Episode 262 of the Devin Nunes Podcast with Lee Smith and Margot ClevelandShow Posted originally on Rumble on: Jun 16, 3:06 pm EDT
Two-Tiered Justice System with Lee Smith and Margot Cleveland
Category Corrupt FBI DOJ DHS ODNI
Senator Grassley Reveals FBI Confidential Human Source Alleging Biden Bribes Has Recordings of Himself Talking to Joe Biden
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 read the 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.
SEE HERE
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.
JPMorgan Chase Settles Lawsuit From Epstein Accusers for $290 Million
Posted originally on the CTH on June 12, 2023 | Sundance
Nothing shouts “complicity” quite like paying $290 million to make the issues disappear. However, according to the Wall Street Journal, fortunately ““The U.S. Virgin Islands will continue to proceed with its enforcement action to ensure full accountability for JPMorgan’s violations of law,” said a spokeswoman for the U.S. Virgin Islands attorney general.”
In one of the biggest settlements within the banking industry relating to sexploitation, JPMorgan Chase has agreed to pay the victims of Jeffrey Epstein $290 million in damages in order to settle a class action lawsuit against the bank. Epstein used JPMorgan and Deutsche Bank as the financial mechanisms to pay for the sex trafficking operation he ran. There are other civil and legal cases still ongoing, but JPMorgan hopes to extricate themselves from the collateral damage of Epstein’s horrific exploits.
Wall Street Journal – JPMorgan Chase JPM -0.25%decrease; red down pointing triangle agreed to pay $290 million to settle a lawsuit over its ties to Jeffrey Epstein, said lawyers for Epstein accusers, shortly after top executives were questioned about the bank’s years of dealings with the convicted sex offender.
The lawsuit on behalf of women who accused Epstein of abuse helped expose details about the bank’s relationship with Epstein for years after his conviction, forced Chief Executive Jamie Dimon to answer questions under oath, and led the bank to turn around and sue a former top leader, Jes Staley.
Dimon said in his deposition last month that he had never discussed Epstein or his accounts. Staley was deposed over the weekend.
The lawsuit was brought by an unnamed accuser who claimed the bank ignored red flags about Epstein until 2013 because he was bringing wealthy clients to the bank. JPMorgan has denied any wrongdoing. The bank still faces a related lawsuit from the government of the U.S. Virgin Islands, where Epstein had a residence.
[…] “The parties believe this settlement is in the best interests of all parties, especially the survivors who were the victims of Epstein’s terrible abuse,” JPMorgan and lawyers for the women said in a press release.
[…] JPMorgan said that it was a mistake to have any association with Epstein and that it regrets its association with him. “We would never have continued to do business with him if we believed he was using our bank in any way to help commit heinous crimes,” a bank spokeswoman said.
Brad Edwards, a lawyer representing Epstein accusers, said, “A settlement of this size finally acknowledges the magnitude of the suffering of Epstein’s victims, the degree to which our system is broken, and the extent of Epstein’s influence to corrupt our system.”
[…] “The U.S. Virgin Islands will continue to proceed with its enforcement action to ensure full accountability for JPMorgan’s violations of law,” said a spokeswoman for the U.S. Virgin Islands attorney general.
The Doe plaintiff said she was sexually abused by Epstein from 2006 to 2013 and trafficked to his friends. She alleged that Epstein paid her and other victims with cash withdrawn from JPMorgan. She accused America’s biggest bank of profiting from Epstein’s activities and assisting in his alleged sex trafficking by enabling him to make payments to women for sex acts.
Epstein became a client of JPMorgan around 1998, and over the years the bank came to manage dozens of Epstein-related accounts containing hundreds of millions of dollars. Epstein turned to Deutsche Bank after JPMorgan closed his accounts in 2013. Both banks worked with Epstein for years after he was publicly accused of abusing girls and pleaded guilty in a Florida state court in 2008 to soliciting prostitution from a minor. (read more)
Does anyone really believe these banks didn’t know what the background of Epstein was all about?
Sunday Talks, Bill Barr Goes All-in to Support Anti Trump Campaign
Published originally on the CTH on June 11, 2023 | Sundance
Appearing on Rupert Murdoch’s network Fox News, former Attorney General Bill Barr frame his false construct in the documents case against President Trump.
First, the obvious. Barr is motivated in his position because this is the constructed inflection point against Donald Trump. The severity of his position, the pretending not to know things, the defensive position about the power of government institutions, all of it is expressed in sum and total for one primary purpose; this is the moment they have manufactured to take Trump down. This is the DC Republican moment all preceding moments were designed to support.
Second, on the details. Barr states with emphasis, the “presidential daily brief (PDB) is not the president’s personal document,” it is a document provided for him by the U.S. intelligence community (IC). Worth noting here is a little factoid that runs in opposition to Barr:
WASHINGTON – […] “while through most of its history the document has been marked “For the President’s Eyes Only,” the PDB has never gone to the president alone. The most restricted dissemination was in the early 1970s, when the book went only to President Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger, who was dual-hatted as national security adviser and secretary of state.
In other administrations, the circle of readers has also included the vice president, the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, along with additional White House staffers. By 2013, Obama’s PDB was making its way to more than 30 recipients, including the president’s top strategic communications aide and speechwriter, and deputy secretaries of national security departments.” [Source]
No one is saying the Trump PDB is Trump’s “personal document“, the point is the PDB’s in question -those noted in the indictment- were part of President Trump’s papers, his administration records; able to be reviewed and critiqued by anyone the president would assign, including speechwriters. Barr us making a non-sequitur.
Third, Barr notes the documents created by government officials are different from personal papers of the President. Perhaps technically true, an argument and debate that takes place after all administrations. However, if government owned, why did government officials (NARA) then stack the documents in the White House parking lot for President Trump to take.
Lastly, like all pundits and commentators all weekend, everyone is intentionally pretending not to know the difference between ‘classified documents’ and ‘documents containing classification markings’. The former is not part of the argument, the latter wording is artful Lawfare language.
Strategic Lawfare at Work, They Didn’t Resign – Jack Smith Takes Down Two Trump Lawyers Using Compelled Testimony, Creating Witnesses Within Indictment
Posted originally on the CTH on June 9, 2023 | Sundance
Good news, bad news and granular news..
First, the good news. The judge assigned to the Trump documents case is U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon. She is the same judge who handled the lawsuit last year after the FBI raided Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate. Judge Cannon was the judge who appointed the “special master” to review the documents the DOJ was claiming were classified, but Team Trump was contending that definition.
Now the bad news. The DOJ is no longer legally arguing that Donald Trump held any classified documents at Mar-a-Lago. The DOJ is arguing that President Trump held documents vital to U.S. defense security. It’s a farce but that’s their position. The classification status of documents is moot, nonexistent, except to create the predicate for the proverbial FBI nose under the tent.
The DOJ-NSD (that’s Lisa Monaco) got a warrant to look for classified documents, but never intended to use classified documents as a case cornerstone because President Trump had full declassification authority. The DOJ got a search warrant by convincing a judge they were looking for something that wasn’t even a violation of law. That’s why the DOJ would not reveal the probable cause affidavit. The search was built upon a fraudulent pretense. “Classified” is a snipe hunt.
You will notice Jack Smith never discussed “classified documents” in his remarks, and the issue of classified documents appears nowhere except in the indictment as a purposeful lawfare description of documents. The DOJ is not legally charging anything relating to the classification status of the documents. That’s the Lawfare and media banter to create a talking point. The term “classified” is all over the indictment, but as a lawfare adjective only; it’s like using the word “stash”.
The special counsel legal framework is centered around documents the DOJ define as vital to “the defense security” of the United States. EVERYTHING is predicated on 31 counts of an 18 U.S. Code § 793(e) violation. The DOJ defines what is considered a defense document, and that intentionally has nothing to do with classification.
The granular news. You might have heard that two of Trump’s lawyers, Jim Trusty and John Rowley, quit today. The media wants to use their exit as a point to indicate Trump is in legal jeopardy; however, that’s not the case.
As soon as Trusty and Rowley saw their forced testimony was used in the indictment, they had no option except to exit the case. Despite the lawyers providing no damaging information against Trump, the DOJ used language in the indictment to turn Trump’s lawyers into material witnesses. Weissmann’s Lawfare tactic create a conflict, forcing the two Trump lawyers to depart.
WASHINGTON DC – Two of Donald Trump’s top lawyers abruptly resigned from his defense team on Friday, just hours after news broke that he and a close aide were indicted on charges related to their handling of classified documents.
Jim Trusty and John Rowley, who helmed Trump’s Washington, D.C.-based legal team for months and were seen frequently at the federal courthouse, indicated they would no longer represent Trump in matters being investigated and prosecuted by special counsel Jack Smith, who is probing both the documents matter and efforts by Trump to subvert the 2020 election.
The resignations were shortly followed by an announcement from Trump himself confirming that a close aide, Walt Nauta, had also been indicted by federal prosecutors. Nauta, a Navy veteran, had served as the former president’s personal aide and was a ubiquitous presence during his post White House days.
In their place, Trump indicated that Todd Blanche — an attorney he recently retained to help fight unrelated felony charges brought by Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg in April — would lead his legal team, along with a firm to be named later. Trump and his team have liked Blanche, who is expected to play a more elevated, central role. (more)
Weissmann, Eisen and Smith are using lawfare in the indictment to put the interests of Trump and his aide Walt Nauta against each other. Obviously, Nauta would not turn on Trump, so the prosecution made Nauta a target for a federal 1001 charge of lying to investigators and will pressure him throughout the case to take a plea in exchange for testimony against Trump. Nauta is the baseline of the “Conspiracy Elements” which require two or more people. Again, pure Lawfare.
Obviously, Jim Trusty was unaware last night that his forced testimony would be used in the indictment. WATCH:
Listen Carefully, Special Counsel Jack Smith Delivers Statement Following Trump Indictment – Indictment Link Included
Posted originally on the CTH on June 9, 2023 | Sundance
I would strongly urge people, especially those who walk the deep weeds, to READ THE INDICTMENT carefully, before watching the remarks by special counsel Jack Smith as delivered today. What you will notice is that 31 of the 37 counts alleged in the indictment are individual counts, one per document, specific to Statute 793(e) which pertains to defense department information.
There were, as claimed in the justice department prior court arguments, and again affirmed today in the indictment itself, 100 classified documents located by the FBI and DOJ after the Trump certification of compliance. Of those 100 documents, 31 of them were specifically selected to represent the baseline for the 793(e) charge. Listen to Smith emphasize Defense and Defense Intelligence, and soon you will see why. WATCH:
~ READ INDICTMENT HERE ~
Jack Smith is relying on 18 U.S. Code 793, a law created in 1948 intended to stop contractors to the Defense Dept from stealing, selling, or copying U.S. defense system secrets, or patents on defense products. [READ THE LAW] The premise of 31-counts [each an individual document] pertain to “National Defense Security.” The subsequent six counts are predicated around the claimed 793(e) violations.
The DOJ is not, repeat NOT, arguing a classified documents case. The entire legal framework is centered around documents they define as vital to the defense security of the United States. EVERYTHING is predicated on this 18 U.S. Code § 793(e) violation:
18 U.S. Code § 793 (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.
Despite the verbose language in the indictment, a key element of Lawfare, the case is weak. The prosecutors know it. I will explain.
NOTE: Sixty nine documents in a Deep State rabbit hole! ~Sundance
Mark Levin Reacts to Trump Indictment – Frivolous Documents Charges
Posted originally on the CTH on June 9, 2023 | Sundance
I am deep in the weeds and assembling notes for outlines to be delivered in the next several articles. However, that said, perhaps the only time Mark Levin’s shouting was tolerable was last night as he responded to the indictment of President Trump. WATCH:
.
NOTE: Sixty nine documents in a Deep State rabbit hole! ~Sundance
Jack Smith, Andrew Weissmann and Lisa Monaco’s Novel Theory – US Code 793 to Prosecute Trump, It Won’t Work
June 7, 2023 | Sundance | 173 Comments
….At a certain point Lawfare fails.
Do you remember the prosecution “Witness #8” in the case against George Zimmerman? The person described as Trayvon Martin’s “girlfriend” who was claimed by FOUR state prosecutors to be the star “ear witness” against Zimmerman.
Do you remember how we waited month after month, laughing at how the State of Florida was relying upon their one key witness, and we all knew it was totally made up?
Do you remember the buildup, the drama, the media’s breathless anticipation, and the eventual beverage that flushed out of your nose in laughter when the State called Witness #8, and brought Rachel Jeantel to the stand?
Not only did she have no clue about any detail the prosecution was saying, she didn’t fit any of the profile that was claimed to be her importance in the case. And… not only could she not read the statement the State of Florida claimed she wrote (she didn’t), Jeantel didn’t even know Trayvon Martin. She was completely manufactured by the prosecution because her mom was a friend of Trayvon’s mom. Everyone wondered how the hell the prosecution could even put her on the stand. Remember that?
The reason they put her on the stand was because the prosecution and Trayvon’s family had no choice. For over a year, they had hyped up this imaginary “ear witness” in an effort to convince Zimmerman to take a plea deal. That was the purpose of the fabrication, and when George Zimmerman didn’t take the plea – when he forced the prosecution to put Witness #8 on the stand – the case collapsed, because the case was manufactured.
When people ask me about the DOJ and/or Jack Smith bringing an indictment against President Trump, in many ways I laugh while waiting for the DOJ to bring a proverbial Jeantel to the court. The DOJ has to indict Trump for the same reason Angela Corey had to put Jeantel on the stand. Their political narrative cases have to continue regardless of the evidence. Lawfare is a construct for media consumption intended to manipulate public opinion.
Technically Lawfare doesn’t need an actual viable legal argument behind it. Much like Zimmerman’s imaginary witness #8, Lawfare can be assembled out of loin cloth. However, at a certain point that legal fabrication runs into the reality of a judicial system it is not designed to defeat.
If the leaks to the media are accurate, WE WERE RIGHT!
Main Justice and DOJ special counsel Jack Smith have run head-first into the problem that President Trump declassified all the documents he retained in Mar-a-Lago.
Again, if the media reports are accurate, Jack Smith is now relying on 18 U.S. Code 793, a law created in 1948 intended to stop contractors to the Defense Dept from stealing, selling, or copying U.S. defense system secrets, or patents on defense products. [READ THE LAW]
Here is how the media are putting it:
The Independent has learned that prosecutors are ready to ask grand jurors to approve an indictment against Mr Trump for violating a portion of the US criminal code known as Section 793, which prohibits “gathering, transmitting or losing” any “information respecting the national defence”.
The use of Section 793, which does not make reference to classified information, is understood to be a strategic decision by prosecutors that has been made to short-circuit Mr Trump’s ability to claim that he used his authority as president to declassify documents he removed from the White House and kept at his Palm Beach, Florida property long after his term expired on 20 January 2021.
That section of US criminal law is written in a way that could encompass Mr Trump’s conduct even if he was authorised to possess the information as president because it states that anyone who “lawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document …relating to the national defence,” and “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 on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it” can be punished by as many as 10 years in prison. (LINK)
Main Justice is now stretching Code 793 to claim any document the government designates as a “national security document” is a national defense document.
I am almost certain this is because the 11th circuit court of appeals ruled the DOJ can label whatever it wants, in any form it wants. As long as the DOJ claims it is a national security interest, it becomes a national security interest. This ruling came from the arguments over the Mar-a-Lago documents. REMEMBER:
[SOURCE]
If the DOJ says a box of Cheerios is a national security threat, the Judicial Branch accepts that all Cheerio boxes are proffered national-security concerns. It doesn’t matter what the Trump documents are, as long as the DOJ can claim they are vital national security interests.
In the previous ruling of the Mar-a-Lago documents, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals did what the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) does with the DOJ-NSD and any matters defined by the originating Main Justice officials as “national security.” The 11th Circuit deferred all definitions to the DOJ.
The DOJ is granted legal benefit of the doubt on all matters of national security, which puts the DOJ-NSD in ultimate control over the star chamber they operate.
[NOTE: In the post 9-11 surveillance state, this approach by the DOJ-NSD is a pillar holding the Fourth Branch of Government in place, as we have outlined. The other pillars are (2) the Dept of Homeland Security, (3) the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and (4) the secret FISA Court system. All four pillars maintain an omnipotent fourth branch of government that operates entirely without oversight. As you can see in the 11th Circuit Court ruling, there is no check or balance in the post 9-11 national security state.]
However, their target isn’t an ordinary citizen or target. The target of these “definitions”, and make no mistake – ultimately this is what the case comes down to, definitions – is the former President of the United States who had unilateral authority to define anything he wanted.
The case against President Donald Trump might look bad on paper, because that is what the case against Donald Trump was designed to do. However, ultimately this case is on a trajectory to go up to a much higher court in discovery and pre-trial argument, because eventually these definitions are going to become an issue for the prosecution.
♦ THE TELL – Here’s the “tell” that every pundit, analyst and litigation expert will pretend they don’t notice. It’s the funniest part of the entire thing and yet no one, again except us, is noticing it. The DOJ has already predicated the baseline of their claim by saying they cannot tell anyone, even the court, what the nature of the documents are that underpin their assertion. Remember, they wouldn’t even let a court appointed “special master” review the documents.
Stop and think about that for a moment. NO ONE knows what the documents are, and the DOJ has stated they will never say what the documents are. The DOJ is filing a case about the mishandling of documents, in whatever legal construct they put forth, while simultaneously saying they are under no obligation to tell anyone what the documents are.
DOJ: Trump violated USC 793 in his discussion and/or handling of documents.
Trump Lawyers: What documents?
DOJ: We can’t say, and we won’t tell you.
The case against George Zimmerman looked bad when everyone thought Witness #8 was real. Hell, almost the entire country believed it.
This case against President Donald Trump is of a very similar Lawfare intention in construct.
Mark Meadows and Mike Pompeo – Acceptable Republicans for National Security State
Posted originally on the CTH on June 7, 2023 | Sundance
Some people reviewing the latest articles [SEE HERE] about the potential indictment framework of President Trump are stunned by this section regarding former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows:
[…] Mr Meadows has already given evidence before the grand jury and is said to be cooperating with the investigations into his former boss. It is understood that the former North Carolina congressman testified as part of a deal for which he has already received limited immunity in exchange for his testimony.
[…] It is not yet known whether the testimony or the charges in question relate to the documents probe, or a separate investigation into the January 6 attack on the Capitol. Both investigations are being overseen by a Department of Justice special prosecutor, Jack Smith. According to ABC News, Mr Meadows has given evidence in both the documents matter and the January 6 investigation. (read more)
First, President Trump did nothing wrong. Meadows can give no testimony that is damaging to President Trump in any ordinary construct. The targeting of Trump is apex Lawfare, which is the manipulation of the law, including new and novel concepts of law, as weapons against opposition.
There, but for the grace of God, stand any one of us. I say this from armored experience against these creatures.
Second, removing the unsubstantiated claim about Meadows reportedly pleading guilty to some charge, which is directly and strongly called “bullshit” by his lawyer, some people are wondering about Mark Meadows. I am not one of those who wonder about Meadows; I have always viewed him as a sketchy self-interested conniving Republican, and I retain that disposition through today.
Mark Meadows and Mike Pompeo were part of the “approved” Republican group who operated inside the Trump administration with loyalty to the right-wing of the UniParty apparatus. Meadows and Pompeo were/are about as trustworthy as Rupert Murdoch and Ron DeSantis, which is to say, they ain’t. They are DeceptiCons, and this isn’t a new position about them. I have previously used the testimony of Mark Milley to show just how Machiavellian this entire tribe of ‘acceptable Republicans’ was/is.
Keep in mind, as President, Donald Trump had few options on administration personnel. He hired what everyone said at the time were solid republicans, only to see those same people undermine his efforts whenever possible. Jeff Sessions, Dan Coats, Mark Meadows, Mick Mulvaney, Bill Barr, Mike Pompeo, the list is long, including his Vice President, Mike Pence.
In essence, this was the GOPe control within the Trump administration, the exact same dynamic would happen in any disruptive administration that came from outside the beltway. This is why those same DeceptiCons are embracing Ron DeSantis – he’s in the club, Trump wasn’t.
As I outlined in September of 2021, years of agonizing and frustrating reviews and analysis of the Trump administration reconciled in the testimony of Joint Chiefs Chairman Mark Milley. During his September 28, 2021, Senate testimony before the Armed Services Committee, General Mark Milley clarified some very painful issues to accept. Namely, that President Trump was being heavily managed by operatives of the Senior Executive Service (SES), and his Republican inner circle was willfully participating.
General Milley is a brutally political, manipulative, entitled and arrogant member of the United States armed forces. His delusions of grandiosity represent the worst of our nation and can only be topped by one other, Anthony Fauci. However, in his testimony Milley outlined the Republican opposition to Donald Trump.
JC Chairman General Mark Milley was attempting to flex his power in the almost identical way we saw former FBI Director James Comey pull the same angle. You might remember, during congressional testimony in March 2017, when Comey was questioned about why he never informed congressional ‘gang-of-eight’ oversight about the preceding eleven month FBI investigating the incoming President, Donald Trump. Director Comey pontificated, obfuscated, dodged carefully, and then deflected responsibility by saying he informed the “national security council” under President Obama.
When General Milley attempted to justify his unilateral contacts with Chinese military officials, he made a similar, and remarkably telling, admission and deflection.
For the January 8, 2021 phone call with General Lee of China, Milley stated he informed President Trump’s Chief-of-Staff Mark Meadows and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.
Keep in mind, Kash Patel has publicly stated General Milley did not inform Acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller directly, at least to his knowledge. So, Milley’s secondary point about notifying Christopher Miller in January 2020 needs to be reconciled carefully.
Listen carefully to how Milley is describing those calls. Specifically, pay attention to Milley saying the calls were initiated by him in response to “concerning intelligence, which caused us to believe the Chinese were worried about an attack on them by the United States.” It is important to note what this is NOT.
The contact by Chairman Milley was not initially triggered by the Chinese contacting him or any U.S. official about their concerns. The contact to them is justified by saying the U.S. intelligence community was generating intelligence that said the Chinese were worried.
For clarity, the Chinese did not say they were worried, the U.S. intelligence community were saying the Chinese were worried. Knowing how the Deep State, aka Fourth Branch of Government operates, keep that key point in mind.
Milley goes on to say, he was attempting to “deescalate” a situation the Chinese had never escalated. Think about that carefully.
[WATCH from 09:00 forward, Prompted]
.
The first call, driven by U.S. Intelligence Community alarms, was made in October 2020, before the election. Then another call was requested by the Chinese on December 30, 2020, for scheduling on January 8, 2021, after the U.S. election. Note this important statement surrounding the January 8th call: “Shortly after my call ended with General Lee, I personally informed Secretary of State Pompeo and White House Chief of Staff Meadows, about the call – among other topics.”
Notice who General Milley did not inform.
General Milley did not inform President Trump, nor his national security advisor Robert O’Brien. This framework appears intentional; however, when you overlay what we previously suspected and outlined about Mark Meadows and Secretary Pompeo, it all makes sense.
Just like many other people who preceded them in the administration, Meadows and Pompeo were in place to manage President Trump. Unfortunately, accepting that reality brings with it a bunch of very concerning issues.
We’ve long suspected Mark Meadows was introduced into the Trump orbit specifically because the Fourth Branch was exerting influence and needed to mitigate any independent action by President Trump. This is the same scenario around introducing former CIA Director Mike Pompeo for the same purposes.
Mike Pompeo and Mark Milley worked unilaterally without President Trump’s authority on at least one situation during the winter of 2019 when U.S. strikes took place. [Background Here] [Background Here]. President Trump made Esper, Milley and Pompeo hold a press conference without Trump supporting them; then President Trump remained silent on the issue for days. There were other issues with Pompeo which looked sketchy, but that one specifically was a big red flag (or cherry on the proverbial cake).
Mark Meadows was the source of frequent leaks against President Trump including his health status during his COVID hospital stay. Mark Meadows was also the primary source for John Solomon when Meadows was in Congress. [Solomon made this admission during a podcast.]
During the peak of the 2018 “Spygate” headlines, prior to the mid-term election, it became obvious that Solomon was being managed and steered in his reporting. It always appeared that Meadows was attempting to tamp-down outrage within the Trump base in order to manage it. John Solomon and the Fox News tick-tock club were a big factor in the success of that approach.
Meadows was/is loyal to the Republican corporation inside the swamp. This was always the accurate prism to view Mark Meadows.
Yes, it is remarkable…. with so many Republicans working against the America First Agenda of President Trump, including all of the Republican members who participated in the Hillary Clinton Russiagate nonsense, it is amazing how Trump was able to achieve so many accomplishments on behalf of Main Street.
FBI Refuses to Give Physical Document to House Investigators Outlining Biden Bribery Scheme, Now Claim “Ongoing Investigation”…
Posted originally on the CTH on June 5, 2023 | Sundance
Here we go again with the ever-familiar silo defense. The FBI is refusing to hand over the unclassified FD-1023 stating there is an ongoing investigation using the confidential human source who made allegations outlined in the document. Remember, the allegations and the statement record was created in July of 2020, almost three years ago.
Prior to last week, the FBI refused to say the 6-page unclassified document existed. After House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer told FBI Director Chris Wray he had already seen the unclassified document via a whistleblower, then Comey admitted the FBI indeed had it. Today, the FBI is refusing to release the document, stating it is now captive as part of an “ongoing investigation.” The claimed investigation began July 2020 – the investigation is “ongoing”. Go figure.
James Comer said he will begin the process, this Thursday, to hold FBI Director Christopher Wray in contempt of Congress. WATCH:
.
Centinel2012 