the leak of the “Top Secret” FISA application used against Carter Page. The media received that leak, in March 2107, and the FBI (Washington Field Office) was investigating how the TS-SCI classified leak originated. At the same time, the DOJ (“Mueller team”), now in September 2017, had a vested interest monitoring ‘who knew what’ not only about the leak (James Wolfe and Mark Warner), but also about the motives of the special counsel coverup operation.
“At the time DOJ began collecting their communications records, Mr. Foster and his fellow colleagues on both sides of the aisle were communicating with confidential sources and whistleblowers whose willingness to share information with Congress is essential to its oversight function. The Legislative Branch has a constitutional interest in protecting the identity of those confidential sources and whistleblower just as journalists do under the First Amendment. Yet due to the secrecy demanded by DOJ, and granted ex parte by the Court, the nondisclosure orders deprived Congress of an opportunity to object at the time or even to know until years later that telecommunications providers had complied. Providers like Google, and perhaps even the Court, yielded to DOJ demands for secrecy without knowing the full context and constitutional implications of the subpoenas.” (more)
The Mark Warner and James Wolfe leak of the FISA application to media was one of the biggest untold stories of the 2017 Trump targeting and DC coverup operation. Factually, the media had the full and unredacted FISA application from March 17, 2017, throughout all of their pretense reporting, as if they didn’t know the details.
The greatest likelihood is that Mueller’s team, headed by Andrew Weissmann, wanted to keep tabs on who in Washington DC was circling the truth. The subpoena against Jason Foster and other House and Senate committee lawyers and staff would help the DOJ keep tabs on who knew the details at a very key time in the coverup operation.
Within Main Justice, DOJ at the time Andrew Weissmann (Mueller team) would want to know what Chuck Grassley and Devin Nunes had uncovered, and who would potentially be assisting them.
The DOJ search warrants, in Sept 2017 (the warrants of interest to Jason Foster), likely do not relate directly to the James Wolfe investigation, despite the timeline being very similar. U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu, from the USAO in Washington DC, was conducting the Wolfe investigation, and the Washington Field Office (WFO), FBI Agent Brian Dugan was the lead investigative unit. These subpoenas were something else.
Elise Stefanik Takes Action Against Special Counsel Jack Smith’s Election Interference – ‘Fight The Democrats Unjust Lawfare And Expose This Corruption’
On Tuesday, Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) filed an official ethics complaint with the Department of Justice’s Office of Professional Responsibility against special counsel Jack Smith, claiming that Smith is interfering in the 2024 presidential election with the indictments he brought against presumptive GOP nominee Donald Trump last year.
In her complaint to Office of Professional Responsibility counsel Jeffrey Ragsdale, Rep. Stefanik, who is rumored to be a potential vice presidential pick for Trump, pointed out a serious violation. She stated that Smith’s attempt to expedite his case to trial before the election is a clear breach of the Department of Justice’s long-standing policy. This policy strictly prohibits timing investigations to aid a certain political candidate. “Biden special counsel Jack Smith is attempting to expedite the trial in order to influence the general election in November,” she wrote.
Rep. Stefanik further detailed the alleged misconduct of Smith and his team. She asserted that they have repeatedly violated the court-ordered stay by serving 4,000 pages of discovery to Trump’s legal team and making a pretrial motion in district court. This, she argued, is a clear indication of Smith’s conduct bringing disrepute to the Department of Justice and the entire federal government. “The DOJ’s Office of Professional Responsibility should impose the discipline that such conduct warrants,” the lawmaker added.
The New York representative demanded that Ragsdale open an investigation into Smith immediately for his actions that attempted to “politicize his criminal prosecution” and interfere in the general election against Trump. During a press conference after Stefanik issued the complaint, she reconfirmed her resolve to fight back against the various prosecutors going after the former president.
“Democrats’ corrupt and desperate witch hunts against President Trump must come to an end. This is lawfare and blatant election interference, and the American people know it. That is why today I filed an official complaint with the Department of Justice Office of Professional Responsibility on Joe Biden’s special counsel, Jack Smith, for his clear and illegal efforts of election interference,” she said. “We will fight the Democrats unjust lawfare and expose this corruption whether it is in New York, Atlanta, or right here in Washington, DC.”
President Trump is currently facing four criminal indictments against him. The first, which is currently underway in New York City, was brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg (D) in which the DA’s office charged Trump with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records by writing down in business ledgers that hush money payments to adult film actress Stormy Daniels were legal payments to Trump’s personal attorney, Michael Cohen. The other case brought by Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis (D) alleges that Trump and 18 other co-defendants attempted to illegally overturn the 2020 election. Special counsel Jack Smith brought the last two indictments, with one being focused on the 2020 election and the other focused on classified documents Trump allegedly took with him post-presidency to Mar-a-Lago.
🚨🚨🚨 I just filed an official ethics complaint against Jack Smith with the Department of Justice's Office of Professional Responsibility for his illegal election interference.
It’s obvious to any reasonable observer that Jack Smith is trying to interfere with the 2024 election… pic.twitter.com/lNW4MUz5Oi
Democrats’ corrupt and desperate witch hunts against President Trump must come to an end. This is lawfare and blatant election interference and the American people know it. That is why today I filed an official complaint with the Department of Justice Office of Professional… pic.twitter.com/yo61lAbnnD
Fani Willis, the district attorney for Fulton County, is currently dealing with yet another legal issue—this time, a lawsuit brought by a state legislator in Georgia.
In her suit, Rep. Mesha Mainor, a Republican elected to the Georgia House in 2020, “alleges that Willis, Commissioner Marvin Arrington, the Fulton County Ethics Board, and the county itself were derelict in its duties to properly litigate a criminal case in which Mainor was repeatedly stalked by a former friend and political associate,” Newsweek reported.
A spokesperson for the state lawmaker said she would provide additional details regarding the lawsuit during a press conference scheduled for Tuesday.
Mainor, who secured a substantial victory in the 2020 election from the constituents of House District 56 in the Democratic stronghold of Atlanta, grabbed headlines last July by switching parties and formally affiliating herself with the Republican Party. At the time, she said she was no longer morally comfortable complying with Democrats’ “left-wing radicalism, lawlessness, and putting the interests of illegal aliens over the interests of Americans.”
Mainor’s lawsuit, which was filed on April 2 in Fulton County Superior Court, alleges that she enlisted Corwin Monson as a campaign volunteer in January 2019. The lawsuit describes them as associates for several years with numerous mutual friends.
He “assured” Mainor he could help her get elected, though one month later, she was “forced to terminate” him after she witnessed “his unruly, belligerent behavior,” the suit said, according to Newsweek.
It reportedly resulted in multiple instances of stalking in various forms, including Monson showing up uninvited to campaign or church events, lingering outside her residence, making calls from different numbers and leaving voicemails, and even proposing to her in front of her minor children at her home, the suit says.
It also claimed that Monson was “in love” with Mainor, though the two of them had never had a romantic relationship.
A judge granted Mainor’s request for a Temporary Protective Order (TPO) against Monson in August 2019. He was subsequently arrested in both September 2019 and September 2020 for violating the TPO.
Following the second incident, Fulton County indicted Monson for aggravated stalking. The second aggravated assault charge in January 2021 could lead to up to 20 years of imprisonment for Monson.
However, the lawsuit alleges that Arrington, who defended Monson in a legal capacity, “used his influence to circumvent the office policies of the District Attorney’s office,” which allegedly included copying the DA on emails, negotiating plea bargains directly, and demanding meetings.
Newsweek added:
Arrington is also alleged to have told Willis “that b**** is crazy”, in reference to Mainor—claimed within the suit to have peddled his influence to in turn influence Willis.
After Willis was sworn in January 2021, she became responsible for the Monson case.
She reportedly dismissed one of his aggravated stalking cases. On the other charge, she offered a plea of three years with one year served in prison and the rest probation. Mainor said she was never informed of the plea deal, [which she] claimed to be a violation of the Georgia Crime Victims Bill of Rights.
“Furthermore, due to DA Willis’ bias towards Mr. Arrington, Plaintiff Mainor has experienced disparate treatment under the law as a victim,” the suit says. “Plaintiff Mainor has been forced to advocate for herself and her safety, although that is the District Attorney’s role.”
Trouble for Willis has been mounting over the past few months which has affected her election-related RICO case against former President Donald Trump. Last month, Judge Scott McAfee, who is presiding over the case, ordered her to either fire an attorney she hired, Nathan Wade, after discovering the two were involved in a romantic relationship or take herself and her entire office off of the case.
A federal judge on Monday adjourned a civil lawsuit brought against former President Donald Trump over the Jan. 6, 2021, riot under a 19th-century law, handing him a delay in the case that he and his legal team sought.
The suit’s lead plaintiff, Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), was joined by several other Democrats “who said they were impeded in their duties by the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol,” Newsweek reported.
The case was pursued under an 1871 act designed to prevent the Ku Klux Klan from intimidating members of Congress in the execution of their duties. On Monday, Mehta ruled that “immunity-related discovery” will persist until September 11, 2024.
Following the conclusion of discovery in September, both parties will present their arguments regarding whether Trump is entitled to presidential immunity from the civil lawsuit—a separate matter from the Supreme Court’s examination of presidential immunity from criminal lawsuits. The proceedings for the former could extend over several months.
Newsweek noted that should Trump be given immunity, then the case is over. If presidential immunity is not granted, further discovery on the case’s facts is anticipated, and a trial is unlikely to commence until after the inauguration in January 2025. Trump, who has consistently sought trial delays, could subsequently seek recourse in federal court to postpone the case until after his term in office has concluded.
Newsweek noted further:
On December 4, 2023, Lee had released a statement in which she said “justice is owed to the Congressional staff, Capitol support staff, law enforcement, and members of Congress who feared for their lives on January 6, 2021. I look forward to seeing Mr. Trump in court.”
MSNBC legal correspondent Lisa Rubin, wrote on X, formerly Twitter, on Monday that a higher court, the Washington D.C. Circuit, had handed the case back to Mehta after reaffirming that “former presidents are entitled to civil immunity for acts even on the ‘outer perimeter’ of their official duties.
“But they [the D.C. Circuit] held Trump had not yet shown his entitlement to such immunity and would instead have a chance to prove in the lower court that ‘his alleged actions in the run-up to and on January 6 were taken in his official capacity as President,’” she wrote.
“That opinion was handed down on December 1, 2023. And now, in the last days of April, Judge Amit Mehta, the district court judge to whom the case has been assigned, has allowed the parties to conduct ‘immunity-related discovery’ through September 11, 2024,” Rubin added, further claiming that Mehta’s ruling doesn’t bode well for Trump in his D.C. criminal case where he’s been charged by special counsel Jack Smith of election interference following Joe Biden’s victory in 2020.
The election fraud proceedings, overseen by Tanya Chutkan, another D.C. district judge, have been put on hold as the Supreme Court deliberates presidential immunity.
“Now think about the criminal case before Judge Chutkan: In a world where the Supreme Court similarly decides there must be further lower court proceedings to determine whether Trump can mount an immunity defense, can that case be tried before 2025? Increasingly, I think not—and that might be the only win Trump wants or needs,” Rubin wrote.
During oral arguments regarding the question last week, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch said that former presidents ought to enjoy some immunity from subsequent attacks if they leave office.
“It didn’t matter what the president’s motives were; that’s something courts shouldn’t get engaged in … I am concerned about future uses of criminal law to target political opponents based on accusations about their motives,” the Supreme Court justice, who was Trump’s first of three appointees to the nation’s highest court, said on April 25.
This is a good overall encapsulation by Julie Kelly and to a lesser extent Steve Bannon about what Judge Aileen Cannon is doing with the Jack Smith “documents” case in Florida.
Kelly notes accurately {See Background} that Judge Aileen Cannon is somewhat limited on what she can do about the federal government case due to the DOJ using the false pretense of “national security” to control how the judicial branch can interact with the lawfare construct of the executive branch. The Lawfare crew intentionally created the “national security” angle to control all sides of the case and limit the release of information to the public.
Judge Cannon has recently been releasing and un-redacting documents and motions filed in the case to allow disinfecting sunlight and transparency to enter. This approach undercuts the prosecution manipulation, the DOJ does not like it. Julie Kelly outlines some of the details that Cannon’s releases have highlighted. {Direct Rumble Link}
At the 12:00 minute mark, Steve Bannon highlights his anger as he rails against congress and the staff of multiple committees who participate in the willful blindness and pretending game.
After noticing how congress is mute about the revelations that Cannon is providing, Bannon notes the republicans are essentially anti-Trump and controlled opposition, which is essentially accurate…. However, he’s just now noticing this?
It is a little annoying to see Mr. Bannon discuss outrage as a manipulative tactic {Chaffe and Countermeasures}, considering the years of outrage traps laid by the republicans in the Deep State against President Trump. The latest effort by congress pretending not to notice, and then staying quiet, is not exactly a surprise.
Think about two sets of documents as evidence against two teams working in synergy. Team one (Clinton) was outside government. Team two (DOJ/FBI) was inside government. The documents the DOJ/FBI were urgently searching to retrieve pertained to both groups but were also divided. That helps to explain the wording of the memo below and the motive behind the DOJ/FBI using the General Services Administration (GSA) and the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) as tools to conduct post-Trump-term physical surveillance and searches.
Here’s the Occam’s Razor…. and I will only say this once. A lawsuit against Hillary Clinton and the Spygate manipulators was filed in 2022. [LINK HERE]
The lawsuit was filed against specific persons, and most of those persons were interviewed by the FBI as part of the originating investigation. Within the subjects of the lawsuit, we find names and groups including:
Hillary Clinton, Hillary for America Campaign Committee, DNC, DNC Services Corp, Perkins Coie, Michael Sussmann, Marc Elias, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Charles Dolan, Jake Sullivan, John Podesta, Robby Mook, Phillipe Reines as well as Fusion GPS, Glenn Simpson, Peter Fritsch, Nellie Ohr, Bruce Ohr, Orbis Business Intelligence, Christopher Steele, Igor Danchenko, Neustar Inc., Rodney Joffe, James Comey Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Kevin Clinesmith and Andrew McCabe.
Once the lawsuit against CLINTON/FBI was filed, the background physical paper evidence no longer needed to be in the possession of the person(s) who wrote the lawsuit (physical possession). [LINK HERE] Simple thumb-drives would suffice.
NarrowPathMinistries 