Posted originally on the CTH on April 24, 2024 | Sundance
If you have followed law and politics for any length of time, you have probably heard of “speaking indictments.” That’s where the prosecution will write an indictment or court motion with very granular -yet perhaps not pertinent- details of a case against a suspect that highlights a much bigger picture than a singular perspective against the individual defendant. The intent is to make the public aware of the details within a case by making them part of the court record.
In the Special Counsel Jack Smith constructed Lawfare case against Donald Trump, what is generally called “the documents case”, involving the raid on Mar-a-Lago, President Trump’s attorney, Christopher Kise, did something similar to a speaking indictment with an extensive court motion on January 16, 2024. The 68-page motion is a comprehensive “speaking motion” which outlines a great deal of the fraud and Lawfare manipulation by the special counsel. [SEE DOCUMENT HERE]
In response to the filing, using the pre-established legal narrative about needing to control “national security” information [SEE HERE], the Jack Smith team (essentially Lawfare operatives like Weissman, Eisen and McCord) redacted large portions of the Trump motion specifically to stop the public record from showing the outline. However, two days ago, April 22nd, Judge Aileen Cannon unsealed and more importantly ‘unredacted’ the motion.
Keep in mind, back in the beginning of the pre-trial discovery phase -in response to the filing by Trump- Jack Smith gave the judge the opinion of the DOJ [SEE HERE] toward discovery and documents. As noted, and summarized well by Julie Kelly:
To clear up any confusion as to what Special Counsel Jack Smith sought to conceal in classified documents case, this is what Smith told Judge Cannon in Feb 2024 in response to Trump’s motion to compel discovery from numerous govt agencies:
1) Defendants are not entitled to discovery of internal government correspondence and memoranda, or to documents that are otherwise privileged.
2) The Court Should Deny Defendants’ Requests for Evidence of ‘Improper Coordination with NARA’ and of ‘Bias and Investigative Misconduct.’
3) The Court Should Deny Defendants’ Requests for Evidence Related to Trump’s Security Clearance With The Department of Energy.
4) The Court Should Deny Defendants’ Requests for Evidence Related to Secure Facilities at President Trump’s Residences.
5) The Court Should Deny Defendants’ Requests for Production of Materials Concerning the Search of Mar-a-Lago.
AND FINALLY:
6) Defendants’ Request for Unredacted Discovery of Materials Should Be Denied.
As we noted at the time, the DOJ position was constructed by McCord, Weissmann and Eisen to make the documents case all about national security. This was done intentionally in order to lean on prior Supreme Court precedent that the judicial branch should not interfere with the decisions of the executive branch when it comes to matters of national security.
In essence, Jack Smith (McCord, Eisen, Weissmann) was/is weaponizing national security as a Lawfare attack angle against President Trump.
One of the ways this Lawfare approach was identifiable, was in the specific parseltongue way the wording of the legal filings were pushed. Example: they didn’t say Trump held classified documents; they said Trump held documents containing “classified markings.” Declassified documents still hold classified markings. CTH has thousands of documents containing classified markings in our research library.
There’s a big difference between “classified documents” and “documents containing classified markings.” The intent of using the linguistics of the latter is to give the impression of something nefarious where nothing nefarious exists.
The special counsel then used the auspices of national security, to control -through redactions and secrecy- the types of information within their court filings that would be visible to the public. Remember, this is LAWFARE and the primary interest of Lawfare is to influence public opinion.
We also noted, at the time, that Judge Aileen Cannon very obviously knew what the Special Counsel was attempting to do. The judge could see how the DOJ was weaponizing the national security angle as a way to target the defendant, Trump, in a way that he would not be able to defend himself. Cannon saw this and began structuring her rulings to combat the secrecy with sunlight.
In this latest decision by Judge Cannon, she has exposed the motives and intentions of the special counsel by un-redacting the 68-page defense motion that Jack Smith previously redacted.
This redacted -vs- unredacted approach allows a comparison between the information provided by the Trump defense team, and the information the Jack Smith team does not want the public to know. [example]
The release of the un-redacted version of the court filing comes after an early April order from Judge Cannon. As noted by PM: “Under the order, the special counsel was required to file an index identifying potential government witnesses identified in the materials included in the motion to compel, and the parties in the case were ordered to work together regarding the redaction of materials that could identify a potential witness.”
There’s another very key aspect to this which should be noted and emphasized. Within the Trump legal presentation, you can clearly see the outline of how and why the special counsel is working with the Biden White House to target President Trump. However, if you know the background you can also see something else, the motive for the raid on Mar-a-Lago.
Remember, every single activity that took place after the November 2016 election was intended to coverup the DOJ/FBI conduct against Donald Trump during the 2016 election. This is very a very critical baseline to understand.
Robert Mueller (the team that included Weissmann etc) was a coverup operation intended to throw a bag over all of the weaponization of government that took place from within the DOJ and FBI toward candidate Donald Trump – Crossfire Hurricane to Robert Mueller, to John Durham, to Jack Smith.
Everything that followed the 2016 election is one long continuum of covering up what took place, and the Jack Smith special counsel is part of that ongoing operation.
When you understand this, then you begin to understand what Julie Kelly is referencing here:
Julie Kelly is “trying to figure this one out“… Let me help:
Last year, CTH outlined a four-part series of articles going deep into the background of the DOJ-FBI raid of President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate, along with the outline into why it was important to them. It doesn’t matter how many different legal angles and Deep State justifications the DOJ attempts to deploy in order to divert away from what took place; the background of who, what, when and why they raided Mar-a-Lago will not change.
In Part One, we outlined the background of the modern Deep State {Go Deep}. In Part Two, we outlined the specifics of how President Trump was targeted by political operatives using tools created by the DC system {Go Deep}. In Part Three, we outlined how and why President Trump was blocked from releasing documents {Go Deep}. And then finally, in Part four {GO DEEP} , we assembled the specifics of what documents likely existed in Mar-a-Lago.
It is important to remember, the Presidential Records Act –the presented pretext for the document conflict– is not a criminal statute. An FBI raid cannot be predicated on a document conflict between the National Archives and a former president.
The raid on Mar-a-Lago was a retrieval effort where the DOJ/FBI were looking for evidence of their misconduct that Donald Trump may have taken with him after his time in office.
That’s it, that was the core purpose.
The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) documents issue was the auspices or justification for the raid, but that wasn’t the intent of the raid.
The DOJ/FBI was on a search mission to retain full control of the evidence that showed corrupt and illegal conduct by people in the Obama administration. The DOJ, FBI, DOJ-NSD, FBI Counterintelligence Division, ODNI, CIA, SSCI and Legislative Gang of Eight, all participated or were willfully blind to the 2016/2017 activity of a weaponized government targeting a Republican political candidate. This action was grossly illegal and unlawful. Every action taken post-election was taken to mitigate the legal risk of the participants.
Jack Smith (remember, it’s really McCord, Eisen and Weissmann) was hunting for evidence of the DOJ/FBI misconduct. That’s the background context here: [Page 35, pdf unredacted]
The special counsel was looking for documents held by Donald Trump that touched on declassification and/or pertained to John Durham and Crossfire Hurricane. They were looking for documentary evidence against them that Trump may have held (he did and likely still does).
Again, (1) Crossfire Hurricane, (2) Robert Mueller and (3) John Durham was all one long continuum with a shift in operational intent. CH was the original targeting, RM was the continuation of the targeting and coverup, JD was the coverup and run out the clock operation that never looked at anything RM did.
The number (4) in the continuum was/is Jack Smith.
Judge Aileen Cannon can clearly see the construct of the fraudulent case against Donald Trump; however, she needs to tread carefully. Mary McCord, Andrew Weissmann and Norm Eisen are using “national security” as a tool to subvert and control the judicial branch while railroading President Trump.
Judge Aileen Cannon stands in the way of this specifically constructed Lawfare case.
Centinel2012 