Posted originally on the CTH on June 17, 2023 | Sundance
In this podcast interview between former HPSCI Chairman Devin Nunes and journalists Margot Cleveland and Lee Smith, the discussion begins with the recent revelations provided by Senator Chuck Grassley about audio tapes as evidence in the Biden bribery scandal. {Direct Rumble Link}
As the story has unfolded, the Confidential Human Source who tipped off the FBI to Joe Biden taking bribes from foreign governments, also claims to have audio tapes of himself talking to Joe Biden about the issues when Biden was vice-president. The FBI has been sitting on this Biden bribery knowledge for multiple years.
The most common opinion of the FBI motive was their intent to burying or capture negative information about Biden. However, with the institutional corruption of the domestic national security apparatus being very visible within DOJ and FBI, Lee Smith ponders whether the FBI/DOJ might be holding back the Biden bribery material as part of their leverage against the White House. It is an interesting angle to consider. WATCH:
Lee Smith is very wise in the ways of the Deep State.
Posted originally on the CTH on June 17, 2023 | Sundance
We live with a new type of tyranny, where we find ourselves dissidents. It is not like any previous tyranny. It is not revolutionary in nature. Instead, it operates very scientifically and technocratically by convincing those it tyrannizes to demand their own enslavement, under the guise of comfort.
Prior dissidents were at least dissidents of a tangible, kinetic revolution. We are dissidents of what the willfully tyrannized perceive as their secure position within the rightful order of things. This needs to be factored into how we think about “converting” and “awakening” others amid the ongoing insurgency.
(Via Daily Mail) – A Fox News producer who resigned over a chyron that described Joe Biden as a ‘wannabe dictator’, has broken his silence.
Alexander McCaskill posted a photo of himself on Instagram holding a cardboard box outside the corporation’s New York offices.
He told his followers ‘Today was my last day at Fox’ and described his time there as a ‘wild 10 years’.
McCaskill is thought to have been responsible for the chyron which claimed President Biden was intent on locking up his 2024 rival, Donald Trump on Tuesday.
Fox had it on screen for less than 30 seconds, and then apologized. Dailymail.com has approached Fox News and McCaskill for comment.
Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson claimed the producer had resigned during his new show, now being broadcast on Twitter, on Thursday.
He did not name the producer but The Daily Beast reported that it was McCaskill, who worked with Carlson on Tucker Carlson Tonight for many years.
McCaskill seemed to confirm news of his resignation on his private Instagram account in a lengthy post.
‘Today was my last day at FOX. It was a wild 10 years and it was the best place I’ve ever worked because of the great people I met,’ he wrote.
‘But the time has come. I asked them to let me go, and they finally did. To all my friends there: I will miss you forever.’ (read more)
Many people have written in and asked how can Trump be charged under the Espionage Act. There is probably no other Act that has been so abused than this statute. It has been responsible for witch hunts and the deliberate execution of people the prosecutors knew were innocent. This Act has silenced people, been used to imprison people for speaking against the government in times of war, and even imprisoned Japanese for simply being Japanese under nothing more than an executive order Public Proclamation No. 4, 7 Fed.Reg. 2601. And on May 19, 1942, eleven days before the time a Japanese petitioner was charged with unlawfully remaining in the area, Civilian Restrictive Order No. 1, 8 Fed.Reg. 982, provided for the detention of those of Japanese ancestry in assembly or relocation centers. One of the top 5 worst decisions of the Supreme Court declaring Blacks were just property in Dred Scott v. Sandford 60 U.S. 393 (1856), but so was the imprisonment of Japanese Americans during World War II solely based on their race – Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944)
Justice Robert H. Jackson (1892–1954) dissented writing “Korematsu … has been convicted of an act not commonly thought a crime. It consists merely of being present in the state whereof he is a citizen, near the place where he was born, and where all his life he has lived.” Jackson argued that the nation’s wartime security concerns did not justify stripping Korematsu and the other internees of their constitutionally protected civil rights.
Nobody would listen to reason. Jackson declared that the exclusion order was “the legalization of racism”that violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. He compared the exclusion order to the “abhorrent and despicable treatment of minority groups by the dictatorial tyrannies which this nation is now pledged to destroy.” He concluded that the exclusion order violated the Fourteenth Amendment by “fall[ing] into the ugly abyss of racism.”
Welcome to reality. Whenever the self-interest of those in power is in conflict with the rule of law, the rule of law is ALWAYS ignored. They are doing that with Trump right now and all the RINOs cheering and arresting Trump on his birthday show just how evil these people truly are. With every cheer the RINOs make, they prove Mark Twain was always right.
t has always been IMPOSSIBLE to hand ANY power to the government under the pretense that it is necessary for some good. Any regulation carries some penalty for noncompliance. Then this opens the door to abuse as we see with Trump. When Congress passes a law, prosecutors make a career out of twisting the words to fit whatever they can dream up. On top of that Congress always expands its power and never was there any “intent” behind the Espionage Act to be used in this manner against a former president. In its current incarnation, the section Trump is charged with reads:
18 USC #793(e)
(e) Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or
The abuse of this law is mindboggling and the real problem here is that prosecutors have discretion so they can openly deny Equal Protection of the Law for they decide if they want to prosecute Trump but not Biden or Pence or Hillary who did have classified documents on her server and did transmit them. I believe that Jack Smith as the prosecutor has violated not just Trump’s civil rights, but he has violated everyone’s civil rights for his selective prosecution with the intent of preventing Trump from running for president.
The Supreme Court held in Armstrong v US, 517 U.S. 456 (1996)that to show selective prosecution, an individual must show that a prosecutorial policy had both a discriminatory purpose and a discriminatory effect. In other words, they must show that prosecutors did not charge similarly situated people and that can clearly be established with both Biden and Hillary Clinton.
There should be a class action lawsuit brought against Jack Smith and the Attorney General for deliberating targeting Trump to interfere in the 2024 election which violates everyone’s civil rights denying us that the 2024 election will be free and fair. It is an acknowledged violation of our Civil Rights for what the entire world now knows they are doing – interfering in the 2024 election.
Of course, all of these RINOs and disgusting people pretending to care about the country or the rule of law, are out in full force driving their knives and stabbing Trump like corrupt senators did to Julius Caesar 23 times. History will remember their names as it remembered Brutus and Cassius. This will be the day that truly lives in infamy. Mike Pence, who I would not vote for even being a local dog catcher, has joined the choir of attacking Trump to save the SWAMP. John Kelly, Trump’s pretend chief of staff who the Neocons put in place since he was previously in the Marine Corps Liaison Office. Remember all their names and NEVER vote for any of them EVER in the future. When you see them in someone’s cabinet, know that the administration can never be trusted. They are against the people, and the constitution, and only support the corruption that is destroying our nation from the inside out – the SWAMP.
The first Espionage Act was passed with the American Revolution. It was passed July 6, 1798, and this is all omitted from the Federal Criminal Code and Rules which are standard today. If Trump would declare he now identifies as a woman, or a lesbian because he enjoys women, then under the Espionage Act of 1798 he could not be guilty. Congress at the time was engaged in writing laws for the PURPOSE (Intent) of protecting the Government, growing out of serious friction with France. Interestingly, it did NOT apply to women. It only applied specifically to natives, citizens, denizens (an inhabitant of a particular place such as a forest), or subjects of a hostile nation of Government, “being males of the age of 14 years and upwards.”
Curiously, it was World War I before they passed a new Espionage Act in 1917, yet they did not repeal nor amend the 1798 Act. It addressed the loophole with women. It merely supplemented the Espionage Act of 1798 statute providing for punishments concerning a woman stating that she may then be interned or punished for violation of any of the espionage laws. The Espionage Act of 1798 gave the president the executive power to restrict certain areas. It even then allows a woman to be executed if she was caught trying to transmit any information which has for one of its purposes visiting an area that is restricted like taking photos of defense ships etc. By 1917, they figured out that some of the very best spies were actually women. That is when Mata Hari, the dancer, was executed by firing squad in France.
On June 15, 1917, some two months after America’s formal entrance into World War I against Germany, the United States Congress passed the Espionage Act. The Espionage Act essentially made it a crime for any person to convey information intended to interfere with the U.S. armed forces during the war effort or to promote the success of the country’s enemies. Anyone found guilty of such acts would be subject to a fine of $10,000 and a prison sentence of 20 years.
The Espionage Act was reinforced by the Sedition Act of the following year, which imposed similarly harsh penalties on anyone found guilty of making false statements that interfered with the prosecution of the war. That included insulting or abusing the U.S. government, the flag, the Constitution, or the military. Freedom of speech was restrained. It further included protesting and agitating against the production of necessary war materials as well as advocating, teaching, or defending any of these acts.
These acts they insisted were intended to target socialists, pacifists, and other anti-war activists during World War I. They were used with a very punishing effect instantly. This became the great Red Scare with people justifying these laws claiming that communists sought to influence and to infiltrate into American society changing the country from within. This was the first Red Scare with the second unfolding during the 1940s and 1950s, associated largely with Senator Joseph McCarthy (1908–1957) who was just manufacturing evidence against people he disliked.
This is when Alexander Mitchell Palmer (1872–1936), assumed the attorney general’s office during the Red Scare, and his right-hand man, J. Edgar Hoover (1895–1972), liberally employed the Espionage and Sedition Acts to persecute left-wing political figures and anyone he just disliked. It would be Hoover who would spy on members of Congress and strike fear in the hearts of everyone on Capital Hill. He had his secret files on everyone even President Kennedy. Abuse of power always follows a grant of power.
One of the most famous activists arrested during this period, labor leader Eugene V. Debs (1855–1926), was sentenced to 10 years in prison for a speech he made in 1918 in Canton, Ohio, criticizing the Espionage Act. Debs had also tried to run for President as the head of the Socialist Party. Debs appealed the decision, and the case eventually reached the U.S. Supreme Court, where the court upheld his conviction. Though Debs’ sentence was commuted in 1921 when the Sedition Act was repealed by Congress, major portions of the Espionage Act remain part of United States law to the present day and are subject to abuse of power as we are witnessing today.
It was April 5th, 1951 when Julius Rosenberg (1918-1953) and his 35-year-old wife Ethel (1915-1953) were sentenced to death using this Espionage Act. Today, everyone concedes that his wife’s crime was simply being married to Julius. The prosecutors charged her thinking it would force him to give up his contacts which he never did most likely because he had none.
A co-defendant of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Morton Sobell (1917-2018), admitted for the first time that he was a Soviet spy on his deathbed at 91 after serving 30 years in prison but also made it clear that Ethel was innocent. Sobell passed military secrets to the Communists in World War II when the nations were still allies, he told the New York Times. Sobell, who served 18 years for espionage, said Julius did pass secrets but Ethel, executed with her husband in 1953, was guilty of nothing more than being Mrs. Rosenberg.
Under our legal system, the Jury can nullify the conviction using common sense based on their own sense of justice. Our corrupt judges will never instruct the jury that they have that power. The JURY can refuse to follow the corrupt law and acquit a defendant even when the evidence presented seems to point to an incontrovertible verdict of guilty. Personally, I think the Jury should be told that they have the power to nullify a conviction as well as to direct charges and reprimand the prosecutor in such a case for his abuse of power.
Just like Ponus Pilate tried washing his hands after sentencing Christ to death, these prosecutors and judges have so much blood on their hands that it takes a really different kind of person to take pleasure in inflicting pain on others. The injustices of so many people who have been executed under our laws only to be found that they were innocent are appalling and disgusting.
Only an idiot accepts government allegations as fact in any case. The entire problem stems from ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY! The US government cannot be sued, only the agents of the government and judges have bestowed that immunity simply because the king had that who we revolted against. But the courts granted the very same power to the government that sparked the American Revolution. Consequently, those in the Justice Department are not forthcoming about admitting a mistake. I do not believe that a prosecutor should be able to bring charges. There should be a panel set up where every prosecutor presents his case to them and they are the ones who bring an indictment. That would remove personal self-interests.
Edwin Paul Wilson (1928–2012) was a former CIA and U.S. Naval Intelligence officer who was convicted in 1983 of illegally selling weapons to Libya. When one agency caught him, the CIA denied he worked for them since it was their secret operation. Wilson was tried and convicted. His daughter fought to get documents to prove her father worked for the CIA which they denied. What they did to Wilson should give anyone pause why they would work for the government.
You can tell Wilson was innocent because they kept him in solitary confinement – the ultimate torture. That is where most suicides take place. They did that to prevent him from having free communication outside the prison. It was later proven that the United States Department of Justice and the CIA had covered up evidence in the case. Wilson’s convictions were overturned in 2003 and he was freed the following year. Prosecutors KNEW he was innocent, but prosecuted him anyway.
Wilson filed a civil suit against seven former federal prosecutors, two of whom are now federal judges rewarded for wrongful prosecutions, and a past executive director of the CIA. On March 29th, 2007, U.S. District Judge Lee Rosenthal dismissed his case on the grounds that all eight had immunity covering their actions – not that they were innocent or his claims were frivolous. They can kill you, rob you, and even rape your family. NO court will ever take your word over a prosecutor. That is why there is no longer any Justice in America. They read it as “JUST US” to always further their own self-interest.
Harvard law professor, Alan Dershowitz, discusses in “America on Trial” several dozen cases that have indeed shaped the United States, transforming the country and its legal system from the colonial period to the present corrupt system of injustice.
Prosecutors abuse the system to win unjust convictions ALL THE TIME. There is the case of JOSEPH SALVATIwhere the jury awarded $102 million because the prosecutors KNEW they were convicting the wrong person. Anyone working for the government who does this sort of thing should be imprisoned. After all, they violate the civil rights of an individual and remain immune from criminal prosecution.
There is the case of Jack McCullough sentenced to life in prison in 1957 who was finally released in 2016. One Judge, U.S. District Judge Leigh Martin May, ruled that the SEC courts established by Roosevelt are unconstitutional. The government just ignored the ruling.
The Supreme Court committed the worst crime against humanity ever recorded demonstrating its bias. They declared that those who are prosecutors or judges have ABSOLUTEimmunity from being prosecuted for wrongful prosecution even if they know they are abusing their authority or committing a crime because they might be afraid to prosecute someone if they could be prosecuted in return.
The Supreme Court’s most anti-Constitutional decision ever rendered implemented a nationwide policy declaring prosecutors must have absolute immunity for acts committed in their prosecutorial role. This decision has unleashed the most abusive legal system ever on the face of this Earth. The most notorious court in history had been that of Hitler which had a 90% conviction rate. The Supreme Court has stripped every possible human right we have fought for since the dawn of civilization with that decision.
The conviction rate now exceeds 98% in the US federal courts. Lawyers tell you to just plea because you cannot win! Federal Judge Jed Rakof’s review of a book – Why Innocent People Plead Guilty. Judge Rakof wrote in the New York Review of Books, “Over the past few decades, ordinary US citizens have increasingly been denied effective access to their courts.” Nobody pays attention and at least one-third of the people in prison are innocent charged with conspiracy so the government does not have to prove you actually did something, you just intended it somehow. Nobody reforms the judicial system so police just kill people without consequence.
Nobody will hold prosecutors accountable and then most judges are former prosecutors so good luck with pleading your case. There is not a vein of morality in most of these people. Even an honest judge is just overruled by the corrupt courts of appeal. When you stare into the eyes of a prosecutor or most judges, all you see is the coldness of evil stripped of all human emotion. They lose all humanity in order to do the job.
The Supreme Court has unleashed the total destruction of the Constitution upon all of us and there is a growing call to acknowledge and address an epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct in the United States, but nobody will listen. The case wasImbler v. Pachtman and its perverse holding is uncivilized in any democratic state for it is the decision of a totalitarian regime.
Shakespeare’s famous line “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers” referred to the king’s lawyers we call prosecutors today. The question is when will the people stand up and say enough is enough! Thomas Jefferson included in the Declaration of Independence about injustice and how the government protected its agents as they do today: “For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:”
History repeats because those in power will always act in their self-interest. Nothing has ever changed since Thrasymachus warned Socrates who imposed the death penalty and Plota fled Athens saying he would not allow a second crime against Philosophy.
Many people have written in and asked how can Trump be charged under the Espionage Act. There is probably no other Act that has been so abused than this statute. It has been responsible for witch hunts and the deliberate execution of people the prosecutors knew were innocent. This Act has silenced people, been used to imprison people for speaking against the government in times of war, and even imprisoned Japanese for simply being Japanese under nothing more than an executive order Public Proclamation No. 4, 7 Fed.Reg. 2601. And on May 19, 1942, eleven days before the time a Japanese petitioner was charged with unlawfully remaining in the area, Civilian Restrictive Order No. 1, 8 Fed.Reg. 982, provided for the detention of those of Japanese ancestry in assembly or relocation centers. One of the top 5 worst decisions of the Supreme Court declaring Blacks were just property in Dred Scott v. Sandford 60 U.S. 393 (1856), but so was the imprisonment of Japanese Americans during World War II solely based on their race – Korematsu v. United States, 323 U.S. 214 (1944)
Justice Robert H. Jackson (1892–1954) dissented writing “Korematsu … has been convicted of an act not commonly thought a crime. It consists merely of being present in the state whereof he is a citizen, near the place where he was born, and where all his life he has lived.” Jackson argued that the nation’s wartime security concerns did not justify stripping Korematsu and the other internees of their constitutionally protected civil rights.
Nobody would listen to reason. Jackson declared that the exclusion order was “the legalization of racism”that violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. He compared the exclusion order to the “abhorrent and despicable treatment of minority groups by the dictatorial tyrannies which this nation is now pledged to destroy.” He concluded that the exclusion order violated the Fourteenth Amendment by “fall[ing] into the ugly abyss of racism.”
Welcome to reality. Whenever the self-interest of those in power is in conflict with the rule of law, the rule of law is ALWAYS ignored. They are doing that with Trump right now and all the RINOs cheering and arresting Trump on his birthday show just how evil these people truly are. With every cheer the RINOs make, they prove Mark Twain was always right.
t has always been IMPOSSIBLE to hand ANY power to the government under the pretense that it is necessary for some good. Any regulation carries some penalty for noncompliance. Then this opens the door to abuse as we see with Trump. When Congress passes a law, prosecutors make a career out of twisting the words to fit whatever they can dream up. On top of that Congress always expands its power and never was there any “intent” behind the Espionage Act to be used in this manner against a former president. In its current incarnation, the section Trump is charged with reads:
18 USC #793(e)
(e) Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or
The abuse of this law is mindboggling and the real problem here is that prosecutors have discretion so they can openly deny Equal Protection of the Law for they decide if they want to prosecute Trump but not Biden or Pence or Hillary who did have classified documents on her server and did transmit them. I believe that Jack Smith as the prosecutor has violated not just Trump’s civil rights, but he has violated everyone’s civil rights for his selective prosecution with the intent of preventing Trump from running for president.
The Supreme Court held in Armstrong v US, 517 U.S. 456 (1996)that to show selective prosecution, an individual must show that a prosecutorial policy had both a discriminatory purpose and a discriminatory effect. In other words, they must show that prosecutors did not charge similarly situated people and that can clearly be established with both Biden and Hillary Clinton.
There should be a class action lawsuit brought against Jack Smith and the Attorney General for deliberating targeting Trump to interfere in the 2024 election which violates everyone’s civil rights denying us that the 2024 election will be free and fair. It is an acknowledged violation of our Civil Rights for what the entire world now knows they are doing – interfering in the 2024 election.
Of course, all of these RINOs and disgusting people pretending to care about the country or the rule of law, are out in full force driving their knives and stabbing Trump like corrupt senators did to Julius Caesar 23 times. History will remember their names as it remembered Brutus and Cassius. This will be the day that truly lives in infamy. Mike Pence, who I would not vote for even being a local dog catcher, has joined the choir of attacking Trump to save the SWAMP. John Kelly, Trump’s pretend chief of staff who the Neocons put in place since he was previously in the Marine Corps Liaison Office. Remember all their names and NEVER vote for any of them EVER in the future. When you see them in someone’s cabinet, know that the administration can never be trusted. They are against the people, and the constitution, and only support the corruption that is destroying our nation from the inside out – the SWAMP.
The first Espionage Act was passed with the American Revolution. It was passed July 6, 1798, and this is all omitted from the Federal Criminal Code and Rules which are standard today. If Trump would declare he now identifies as a woman, or a lesbian because he enjoys women, then under the Espionage Act of 1798 he could not be guilty. Congress at the time was engaged in writing laws for the PURPOSE (Intent) of protecting the Government, growing out of serious friction with France. Interestingly, it did NOT apply to women. It only applied specifically to natives, citizens, denizens (an inhabitant of a particular place such as a forest), or subjects of a hostile nation of Government, “being males of the age of 14 years and upwards.”
Curiously, it was World War I before they passed a new Espionage Act in 1917, yet they did not repeal nor amend the 1798 Act. It addressed the loophole with women. It merely supplemented the Espionage Act of 1798 statute providing for punishments concerning a woman stating that she may then be interned or punished for violation of any of the espionage laws. The Espionage Act of 1798 gave the president the executive power to restrict certain areas. It even then allows a woman to be executed if she was caught trying to transmit any information which has for one of its purposes visiting an area that is restricted like taking photos of defense ships etc. By 1917, they figured out that some of the very best spies were actually women. That is when Mata Hari, the dancer, was executed by firing squad in France.
On June 15, 1917, some two months after America’s formal entrance into World War I against Germany, the United States Congress passed the Espionage Act. The Espionage Act essentially made it a crime for any person to convey information intended to interfere with the U.S. armed forces during the war effort or to promote the success of the country’s enemies. Anyone found guilty of such acts would be subject to a fine of $10,000 and a prison sentence of 20 years.
The Espionage Act was reinforced by the Sedition Act of the following year, which imposed similarly harsh penalties on anyone found guilty of making false statements that interfered with the prosecution of the war. That included insulting or abusing the U.S. government, the flag, the Constitution, or the military. Freedom of speech was restrained. It further included protesting and agitating against the production of necessary war materials as well as advocating, teaching, or defending any of these acts.
These acts they insisted were intended to target socialists, pacifists, and other anti-war activists during World War I. They were used with a very punishing effect instantly. This became the great Red Scare with people justifying these laws claiming that communists sought to influence and to infiltrate into American society changing the country from within. This was the first Red Scare with the second unfolding during the 1940s and 1950s, associated largely with Senator Joseph McCarthy (1908–1957) who was just manufacturing evidence against people he disliked.
This is when Alexander Mitchell Palmer (1872–1936), assumed the attorney general’s office during the Red Scare, and his right-hand man, J. Edgar Hoover (1895–1972), liberally employed the Espionage and Sedition Acts to persecute left-wing political figures and anyone he just disliked. It would be Hoover who would spy on members of Congress and strike fear in the hearts of everyone on Capital Hill. He had his secret files on everyone even President Kennedy. Abuse of power always follows a grant of power.
One of the most famous activists arrested during this period, labor leader Eugene V. Debs (1855–1926), was sentenced to 10 years in prison for a speech he made in 1918 in Canton, Ohio, criticizing the Espionage Act. Debs had also tried to run for President as the head of the Socialist Party. Debs appealed the decision, and the case eventually reached the U.S. Supreme Court, where the court upheld his conviction. Though Debs’ sentence was commuted in 1921 when the Sedition Act was repealed by Congress, major portions of the Espionage Act remain part of United States law to the present day and are subject to abuse of power as we are witnessing today.
It was April 5th, 1951 when Julius Rosenberg (1918-1953) and his 35-year-old wife Ethel (1915-1953) were sentenced to death using this Espionage Act. Today, everyone concedes that his wife’s crime was simply being married to Julius. The prosecutors charged her thinking it would force him to give up his contacts which he never did most likely because he had none.
A co-defendant of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Morton Sobell (1917-2018), admitted for the first time that he was a Soviet spy on his deathbed at 91 after serving 30 years in prison but also made it clear that Ethel was innocent. Sobell passed military secrets to the Communists in World War II when the nations were still allies, he told the New York Times. Sobell, who served 18 years for espionage, said Julius did pass secrets but Ethel, executed with her husband in 1953, was guilty of nothing more than being Mrs. Rosenberg.
Under our legal system, the Jury can nullify the conviction using common sense based on their own sense of justice. Our corrupt judges will never instruct the jury that they have that power. The JURY can refuse to follow the corrupt law and acquit a defendant even when the evidence presented seems to point to an incontrovertible verdict of guilty. Personally, I think the Jury should be told that they have the power to nullify a conviction as well as to direct charges and reprimand the prosecutor in such a case for his abuse of power.
Just like Ponus Pilate tried washing his hands after sentencing Christ to death, these prosecutors and judges have so much blood on their hands that it takes a really different kind of person to take pleasure in inflicting pain on others. The injustices of so many people who have been executed under our laws only to be found that they were innocent are appalling and disgusting.
Only an idiot accepts government allegations as fact in any case. The entire problem stems from ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY! The US government cannot be sued, only the agents of the government and judges have bestowed that immunity simply because the king had that who we revolted against. But the courts granted the very same power to the government that sparked the American Revolution. Consequently, those in the Justice Department are not forthcoming about admitting a mistake. I do not believe that a prosecutor should be able to bring charges. There should be a panel set up where every prosecutor presents his case to them and they are the ones who bring an indictment. That would remove personal self-interests.
Edwin Paul Wilson (1928–2012) was a former CIA and U.S. Naval Intelligence officer who was convicted in 1983 of illegally selling weapons to Libya. When one agency caught him, the CIA denied he worked for them since it was their secret operation. Wilson was tried and convicted. His daughter fought to get documents to prove her father worked for the CIA which they denied. What they did to Wilson should give anyone pause why they would work for the government.
You can tell Wilson was innocent because they kept him in solitary confinement – the ultimate torture. That is where most suicides take place. They did that to prevent him from having free communication outside the prison. It was later proven that the United States Department of Justice and the CIA had covered up evidence in the case. Wilson’s convictions were overturned in 2003 and he was freed the following year. Prosecutors KNEW he was innocent, but prosecuted him anyway.
Wilson filed a civil suit against seven former federal prosecutors, two of whom are now federal judges rewarded for wrongful prosecutions, and a past executive director of the CIA. On March 29th, 2007, U.S. District Judge Lee Rosenthal dismissed his case on the grounds that all eight had immunity covering their actions – not that they were innocent or his claims were frivolous. They can kill you, rob you, and even rape your family. NO court will ever take your word over a prosecutor. That is why there is no longer any Justice in America. They read it as “JUST US” to always further their own self-interest.
Harvard law professor, Alan Dershowitz, discusses in “America on Trial” several dozen cases that have indeed shaped the United States, transforming the country and its legal system from the colonial period to the present corrupt system of injustice.
Prosecutors abuse the system to win unjust convictions ALL THE TIME. There is the case of JOSEPH SALVATIwhere the jury awarded $102 million because the prosecutors KNEW they were convicting the wrong person. Anyone working for the government who does this sort of thing should be imprisoned. After all, they violate the civil rights of an individual and remain immune from criminal prosecution.
There is the case of Jack McCullough sentenced to life in prison in 1957 who was finally released in 2016. One Judge, U.S. District Judge Leigh Martin May, ruled that the SEC courts established by Roosevelt are unconstitutional. The government just ignored the ruling.
The Supreme Court committed the worst crime against humanity ever recorded demonstrating its bias. They declared that those who are prosecutors or judges have ABSOLUTEimmunity from being prosecuted for wrongful prosecution even if they know they are abusing their authority or committing a crime because they might be afraid to prosecute someone if they could be prosecuted in return.
The Supreme Court’s most anti-Constitutional decision ever rendered implemented a nationwide policy declaring prosecutors must have absolute immunity for acts committed in their prosecutorial role. This decision has unleashed the most abusive legal system ever on the face of this Earth. The most notorious court in history had been that of Hitler which had a 90% conviction rate. The Supreme Court has stripped every possible human right we have fought for since the dawn of civilization with that decision.
The conviction rate now exceeds 98% in the US federal courts. Lawyers tell you to just plea because you cannot win! Federal Judge Jed Rakof’s review of a book – Why Innocent People Plead Guilty. Judge Rakof wrote in the New York Review of Books, “Over the past few decades, ordinary US citizens have increasingly been denied effective access to their courts.” Nobody pays attention and at least one-third of the people in prison are innocent charged with conspiracy so the government does not have to prove you actually did something, you just intended it somehow. Nobody reforms the judicial system so police just kill people without consequence.
Nobody will hold prosecutors accountable and then most judges are former prosecutors so good luck with pleading your case. There is not a vein of morality in most of these people. Even an honest judge is just overruled by the corrupt courts of appeal. When you stare into the eyes of a prosecutor or most judges, all you see is the coldness of evil stripped of all human emotion. They lose all humanity in order to do the job.
The Supreme Court has unleashed the total destruction of the Constitution upon all of us and there is a growing call to acknowledge and address an epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct in the United States, but nobody will listen. The case wasImbler v. Pachtman and its perverse holding is uncivilized in any democratic state for it is the decision of a totalitarian regime.
Shakespeare’s famous line “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers” referred to the king’s lawyers we call prosecutors today. The question is when will the people stand up and say enough is enough! Thomas Jefferson included in the Declaration of Independence about injustice and how the government protected its agents as they do today: “For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:”
History repeats because those in power will always act in their self-interest. Nothing has ever changed since Thrasymachus warned Socrates who imposed the death penalty and Plota fled Athens saying he would not allow a second crime against Philosophy.
This will be a day remembered in the history of the entire world. It is the day that the United States indicted and arrested a former president to prevent him from running in the 2024 election. Even Richard Nixon was pardoned because they fear that the civil unrest that might unfold would tear the fabric of the nation apart. Today, the Department of Justice is praying for anything to start to arrest anyone protesting for Trump and call them a domestic terrorist to set an example by striking fear into the heart of people to vote for Biden and shut the hell up. This was the day that the United States begins its decline and fall.
The Arrest of Donald Trump on charges related to the alleged mishandling of classified documents has demonstrated to the world that the United States is no longer the beacon of liberty and justice for all. Besides Biden having classified documents, taking actual bribes, and Hillary setting up a private server on which there were also classified documents so nothing she had on that would be accessible under the Freedom of Information Act because it was private – not government. This has clearly shown that the Biden Administration has weaponized the Department of Justice just like every other corrupt government including Ukraine – Zelensky criminally charge his opponent as well.
Today marks the very first time a former president has ever been arrested by the U.S. government. Trump pleaded not guilty to all charges. MSNBC Chief Legal Correspondent Ari Melber reports was so excited, it probably pissed his pants. No doubt the jubilation is static at CNN, NY Times, Washington Post, etc, etc. As they said when Rome fell, they too were still laughing.
ANY Republican politician that abandons Trump you now know their true colors. The reason why, the rumor running around is that the DOJ is cheering for they intend to indict Trump supporters on whatever scheme they can make up before the 2024 election. So you will see, Republican throwing Trump under the bus. This is a warning to anyone who thinks they really can drain the swamp. DeSantis – please stay here in Florida. You will NEVER make a difference in that town. The time for declaring the Democracy of Florida is rapidly approaching.
And to those who hate Trump, this has nothing to do with Trump. If the Republican gain power, they will retaliate with the same vengeance and lack of rule of law. We have crossed the Rubicon. As for the RINOS who will not defend the country, the constitution, or even speak up about the weaponizing of the DOJ against political opponents, we now know who you really are and you do not stand by the Constitution. We live in a full-blow authoritarian dictatorship. As even the cartoons use to sign off – That’s All folks! We now have less than 8 years left. Protesting will do nothing at this point, The Die has been Cast, as Caesar said when crossing the Rubicon. There is absolutely nothing we can do to reverse the trend.
The mainstream media continually calls Biden’s Burisma bribery misinformation. Senator Chuck Grassley made a stunning claim that a Burisma executive is currently in possession of recorded calls with Hunter and Joe Biden in which they discuss the $5 million bribe. The then-vice president and the executive referred to the bribe as an “insurance policy” for the Biden crime family.
Attorney General Matt Whitaker told Fox that this will be a “cataclysmic event” if the audio recordings are released. Document form FD-1023 form, dated June 30, 2020, initially redacted the audio files to protect the Bidens. “This information, that there were recordings of the president of United States talking to a foreign national about bribes, was redacted from that 1023. That’s extraordinary in and of itself. Now, the contents, if true, I mean, obviously this is a cataclysmic event because you just don’t have these types of recordings usually available. And… it will prove essentially what Joe Biden knew and what his scheme was to abuse his power as vice president,” Whitaker told Fox.
Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said that the Ukrainian executive kept the tapes as a form of his own insurance policy in case he got into a “tight spot.” Grassley also said that the recordings may prove that Biden helped to appoint his son Hunter to a position at Burisma. “So, as I’ve repeatedly asked since going public with the existence of the 1023, what, if anything, has the Justice Department and FBI done to investigate? The Justice Department and FBI must show their work. They no longer deserve the benefit of the doubt,” the senator said.
Where is the global outrage? The Bidens were engaged in illegal dealing with Ukraine years before Biden became the POTUS. We are now sending blank checks of taxpayers’ money to Ukraine, exacerbating inflation and creating economic uncertainty throughout the globe. Biden should be impeached at the very least for these offenses. The intelligence agencies have refused to cooperate with investigations and have illegally withheld information that would have sent Joe and Hunter to prison. The Department of Justice and FBI have become the Democrat’s personal Gestapo and are refusing to abide by the law. The people must demand justice.
Posted originally on the CTH on June 12, 2023 | Sundance
“81 Million Votes My Ass”, is a new counter-propaganda message turned into a song and highlighted by Kari Lake. {Direct Rumble Link}
The song is a little salty but strips down the nonsense and delivers a direct counterpunch to the elements in social society that would continually have us believe that Joe Biden won 81 million votes in the 2020 election. WATCH/LISTEN:
.
2024 is every American patriot uniting to burn the ships behind us. This one is for all the marbles. 2024 is not a fight where tepid half-measures and gentlemanly pastels will suffice. Get right with God, put on the armor, absorb the focus of fighting like the third monkey on the ramp to Noah’s ark, and get comfortable being uncomfortable.
Our ally is anyone who stands beside us, right now. Our enemy is anyone who doesn’t.
The new sons and daughters of the revolution are going to look completely different. The Green Dragon Tavern may be a church, a picnic table or a tailgate. The assembly is not focused on the labels of the assembled. The mission is the purpose. The fight is wherever it surfaces. Delicate sensibilities must be dispatched like a feather in a hurricane.
Posted originally on the CTH on June 13, 2023 | Sundance
Things are certainly getting interesting on the Biden bribery story. Apparently, in the unclassified interview with the Confidential Human Source, the FBI redacted the source alleging he has audio recordings of himself speaking to Joe Biden.
Senator Chuck Grassley revealed this little bit of information today from the security of the Senate floor. WATCH:
[Grassley] […] Let me assist for purposes of transparency.
The 1023 produced to that House Committee redacted reference that the foreign national who allegedly bribed Joe and Hunter Biden allegedly has audio recordings of his conversations with them. Seventeen total recordings.
According to the 1023, the foreign national possesses fifteen audio recordings of phone calls between him and Hunter Biden. According to the 1023, the foreign national possesses two audio recordings of phone calls between him and then-Vice President Joe Biden. These recordings were allegedly kept as a sort of insurance policy for the foreign national in case he got into a tight spot. The 1023 also indicates that then-Vice President Joe Biden may have been involved in Burisma employing Hunter Biden. (read full transcript)
[Transcript] – Last week, I came to the Senate Floor to give a speech about the Biden Justice Department and FBI playing games with the American people by hiding the FBI-generated 1023 document from Congress.
Director Wray was going to be held in contempt for refusing to produce the 1023 that I told Chairman Comer about. Then, instead of contempt, the FBI committed to showing the 1023 and related documents to Congress.
So, the FBI showed but didn’t provide possession of that 1023 to the House Oversight Committee last week.
As the public knows that 1023 involves an alleged bribery scheme between then-Vice President Biden, Hunter Biden and a foreign national. The same allegations that Chairman Comer and I made public on May 3 of this year.
And on the same day that the FBI provided a redacted version of the 1023 to the House Oversight Committee, the Justice Department announced that former President Trump had been indicted and charged with 37 crimes relating to his alleged mishandling of classified records.
Attorney General Garland signed off on prosecuting Trump for conduct similar to what Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton engaged in. Two standards of justice in this country will turn our constitutional Republic upside down. Thanks to the political infection within the Biden Justice Department and FBI, we’re well along the road for that to happen.
This senator will do all that he can to fight that political infection. And you fight it by bringing transparency to what the government does. The public’s business ought to be public. Transparency brings accountability.
With respect to the 1023 shown to that House Committee, from what I’ve been told by folks who’ve reviewed it, it’s filled with redactions. So, Director Wray placed redactions on a document that’s already unclassified.
More than that, the FBI made Congress review a redacted unclassified document in a classified facility. That goes to show you the disrespect the FBI has for Congress. On a previous time on the Senate Floor, I asked my fellow senators what’s so unusual about an unclassified document being given to the public, when on May 18 of this year, there was leaked to the New York Times a classified document and even the name of a confidential human source. So, we’re kind of in a strange situation here. A classified document can be leaked to the New York Times, but an unclassified document can’t be made public to 300 million Americans.
Accordingly, Congress still lacks a full and complete picture with respect to what that document really says. That’s why it’s important that the document be made public without unnecessary redactions for the American people to see.
Let me assist for purposes of transparency.
The 1023 produced to that House Committee redacted reference that the foreign national who allegedly bribed Joe and Hunter Biden allegedly has audio recordings of his conversations with them. Seventeen total recordings.
According to the 1023, the foreign national possesses fifteen audio recordings of phone calls between him and Hunter Biden. According to the 1023, the foreign national possesses two audio recordings of phone calls between him and then-Vice President Joe Biden. These recordings were allegedly kept as a sort of insurance policy for the foreign national in case he got into a tight spot. The 1023 also indicates that then-Vice President Joe Biden may have been involved in Burisma employing Hunter Biden.
So, as I’ve repeatedly asked since going public with the existence of the 1023, what, if anything, has the Justice Department and FBI done to investigate?
The Justice Department and FBI must show their work. They no longer deserve the benefit of the doubt. It’s clear that the Justice Department and FBI will use every resource to investigate candidate Trump, President Trump and former President Trump.
Based on the facts known to Congress and the public, it’s clear that the Justice Department and FBI will use every resource to investigate candidate Trump, President Trump and former President Trump. Based on the facts known to Congress and the public, it’s clear that the Justice Department and FBI haven’t nearly had the same laser focus on the Biden family.
Special Counsel Jack Smith has used a recording against former President Trump. Well, what’s U.S. Attorney Weiss doing with respect to these alleged Joe and Hunter Biden recordings that are apparently relevant to a high-stakes bribery scheme?
Getting a full and complete 1023 is critical for the American people to know and understand the true nature of the document and to hold the Justice Department and FBI accountable.
It’s also important for asserting constitutional congressional oversight powers against an out-of-control Executive Branch drunk with political infection. Remember, Congress has received 1023’s in the past and they’ve been made public. So asking for this 1023 to be turned over to the American people to read is not unusual.
Congress owes it to the American people and the brave and heroic whistleblowers to continue to fight for transparency in this matter and make this document public without unnecessary redactions.
I want everyone to remember, that I have readthe unredacted version. [Transcript Link]
Additionally, as more information is coming out from the FD-1023 and associated articles, the deep weeds walkers and research teams are zeroing in on the potential identity of the Confidential Human Source who gave the interview to the FBI.
Also keep in mind, this testimony was made to the FBI in July of 2020. We are now past several elections of sequential coverup operations by the FBI in order to protect Joe Biden and manipulate election outcomes.
Posted originally on the CTH on June 12, 2023 | Sundance
Devin Nunes was previously the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. In that very specific role, Nunes was a member of the Gang of Eight who are briefed on all intelligence issues at the same level as the President, the chief executive. The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman, is the #2 ranking intelligence oversight member within the national security oversight apparatus, exceeded in rank amid the Gang of Eight group only by the House Speaker.
As the HPSCI chairman, Nunes has a very granular understanding of intelligence language and the way the intelligence apparatus uses words within national security documents. When Nunes talks about national security documents, he is a subject matter expert on the administration side of the process. Why is that important right now? Because Nunes knows how to contrast the wording in the Jack Smith indictment against wording used to describe national security documents.
Pay very close attention to this interview, prompted to 05:06, for the Nunes part. You have to get past the paid to obfuscate Mrs. Hannity interruptus, as she tries to shut down Nunes from bringing sunlight on the indictment. However, what Nunes introduces in his comments is the origin of what I am going to explain after the interview.
This is a game-changing context for the Jack Smith indictment. Again, pay close attention. WATCH:
.
What almost everyone in professional narrative engineering/punditry is missing, many of them because they are paid to pretend not to know, is that the national archivists gave sworn testimony to Congress about the Trump documents on May 17, 2023 {citation}. What I am going to outline below will explain the fraud that Jack Smith and his Lawfare crew are purposefully generating.
Some baselines are needed for you to understand what is happening.
First, the National Archives and the DOJ did not demand a return of Classified Documents. They requested a return of documents containing classification markings. These are two entirely different things.
Most documents containing classification markings are not classified documents; yet, most classified documents contain classification markings. Additionally, one of the documents used by Jack Smith in his indictment [COUNT #11] contained no markings at all.
Second, it is critically important to remember that throughout the legal issues in the aftermath of the Mar-a-Lago raid, the DOJ has viciously denied any responsibility to describe the classified documents they claim to have retrieved. In fact, the DOJ has fought against any entity, including the court appointed “special master”, from being able to look at the documents the DOJ *previously* claimed were either classified, or, vital to national security.
Because there is a very specific type of Lawfare game playing with words taking place, it is critical to see the value in what Devin Nunes understands about the way the language is being deployed. Now we return to the testimony of the national archivist office, and here is where it gets really interesting.
During testimony to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) officials were asked specifically about Trump documents and how they could *KNOW* fulsome return of documents had not taken place. The response from the NARA officials is enlightening:
Notice that NARA had knowledge these documents were in the possession of Trump and were pertinent to their archive retrieval. It was interesting at the time that NARA would know the content of the President Obama letter, and further interesting they would know there was more than one piece of correspondence between President Trump and Chairman Kim [Jong-un]. CNN even wrote about it HERE.
[Irrelevant note: Mr Bonsanko got the name wrong, Jong-il is dead]
Reminder, keep in mind the DOJ ferocity in not wanting anyone to know what documents they retrieved and/or defined.
We know, from President Trump describing the letter left to him by the former president, that Obama told Trump in the letter that the number one foreign policy and intelligence threat perceived by Obama (at the time of his exit) was a nuclear armed North Korea. This is where you overlay the Jack Smith writing in the indictment of national defense secrets and nuclear security issues.
We know, from President Trump speaking publicly about his communication and diplomacy with Chairman Kim Jong-un, that the two leaders exchanged letters relating to aligned national security interests that centered around DPRK nuclear ambitions and status.
Trump and Kim formed a geopolitical truce, a friendship of sorts, based on respect and trust around the nuclear issue. Chairman Kim decreased hostilities; President Trump no longer used inflammatory language about “Little Rocket Man.” A diplomatic détente was created.
NARA was looking for the letter written by Obama that described DPRK nukes, and NARA was looking for letters between Trump and Kim that touched on DPRK nukes.
Now, does the wording in the Jack Smith indictment that pertains to “nuclear concerns” and “national security matters” make more sense?
Would all of this hullaballoo really stem from President Trump not giving up personal letters written to him by President Obama and Chairman Kim? YES! Would President Trump even characterize those as government property? NO!
Can you see the way it unfolds? Of course, when you apply the Lawfare lingo, an approach entirely based on maintaining the targeting of Trump, then suddenly the seemingly innocuous becomes horribly nefarious.
In order to pull this off two things would be needed: (1) the DOJ would need to write about it in a certain way in the indictment√; and (2) simultaneously, the DOJ would need to stop anyone from viewing the actual documents, as they misleadingly described them√. Hey, wait… that’s exactly what they did.
But wait, it gets better….
First, why would President Obama write about the DPRK nuclear threat in his letter welcoming President-elect Trump to the White House? It always struck me as odd, even years ago, when Trump would talk about this issue. It never made sense why President Obama would memorialize that type of an issue in writing, until today.
Normally that type of policy and leadership issue would be part of a conversation. “Mr. Trump, as I depart office the number one issue you might first want to deal with on a national security basis is the nuclear ambitions of North Korea, here’s my opinion”… and so it would go. Why write it down? If the intention was to create a record that would always mean the letter was going to remain hidden from public review, then writing about DPRK nukes would be a solid tool for that motive.
Lastly, who would know about the content of the letter that President Obama wrote to President-elect Trump, specifically as it centers around a national security issue? Who would know what Obama wrote to Trump?
Lisa Monaco would certainly know the content of the letter written by Barack Obama to Donald Trump; she, Susan Rice and Kathryn Ruemmler might have even assisted in the writing of it. Remember, it was Susan Rice who wrote the January 20th “by the book” memo memorializing the FBI targeting of Trump, and Kathryn Ruemmler represented Susan Rice as her lawyer when investigators made inquiry.
Lisa Monaco was previously President OBama’s senior advisor for national security.
Currently Deputy Attorney General, Lisa Monaco is the head of the DOJ operation that was targeting the Trump Mar-a-Lago documents and framing the legal issues for the DOJ to use in court. Special Counsel Jack Smith also reports to Lisa Monaco.
America seems to have lost all true allies. Once the world police, the US has been expected to “save” democracies worldwide since the First World War. The US pledges more to NATO than any other member and has gifted Ukraine endless supplies to protect Europe from “Russian aggression.” Yet, a new poll states that Europeans would not want to back America in a war against China.
Six thousand people were surveyed from Austria, Bulgaria, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, and Sweden. Only a quarter of respondents said they’d “like their country, or Europe, to take America’s side,” while 62% would like to remain neutral. Around 43% said China is a “necessary partner” to the EU, and they must “strategically cooperate” with Beijing. Bulgarians were the most likely to side an alliance with China (8%) and/or consider the nation a “necessary partner” (58%). Swedes were the most willing to support the US, with 26% calling China an adversary. About 31% of Poles also said they would side with America if they were to go to war with China.
What will happen to America’s allies when China becomes the more strategic trading partner? American politicians have destabilized our economy and are attempting to steer away from capitalism. Countries will be lining up to sell to China, and not the US.
In the end, it does not matter. The people are never permitted to vote on whether or not we go to war. Most of us, regardless of nationality, simply want peace. We all want to have enough to live comfortably, which is not an option during wars. They ask us to sacrifice, but for what? Our politicians create conflict and send the people, who never had a say in the first place, into battle to die.
If China enters Taiwan, the world will erupt into chaos. The neocons have been waiting for that very moment to justify a new war. Every NATO member nation would be required to fight China. A Gallup poll from February showed that 65% of Americans wanted to support Ukraine against Russia, but they likely do not realize what it entails. We are not merely giving Ukraine supplies; we are preparing for a worldwide battle. In the end, the people are merely cannon fodder and I hesitate to show any support to a politician who believes war is the only option for conflict resolution.
Posted originally on the CTH on June 11, 2023 | Sundance
I have been reviewing interviews, looking at discussion, and some of them I will share in the next few articles. However, for a solid representation of the state of our current dynamic, as it relates to the targeting of President Donald J. Trump, this interview below is a solid outlook from the detractors.
CBS News legal analyst Rikki Klieman and CBS News investigative correspondent Catherine Herridge join “Face the Nation” to discuss what’s in the indictment — and what it means for Trump. [Transcript Here]
Before getting to the video, it’s valuable to see Rikki Klieman representing the interpretation of the media outlook toward the indictment handed down by Special Counsel Jack Smith. It is also valuable to see CBS’s Catherine Herridge represent the defenders of the institutions, from the outside vulgarian personage of Trump.
Klieman buys the Lawfare narrative completely, including the framework of classified documents as opposed to documents containing classified markings. She sells the Lawfare outline as gospel and makes all assertions from that position. Herridge looks at how the bureaucracy responds to Trump, including how the institutions hold power of determination higher than a President of the United States.
As Bill Barr said emphatically earlier today, “The documents do not belong to Trump,” continuing with “The documents belong to the government who created them, not the man for whom they were created.” So sayeth the defender of the omnipotent Dept of Justice. This is where a sharp intellectual knife to cut through the chaff and countermeasures is needed, and notice no one brings up the visible and practical deconstruction point.
If the documents did not belong to President Donald J. Trump, then why did the government dump them in the parking lot of the White House and tell him to deal with them?
If the documents belonged to the government, and not to the man for whom they were created, then why did that same government give them to him and force him to take them to a location of his choosing? Can you see the obtuse argument fall apart when simple pragmatic questions are raised?
The institutions are presented, by the sellers of the Lawfare narrative, as higher than the authority of the President of the United States. This is how ridiculous our government has become.
Institutions are not omnipotent entities; they are buildings and networks full of people who facilitate processes that are an outcome of policy. Those buildings and offices are not the government. The elected politicians who we send to Washington DC are not subservient to the processes, norms and morays they determine within the bureaucracy that the politicians are in charge of.
The argument(s) against Donald Trump are akin to a business saying that all work product created during the tenure of employment belongs to the enterprise of the business and not to the employee. If you want to hold that line of thought, fine. However, you then need to reconcile that the business enterprise intentionally gave all the work product to the employee, dumped it in their lap, told them to take it and leave, and then comes back at a later date and says – we now need to review the stuff we forced you to take because some of it might not actually belong to you.
Does this happen anywhere else? Of course not.
The fact that the National Archives and Record Administration refused to take custody of the documents upon the end of the White House tenure, combined with the fact the NARA dumped those documents in the parking lot of the White House for Trump to deal with, is a direct statement the bureaucracy was telling President Trump these are your records. His records – not their records on loan to him.
The Presidential Records Act is the overriding legislative guidance for the flow of work product post term in office. These are essentially document arguments. The fact that NARA together with the Biden administration would weaponize the disposition of documents, they intentionally forced Trump to take ownership of, speaks to an intent within the bureaucracy that is transparently obvious.
Bill Barr’s entire mindset is based on a belief the institutions are of a higher power than the individuals we elect to control them. In essence, the President of the United States is subservient to the bureaucracy. This is nonsense. This is also why former AG Bill Barr was more concerned about preserving the institutions than stopping the weaponizing activity that flows from them.
President Trump could store his “presidential records” anywhere he wants to; they are his records.
Now, watch Klieman obscure the difference between classified documents and documents containing classified markings. Despite her pontifications to the contrary, the indictment is not based around any classified documents. The classification of the documents is technically and factually moot to the ridiculous point the special counsel is making.
.
[Transcript] -JOHN DICKERSON: For more on the legal implications, we’re joined by senior investigative correspondent Catherine Herridge and CBS News legal analyst Rikki Klieman.
Rikki, I want to start with you.
You have been a prosecutor and a defense lawyer. So what stands out to you, now that you have read this indictment?
RIKKI KLIEMAN: I think what stands out, obviously, is the magnitude of detail in this indictment.
It’s not only that you’re dealing with 31 counts under the Espionage Act, which simply means the unlawful, willing retention of classified information, or even unclassified information that would hurt the defense of the United States and aid our enemies. It’s the detail of a speaking indictment.
We have to remember that much of this indictment, John, is to educate not only ultimately a court and jury, but it’s really to educate the public. Much of this indictment, in terms of the detail, may not even come into evidence, in terms of what’s admissible or not in the course of a trial.
What also strikes me, John, is, the overwhelming detail leaves the Trump legal team with real need to have powerful motions to dismiss, because, if this goes to trial, the way it reads, it’s rather overwhelming for anyone to be able to fight it on the facts themselves.
JOHN DICKERSON: And I want to get to that motion-to-dismiss question in a moment.
But, Catherine, you have been doing reporting about the risk assessment about just what was in these documents. Educate us on that.
CATHERINE HERRIDGE: Well, what jumps out to me, John, is when you go to the section the willful retention of national defense information, by my count, there are 21 top secret documents, and the disclosure of top secret information has the expectation of exceptionally grave damage to national security.
But what out — stands out to me is some of the classified codings, like TK, or Talent Keyhole. You don’t see that very often. That’s about intelligence from overhead imagery. For example, if we’re looking at a terrorist target, do we have such good visibility that we can count the hairs on their head? Can we see what they’re eating for breakfast on their terrorist patio?
Those are capabilities that we don’t want our adversaries to know that we have. And then also Special Access Programs, or SAP, these are highly restricted programs because of the sensitivity of the intelligence and the technology, such as stealth technology, for example.
Think of classified information like the Pentagon. Special Access Programs are these handful of rooms where there are just a limited number of keys to control and restrict access to that information.
JOHN DICKERSON: So it’s not just secret; it’s the top of the — top of the top?
CATHERINE HERRIDGE: Some of these are way beyond top secret, like, I said, Talent Keyhole, when you’re talking about Special Access Programs or SCI, sensitive, compartmentalized information.
These really are the crown jewels of the U.S. intelligence community.
JOHN DICKERSON: Rikki, let me ask you about a part of this indictment which seems to come — which comes from one of the former president’s lawyers.
Educate us on the crime-fraud exception, how it’s possible for a prosecutor to have this information. And is that a weakness? Because we know, from our reporting, that this is something that the Trump defense team is going to talk about, is the behavior of the prosecutors.
RIKKI KLIEMAN: We all believe that, when you go to a doctor, that there’s a privilege, that what you say and what your ailments are will remain confidential.
Same thing if you go to a clergyperson. And it’s exactly the same thing. When you go to a lawyer. You believe that, if you are a client, that what you say will never be disclosed to anyone, let alone in the grand jury or court of law. It’s called the attorney-client privilege. It protects all conversations relating to legal advice.
So, how did it get broken? That is, how did a court in Washington, D.C., a judge, and then an appellate court affirm the idea that you could hear, listen, read the notes and the voice memos of a lawyer to testify against his own client?
It’s called the crime-fraud exception. So what the court believed was, the conversations between Evan Corcoran, the lawyer, and Donald Trump were really in furtherance of a crime or a fraud, and he was ordered and forced to testify.
Now, one could say, well, that’s one and done. So now Mr. Corcoran is going to be a witness in this case, should it go to trial. But we have to remember that that took place, that decision, in the District of Columbia. Now we are in Florida. So can it come up to a new judge? Might a new judge decide that it is not admissible at trial? Yes.
Will that hurt the case? Not necessarily. There’s plenty of other evidence.
JOHN DICKERSON: Catherine, I have got two questions for you.
The first is, what happens if you’re just a regular old Joe and you have this kind of information? Legally, what happens to you? What’s happened?
CATHERINE HERRIDGE: Well, as one example, I have contacts who work in the nuclear weapons capability arena.
Let’s say you have a nuclear document, it’s on top of the photocopier, and you walk away, you leave it there. Your clearance is gone. You are out the door. There are immediate consequences.
JOHN DICKERSON: Let me ask you about a number of the president’s defenders.
Well, first of all, we should note, the current president is under investigation by a special counsel.
CATHERINE HERRIDGE: Correct.
JOHN DICKERSON: We don’t know much about that. But Republicans have brought that up in defending the president. They have also brought the case of Hillary Clinton.
You have been looking at that. Give us a sense of the apples and oranges or apples and apples in comparison with what’s on the table here.
CATHERINE HERRIDGE: Well, what strikes me, John, in this indictment is I think the special counsel, Jack Smith, specifically charged willful retention of national defense information in an effort to sort of blunt criticism that these cases may be the same.
If you go back to the summer of 2016, then-FBI Director James Comey said that they found multiple e-mail chains on Hillary Clinton’s private server that she used for government business that contained highly classified information, including these Special Access Programs that we just discussed, but, in his view, it should not be charged because he didn’t feel there was sufficient evidence of intent or willfulness.
Critics would say that even just purchasing the server was an example of intent. And then, finally, you have to look at just the scope of the information and also the timeline. But I think this charging of willful retention really is by design.
JOHN DICKERSON: Right, the facts of the case quite different. But thank you so much for that and for all your other answers.
And, Rikki Klieman, thank you.
And Face the Nation will be back in one minute. Stay with us. (link)
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America