Robert Barnes Summary – The Administrative State Motive to Weaponize Secrets and Create Precedent


Posted originally on the CTH on June 19, 2023 | Sundance 

Attorney Robert Barnes does a good job framing the motive of the DC administrative state, specifically the Lawfare ideologues currently in control of the DOJ, to create a precedent to usurp constitutional power by targeting President Trump.

Segment prompted to 23:40 WATCH:

.

President Trump Interview With Fox News Brett Baier


Posted originally on the CTH on June 19, 2023 | Sundance 

Earlier this evening, President Trump sat down for an extensive interview with Fox’s human cabbage patch doll, Brett Baier.  {Direct Rumble Link} Many people were apprehensive about President Trump talking to DC gatekeeper Mr. Baier given that Fox News would like to support the prosecution effort against Trump.

President Trump appears with Baier because President Trump has done nothing wrong.  The legal arguments against him, and more succinctly against the power of the office of the president, are nonsensical.   There is no person, agency, bureaucracy or process that exists above the executive office of the president.

The President has every right to any and all documents that are created, distributed, reviewed and/or utilized during his administration.  WATCH:

Anyone who is saying President Trump did not have the unilateral right to define his presidential records -as he sees fit- needs to answer this question:

Who is this power that supersedes the executive office of the President? and where are they outlined in the constitution?

WE THE PEOPLE are the only entity that grants and/or removes presidential authority.  We vest and affirm our power every 4 years to the President of the United States.  We do not vest power to a bureaucracy or administrative state that believes they are above the power of We The People.  The President reports to us, and we affirm or deny our support with reelection.

There is no governmental system or constitutional process that supersedes the Office of the President within the executive branch.

There are co-equal branches outside the Executive, the Legislative and Judicial branches, with their own constitutional power.  However, the Legislative and Judicial cannot impede or reach into in the structure of the Executive to limit the power outlined in the constitution and granted by We The People.

Apparently, President Trump is Aware of Lisa Monaco’s Purpose


Posted originally on the CTH on June 19, 2023 | Sundance 

Posted to Truth Social by President Trump:

A little more than a week before Special Counsel Jack Smith released his indictment against President Trump, Andrew Weissmann, Norm Eisen and fellow lawfare travelers, wrote an internal prosecution memo for current Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco to use on behalf of the conscripted Special Counsel. [SEE 186-page Guidance MEMO HERE]

When Jack Smith revealed his indictment in Florida, not accidentally it was almost identical to the guidance memo that Weissmann had written.  Even the novel use of the Espionage Act was identical in format to the outline by Weissmann, Eisen and their crew.

Here are the instructions from Andrew Weissmann:

Here is the Special Counsel indictment:

[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.]

Essentially, what we are witnessing is what Lawfare researchers would expect.

The Lawfare operatives, represented by Weissmann, Eisen and company, are all ideological agents connected directly to the anti-Trump efforts.  Their ally in the DOJ is Deputy AG Lisa Monaco.

I use the term “Lawfare” to describe their general group association, as well as the actual organization funded by the Brookings Institute that carries the same name.

Essentially, Lawfare et al, are the group of current and former Dept of Justice ideologues that we find throughout the deployment of all Main Justice weaponization, activism and corruption.

The Muller team were all Lawfare members. The legal team in/around the accusations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, what Christine Blasey-Ford called “beach friends,” are all Lawfare members.  The legal team behind both of Trump’s impeachment efforts were all Lawfare members.  It is one large network of legally minded ideologues working toward a common goal; they are inside government and connected to the same DOJ minds outside government.

The second thing they have in common is their collective risk within their action.  Many of their activities were/are unlawful (spygate, FISA, Mueller probe, impeachment background etc), so to the extent the Lawfare group can mitigate risk by attacking anyone who would be a threat to them, this is what we see.

Andrew Weissmann and Norm Eisen are two of the most well-known members of this politically motivated group.  Together they have created novel legal theories to use by the DOJ against their political opposition.  They write the legal filings for Main Justice to use inside government.

The fact the DOJ uses these novel theories and legal filings in the actual practice of law and prosecution shows how deeply connected the outside Lawfare group is to the Lawfare group inside DC.

Much of their Lawfare approach, that is using the law as a weapon, is based on a goal of attrition. Wear down the target until they are eventually destroyed.  The same approach and motive is intended toward the supporters of the target.  Wear down the psyche of the target’s supporters until they too are destroyed.

Creating demoralization is a very familiar approach from the Saul Alinsky methods rulebook.  It is another way to create fear through isolation, ridicule and marginalization of their opponent.  Threatening to make any defender a target is exactly the key behind Andrew Weissmann’s entire tenure as a prosecutor.  You will note, they did this Lt Gen Mike Flynn when Weissmann expanded their scope and then threatened Flynn’s son, Mike Flynn Jr.

On June 2, 2023, Andrew Weissmann and Norm Eisen published their “Model Prosecution Memo” for use inside the DOJ and for the legal scribes in media to review prior to the DOJ making any Trump indictment announcement.  {SEE MEMO HERE}  This is the same playbook they have used successfully in the past to get all of their allies on the same page for the preferred narrative.

Anticipating that Lisa Monaco would then be distributing the talking points and giving Jack Smith the groundwork for his upcoming novel indictment effort, Andrew Weissmann then appears on MSNBC to discuss.

Same Magistrate Judge That Authorized FBI Mar-a-Lago Raid Now Limits Trump Public Defense Against Secret FBI Evidence


Posted originally on the CTH on June 19, 2023 | Sundance

Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart is the judge who authorized the fraudulent search warrant used by the DOJ and FBI in the Mar-a-Lago raid against President Trump in August of last year.  Today, Judge Reinhart accepted the position of Special Counsel Jack Smith and puts restrictions on President Trump’s ability to defend himself.

Judge Reinhart has approved the motion filed by Special Counsel Jack Smith to restrict President Trump’s access to the materials the DOJ claims to use against him and block the ability of President Trump to state publicly his defense against the evidence.  The star chamber of the DOJ Lawfare operation is continuing unabated.

(Via ABC NEWS) – A federal judge on Monday approved a protective order sought by special counsel Jack Smith to keep former President Donald Trump from disclosing sensitive information in his classified documents case.

Smith sought the order to ensure that neither Trump nor codefendant Walt Nauta, Trump’s presidential valet, disclose sensitive information obtained during the discovery process, where prosecutors will show the defense what evidence it has amassed during their investigation into Trump’s handling of classified documents since leaving office. (read more)

“The Discovery Materials, along with any information derived therefrom, shall not be disclosed to the public or the news media, or disseminated on any news or social media platform, without prior notice to and consent of the United States or approval of the Court,” Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart said in the order.

“Defendants shall only have access to Discovery Materials under the direct supervision of Defense Counsel or a member of Defense Counsel’s staff. Defendants shall not retain copies of Discovery Material,” the ruling said.

“The materials also include information pertaining to ongoing investigations, the disclosure of which could compromise those investigations and identify uncharged individuals,” their Friday filing said.

Furthermore, the protective order limits Trump’s access to the material, stating that he can only view the discovery materials under the direct supervision of his defense counsel or a member of the counsel’s staff. As demanded by the Special Counsel, Trump is not allowed to retain copies of the discovery material.

The order applies to both Trump and his co-defendant, Walt Nauta, and prohibits them from disseminating any evidence provided to their lawyers during the discovery process. Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart emphasized that the discovery materials, along with any derived information, should not be made public or shared on news or social media platforms without prior consent from the United States or approval from the court.

The DOJ wants to limit public knowledge of the material evidence, not because it would harm national security – but rather because the nature of the evidence itself would highlight to the nation how fraudulent the targeting is. This is the guaranteed DOJ motive, that’s why everything is under seal and even the media will not talk about how they are gaining their leak knowledge. This is LAWFARE narrative engineering at its apex deployment. (more)

Hopefully everyone can see now why I created so much context for the Fourth Branch of Government.  The DOJ is essentially arguing that some unknown administrative state has a superior position to the executive branch of government.

The US DOJ are affirming a belief in the omnipotent Fourth Branch of Government that Barack Obama created.

GREAT POINT by Lee Smith – The FBI May Not Be Burying the Evidence Against Joe Biden, The FBI May be Using it as Leverage Against the White House


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.

It Begins, DOJ Files Motion to Limit President Trump’s Ability to Defend Himself


Posted originally on the CTH on June 17, 2023 | Sundance 

One of the ways you can immediately detect federal Lawfare deployment is to look at how media articles are written when they outline court filings without direct citation for review.  The Hill began SEE HERE. The New York Times is similar, SEE HERE.

Notice both national publications talk about a DOJ court filing, presumably made under seal, that limits President Trump’s defense access to materials and documents used in the case against him.  Notice the media do not say how they gained insight into the details of the sealed filing itself; nor do they provide any source context for how their reporting is structured.  Nothing like, “according to sources with familiar with the matter” or anything similar. Just nothing; no attribution at all.

That media context is a BIG red flag indicating the need to ‘create a narrative’ is more important than the actual substance of the evidence material underpinning it.

Both stories hit on the issue of the DOJ filing a (presumably sealed) motion with the Florida court, to place limits, rules and restrictions on evidence against President Trump, that limits his ability to review it, talk about it and/or provide context for it.  THIS IS A LAWFARE MOVE.  This is what happens in the prosecutorial star-chambers where they hide information in order to create the appearance of something nefarious, where nothing nefarious exists.

When we see this legal approach, we can be assured the case that uses the evidence is built upon fraud and pretense.  Do not be afraid to tell your family, friends and others about this dynamic.  President Trump is being accused of the crime of violating 18 U.S. Code § 793(e) – Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information, a violation of the espionage act, and the DOJ is requesting that President Trump must not permitted to defend himself by discussing the evidence against him.

The DOJ wants to limit public knowledge of the material evidence, not because it would harm national security – but rather because the nature of the evidence itself would highlight to the nation how fraudulent the targeting is.  This is the guaranteed DOJ motive, that’s why everything is under seal and even the media will not talk about how they are gaining their leak knowledge.  This is LAWFARE narrative engineering at its apex deployment.

WASHINGTON DC – The Justice Department on Friday filed a motion seeking to block former President Trump from releasing any classified materials that will be shared with his legal team during his prosecution for the mishandling of records at Mar-a-Lago, noting that some are still being used in the course of their investigation.

The documents “include information pertaining to ongoing investigations” which could be used to further cases against uncharged individuals, the Department of Justice (DOJ) wrote.

The suggested protective order, which will be reviewed by Judge Bruce Reinhart, would allow Trump to review the 31 documents the DOJ is using in the case only while in the presence of his attorneys.

“Defendants shall only have access to Discovery Materials under the direct supervision of Defense Counsel or a member of Defense Counsel’s staff. Defendants shall not retain copies of Discovery Material. Defendants may take notes regarding Discovery Materials, but such notes shall be stored securely by Defense Counsel,” the DOJ wrote.

It also includes similar language to a protective order agreed to in another Trump case that bars the former president from disclosing evidence in the case. New York state prosecutors made that request as they pursue a 34-count indictment of Trump relating to a hush money scandal.

“The Discovery Materials, along with any information derived therefrom, shall not be disclosed to the public or the news media, or disseminated on any news or social media platform, without prior notice to and consent of the United States or approval of the Court,” the department wrote. (read more)

Watch this interview with Devin Nunes and Kimbery Guilfoyle – Start at 06:40 listening to Nunes:

I am correct about the documents grabbed.

I am correct about the nature of the DOJ/FBI intentions and motives.

I am correct about the Lawfare manipulation of the material to present the illusion of illegal where nothing illegal is taking place…

…and I am increasingly certain that Mary McCord is part of TEAM Jack Smith!

Wait for it!

The first two defense approaches will likely be: (1) the Presidential Records Act supersedes the issues of document holding as noted in the use of the Espionage Act. (2) However, if the Espionage Act [Statute 793(e)] has to be defended, the originating issue of “unauthorized possession” will be the second approach heading to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Some baselines are needed 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. {GO DEEP}

Because there is a very specific type of Lawfare taking place with words, it is critical to see the value in what former HPSCI Chairman Devin Nunes has stated about the way the language is being deployed.   Now we turn 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:

[Source pdf, testimony transcript – page 43 and 44]

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 “nuclear national defense” 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 letters as government property?  NO!

♦ The indictment accuses President Trump of withholding documents containing “classified markings,” a very specifically deployed obtuse wording intended to create the implication of something nefarious where nothing nefarious exists.  It is entirely possible for a person, any person, especially a person who follows the news, to possess documents containing “classified markings.”

[SOURCE page 41]

There is a big difference between a classified document and a document containing classified markings.  As an example, anyone who has looked at the Carter Page FISA application, made public in July 2018, has reviewed a document containing “classified markings.”  When a document is declassified, they do not remove the markings.

This language is the underpinning of the entire DOJ/FBI framework that predicated the raid on Mar-a-Lago.   Specifically, neither NARA nor the DOJ-NSD requested President Trump or his team to return Classified Documents.  The DOJ demanded the return of any documents that contained “classified markings.” [SEE BELOW]

[Indictment Source, page 4]

Because the verbiage is so intentionally obtuse (ie. Lawfare), a fulsome production in compliance with this DOJ demand would include any newspaper or magazine articles that had a picture of the Carter Page FISA application, or any printed online article that might contain the same or similar elements.  There is a big difference between asking for a classified document return, and asking for a return of documents that contain “classified markings.”

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.

♦ In a previous court ruling by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, the court ruled in favor of the U.S. Dept of Justice – National Security Division (DOJ-NSD), and blocked the lower court order instructing a Special Master to review the DOJ claimed, “classified documents.” [pdf Ruling Here]

Essentially the order of the appellate court was based on the DOJ defining Trump’s Mar-a-Lago documents as “classified” and “vital to national security”, and the court’s determination said they have no authority to question the decision of the executive branch when it comes to how they DEFINE matters of national security.

The court (judicial branch) openly stated they defer to the DOJ (executive branch) regarding any/all claims of harm to national security that may be caused by a review of documents the DOJ-NSD determined, on their own authority, to be identified as classified or matters of “national security.”

In the prior opinion of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, if the DOJ states sharing the “classified documents” with a special master may harm national security, the court must accept that position without challenge and stop the special master review.

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 is deferred to the DOJ.

The DOJ was 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.

This ridiculous ruling meant the DOJ could define any document as a document of “national security interest” and there is no countervailing review of their definitions.  As soon as this decision was reached the DOJ then moved to appoint a special counsel.  Can you see how this works?

With this ruling in his briefcase, Special Counsel Jack Smith could now define the Mar-a-Lago documents according to the legal intention of his targeting.  That’s exactly what he did.  The case against Trump is not a case about classified documents, it is a case about the DOJ defining unilaterally what documents are considered “vital to national security.”

With the DOJ getting to define those documents, the special counsel then moves to claim national security threats created by Trump’s ownership.  The overlay of “vital to the nuclear capabilities of the defense dept,” can then be shifted to include letters from President Obama and Kim Jong-un about DPRK nuclear capabilities.