Password removed from this post (only) to permit larger dissemination.
There are many very important positions related to the expectations we hold for President Trump. Having spent years deep inside the actual workings of the current professional DC silos, I can tell you most of those expectations are very challenging to achieve.
In one 4-year term President Trump can set the cornerstone for a reconstruction effort that will take at least 15 years. [Reference, Team Obama used 18+ years to create it (January 2007 to present)].
In this series my goal is more to describe the needs of some critical positions from a very practical, non-pretending, perspective of what happens within specific offices. I already discussed two critical positions that do not require IC approval (Emissary and NatSec Advisor) today I outline a third, the White House Counsel.
The Office of White House Counsel does not need IC/Senate approval.
The Office of the White House Counsel (WHC) is the gatekeeper to the Office of the President. The White House Counsel does not represent Donald Trump; the WHC represents the office of the presidency and the person fulfilling the duty of the presidency. For the interests of an effective White House Counsel, who is president is irrelevant; they are guarding the office.
The WHC is critical because it is the advice and opinion of the lawyer in this role who can completely hamstring a President, block a President and ultimately control a President. The WHC also party controls access to the Office of the President, if the person seeking access is determined detrimental to the “office of the president.”
Essentially a legal gatekeeper, with the job to protect the office of the President (not Donald Trump the person), the White House Counsel is very critical. Understanding that lawyers in general are averse to risk, and understanding a White House primary lawyer would be exceptionally averse to risk, most White House counsel office holders are predisposed to create the concentric circles of protection around the office.
The WHC coordinates the collapse of the concentric circles when major crisis unfolds. Starting on the perimeter the WHC organizes the people who will take responsibility for a major problem, with the goal in mind to keep the collateral damage as far away from the office as possible. Like a mob lawyer, the consigliere will tell a person when they must take the blame -self immolate- and exit the White House for the good of the office etc.
That said, there was a very important facet to the White House Counsel’s office that failed in Trump’s first term. This failure cannot be repeated.
In Term-1 the opinion of the White House Counsel was to block all declassification efforts that did NOT have the full support of the Intelligence Community (IC). The IC always knows the White House is averse to risk and the IC weaponize the fear of the WHC against the office of the President.
The declassification process is a request by an agency, including a superior agency like the President of the United States, to the Intelligence Branch asking for them to release the information. The Intelligence Branch again holds full unilateral control. If the head of the CIA refuses to comply with the declassification instruction of the President, what can the president do except fire him/her? {Again, GO DEEP} How does the President replace the non-compliant cabinet member? They have to go through the SSCI confirmation. See the problem?
In Term-1 the IC message to the WH Counsel was that if Donald Trump declassified any documents, they would use the DOJ (special counsel weapon) to attack the office of the president for “obstructing justice.” The WHC was fraught with fear over what would happen, and demanded that POTUS Trump stop trying to declassify information/documents the IC didn’t support.
The IC was trying to take out Donald Trump and the WHC in essence supported their objective because the WHC was only focused on threat mitigation. In term-2 these threats are going to be of even greater significance. The IC is now in a zero-sum game.
The IC has evolved into the superseding, omnipotent 4th branch of government. If Trump wins, the IC are potentially going to be removed or at least greatly diminished. Ergo, the IC will do anything to stay in power. It is exceptionally critical for the next term Trump White House Counsel understand this. The next WHC needs to be as brave as they are legally smart and strategic.
The next WHC needs to be brave for the office, empowering for President Trump, and stand as a flea against a furnace created by the IC and Lawfare system if that is what’s needed.
The next WHC needs to look carefully at the recent SCOTUS decision about the unilateral power of the President within the Executive Branch and lean heavily into that decision; fully extending the power and influence of the Office of the President against the full system of every Executive Branch agency. Each silo needs to be confronted, and it is going to take a very bold WHC to support this effort.
The recent Supreme Court decision gives tremendous power, ABSOLUTE POWER within the Executive Branch, to the President. This is not a time for the WHC to be timid, afraid or risk averse. This is a time for the WHC to spread the wings of the Eagle and sharpen the talons for use against corrupt and weaponized agencies. In short, go on the attack.
Strategic support for the goals and objectives of the President and National Security Advisor, should be the primary filter of consideration for the White House gatekeeper. The counsel must be smart, killer smart; brutally strategic; cunning and fully versed in how the dark arts will come against them. Prior experience as a target by the same system they now confront should be considered an asset.
The person filling the role of WHC must have exceptional constitutional knowledge and capabilities to guide and counsel the key people in/around the office of the President. Not with the intent to stop the objective, but with the intent to support the objective by telling the scouts and strategic weapons “what” they will face and “where.”
There are some really good lawyers who can fill this role; however, every top-tier candidate must be filtered through the prism of stability, background, the lack of attack vectors against them and keen judgement in all facets of prior political experience. They must also have a disposition of attack, not defense. The WHC needs to push forward, not guard as much.
For this reason, I would love to see a brilliant and snarky lawyer like Eric Dublier take the job; but, I doubt he would take it. Another strong possibility would be John Eastman.
John Eastman has been the target of the weaponized IC and Lawfare. He has a brilliant mind, strong constitutional understanding, and, well, perhaps most importantly, he has a personal reason to be pissed off about the current status of our Executive Branch agencies. In the position of White House Counsel, John Eastman esq would trigger spontaneous ‘splodey heads just from the announcement itself.
A collaboration between John Eastman and Jeffrey Clark would be good strategic positioning. However, President Trump needs to be keenly aware that a team of “professionally republican advisors” will try to steer his options toward lawyers they know will retain the status quo.
~ Support CTH HERE ~
Next position will be the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), the first position that needs Senate Confirmation.
RESOURCES:
Alina haba? Robert Barnes?
Joe Digenova? Rudy?
Would be interesting if they could convince Joe. Not sure he would want the job.
Rudy has too much baggage. Rudy can be a better background source and supporter.
My thoughts exactly
No!
Please, no, to tik tok Joe.
Joe Digenova was on every news channel promoting Bill Bar for A.G a hard pass on Joe
Are you back again today? Go away.
What do you have against Sundance’s picks?
Rudy is well past his sell by date.
Tick-Tock.
Clarence Thomas.
Rudy Giuliani if he were twenty years younger.
Rudy was disbarred. Too many attack vectors.
Only in New York.
There’s reciprocal discipline in any other jurisdiction.
So was John Eastman. Eastman is the man for this job.
Yes, and he is brilliant.
If he has been disbarred, how can he be allowed to be WHC??
White House Counsel to the President is an advisory position.
Eastman’s disbarment is a plus not a minus.
Almost any lawyer Trump would consider would be in fear of being disbarred. The Leftist State Bars have targeted all Trump lawyers. As Sundance points out most lawyers are already ultra risk-averse. So the fear of disbarment would totally paralyze them and hamstring Trump.
But Eastman has already been disbarred and brutally slandered for preposterous nonsense. He has nothing left to lose, everything to gain and much payback past-due.
Guiliani is a serial violator of the 2A and 4A. Just no.
Sidney Powell, either as WHC, as she IS Rudy but younger, or A.G.
She forced the DOJ to reverse its position in the Flynn case, is whip smart and writes briefs that are ‘to die for’.
It wouldn’t hurt for the WHC to have a “staff” of like-minded lawyers to draw from. More guns is good.
Sidney is a warrior.
She has “kracken” baggage from that horrible presser in 2020 in Atlanta that she conducted with Lin Wood. She also was one of the early guilty pleas in the Fani Willis sham RICO case in Georgia.
Anyone tied to Trump has been slammed and caricatured.
Trump should have turned her loose. He would be President today.
Second that motion. 🔥
Alina Habb, while Honey Badger fierce, likely doesn’t have the experience of being attacked directly by the beast as a couple others do.
she would be totally out of her league as well
The person has to be a hardened fighter
Judge Jeanine Pierro
Hmmm…
Oh please. Talk about out of her league. Pirro no thanks.
Remember that the WHC is there to protect the OFFICE and not President Trump. I love Alina Habba, but she’s not ready for this one.
The President IS the office.
Robert Barnes is totally in for Robert Kennedy Jr. He does support Trump but he’s backing RFK jr. That’s enough to ax him out.
🎯
This would be after Junior loses, though…
Can he support the office? He was all for what President Trump was trying to do on January 6, and called Pence out for his actions that day.
I think he and RFK Jr. may be friends.
As much as I love Alina and Barnes, they are headliners. Barnes can be a stern, snarky lawyer who is not afraid of much. Barnes reminds me of Bannon. Big mouth, although mostly accurate, thorough, but a little to much. Alina is young, has young children. I don’t think she is ready…yet. Just thoughts.
She hasn’t been tempered by fire. She seemed personally upset about a judge being unprofessional and nasty to her, which although I don’t blame her one bit, shows she is not ‘hardened’ yet.
Barnes, I don’t think so! He is a RFK cheerleader. It needs to be someone who is silent but deadly.
silent but deadly
YES
Well, this has already turned into a “let’s just throw out random names that Sundance hasn’t mentioned” – rather than discussing who he has mentioned.
I hope to read some intelligent commentary from those who possess knowledge of the subject matter or those mentioned. For example, can anyone expand on Eric Dublier?
Nothing wrong with people throwing out their own ideas. I know nothing of Eric, do you?
Of the first four OP comments on this article, three were just other names. NO ideas. Frankly, some of them are quite silly. That is hijacking.
The other (of the four) OP comment implied that we shouldn’t even be discussing this, because the election will be stolen.
Sundance was not pleased. He asks very little.
(BTW, I know little of Dublier, which is why I asked.)
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jan/1/eric-dubelier-emerges-robert-muellers-top-courtroo/
https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2020/03/18/its-not-croquet-in-dropped-mueller-case-reed-smiths-eric-dubelier-didnt-pull-punches-defending-russian-firm/
https://lawandcrime.com/awkward/accused-russian-troll-farms-attorney-mocked-for-telling-ticked-off-judge-thats-your-opinion/
Seems he was hired to defend Concord Management (russian company) when they were accused by Robert Mueller(A.Weissmann) during the “Russia, Russia, Russia” gate. Dubelier acutually stated that the company was framed…
I can see why Sundance thinks he would not take the job.
Thanks. The next comment page is helpful, too. And as the poster below noted, the correct spelling is Dubelier. (Sorry, I took it straight from SD’s article.)
How about General Flynn? He would be very motivated to take on the villainous scum.
Fwiw…..motivated to do something =/= having the talent stack or skill set to do that thing.
Mission focused maturity + wisdom == having the humility to figure out how best to help achieve the mission rather than wanting to be the person who gets credit for doing it.
As an old, pre woke, adage used to warn, “too many chiefs, not enough Indians” leads to disaster.
Eric Dubelier is correct spelling of his name.
Personally, I think Barnes lacks the backbone.
Look up the cases he has fought and won.
Also look at the cases he’s fought and lost.
Murphy’s Law.
Reward someone by punishing them ie take them away from doing what they’re suited to do and have them instead do something they’re not suited to do and will fail at spectacularly.
Jay Sekulow
He has been squishy in support of PDJT lately.
Robert Barnes is too much pro-Robert Barnes than pro-WHC or protecting the Office of the Presidency. Talks a good game, blocks people who have ideas that even hint at being anything other than as a sycophant reply.
You can be sure that Mike Davis from the Article 3 Project will be on the list. However, caveat emptor!
Mike Yoder?
Lets put him on the list.
Chicken eggs? Got to find a way to beat the cheat first. Appears as if it is all being set up for a few weeks of vote counting again. I mean the media is saying only a percent difference between the candidates.
Todd, this is not the subject of this thread. Please review Sundance’s recently posted guidelines and do not change the subject.
So I guess I need to go back to password protected, just to stop the feds from hijacking the threads?
This is beyond annoying.
Wonder who Todd’s 3 “Likes” are? Todd’s tag team?
Special Agents Todd, Rod and Odd.
It appears that Special Agents Larry, Curly and Moe have joined the ThumbsUp Agents of Todd. When will Agent Shemp be joining?
🤣🤣🤣
Sundance, if I know the password, the feds know the password. How do you protect yourself from that?
The Fed trolls are many working a daily shift in their computer labs. They don’t seem to take the time or effort to email this site for the password info. Treepers on occasion will give hints but as of recent times we don’t even give hints. If you have followed the discussion since last year you know the PW. It may be useful to change the the PW every few months using the existing PW to update people on the new PW.
Yes, please.
When I see this happen on this site I can almost see the spiders literally crawling around on my screen.
I’ve been following this site for years but missed the instructions on how to get this “password”. How do I get one?
send an email to the address at the upper right. include geokstr in the title and the word “password.” They got right back to me.
subject
Todd, you qualified your statement when you mentioned the MSM. NOBODY believes that Kamala is even close to DJT in the real polls. That includes the Act Blue fundraising, which is a money-laundering scam. Find another forum.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm%2091&version=NKJV
Sydney Powell?
no
she folded under pressure
and, I understand why
but, this person needs more fortitude
in the face of adversity
I like the John Eastman suggestion
She folded under financial burden.
that is true
John Eastman did not
Some people have more money than others.
some people wouldn’t fold if they were on the rack
you know the ones
who were previously or now in prison
Hell no!
Let’s win this first
If Democrats steal it again, all of this is moot
As SD said, the IC will do ANYTHING to stay in power
Agreed – The RNC is doing little to nothing proactively to clean up fake and illegal voters. We should be concerned about Election fraud and the lack of anyone doing anything about it.
On OAN, Researcher and former California lawmaker Steve Baldwin reveals that voter rolls in swing states are full of illegal voters & ghost names. Migrant processing facilities also appear as some voters’ addresses. The steal is in place ready for ballot injection.
https://x.com/ScottAdamsSays/status/1819707422019297381
Another attempt to hijack, to talk about stolen elections!
Yes, gonna have to go back to password, so only clever wolveines will be able to weigh in on this difficult challenge of staffing PDJT’s next term, without being choked off by distractions of whether there will BE a next term.
And, I disagree regarding Sidney. Its easy for keyboard warriors to sit in judgement, NOT being threatened with having their life, business and career destroyed, and criticising.
Having been in that position once, if she takes the job, she will have learned from the experience.
We can’t afford to wait. Clock is ticking. Team-2 needs to be ready for the race no later than Nov 6.
Urgent Help Wanted: Marc Elias’ good twin to lock horns and bring the fire to forever fight…
Does he have one?
I like John Eastman just because.
I like your choices.
I am in agreement with Eastman. I have found him to be very smart, snarky, determined, and resolute. I would hope that his issues with the doj would not hinder such consideration.
What concerns me is just how few trustworthy individuals there are that would be able to onslaught that will be blown at them…no matter who takes the job. Perhaps those who are headline names will come forward. I do not consider Eastman a headliner.
I also love Jeffrey Clark. I am going to do some additional research…
Thank you Sundance.
I like Eastman and Clark. And like you, I am concerned about the lack of trustworthy individuals. It’s no wonder the first term was so fraught with peril at every turn.
Kurt Olsen is another name to throw into the hat.
He headed up the team that represented Kari Lake in her election challenge case, faced threat of disbarrment, a sharp, gutsy guy.
I think you have to distinguish between the roles of what the British call a solicitor and what they call a barrister (litigator).
The White House Counsel isn’t out there litigating cases. That’s the Solicitor General’s office.
The White House Counsel is the solicitor. Think in house corporate counsel. Strategy, analysis, bureaucracy management. Key adviser. Order giver to get it done. The person who, by the way, ought to be the key person to assist in selecting the Solicitor General.
Which is confusing, I know, because the SG isn’t actually a solicitor . . .
By the way, staffing matters. The SG’s office and the White House Counsel’s office are traditionally preserves of the brightest, most politically connected 25 to 35 year old graduates of HYP plus (Harvard Yale Princeton).
All of those graduates these days are tainted by Woke Inc.
A conundrum.
Perhaps it is not a conundrum?
I am willing to bet that there are plenty of older, qualified but SEASONED lawyers who no longer work for the gov/DC and are in private practise, etc. or perhaps military lawyers no longer in active duty that would be willing to pony up for 4yrs.
There may be other lawyers who have not been in the corrupted dc system but have fought corruption in other parts of our nation that might also be willing to pony up.
Isn’t it time to stop these corrupt traditions in order to protect/save our Republic?
Agreed.
Older attorneys, especially with military service prior to 2000, are a good place to look.
Seems like a good choice. He doesn’t back down or scare off.
In one 4-year term President Trump can set the cornerstone for a reconstruction effort that will take at least 15 years. [Reference, Team Obama used 18+ years to create it (January 2007 to present)].
And Ozero had a more than willing congress with GOPrick RINOrats to give him what he wanted…..or not to question. Easy as anything for him to accomplish.
Retired Magistrate here: Ken Paxton; a fighter and a survivor.
Interesting but he really needs to be AG for PDJT.
If that gets blocked though – another Eastman staffer….
Marcia, while Paxton would be good, we desperately need him to stay here in TX. He is the ONLY thing keeping Texas red.
Need to clean out the Texas State Republican Party Executive Committee, of all of the Bushie RINOS controling the party,…as a first step.
Texas isn’t Red, its just painted that way.
Working on it, Dutch. Long term, but working on it. They are ingrained deeply, so will take a long time, but…working on it. via True Texas Project.
This does require consideration. Like Regression Testing in software, sometimes you make a positive change to fix a problem and create one up or downstream that is worse.
Would removing Paxton turn Texas over to the Bushies? If this is a 15-year plan (which frankly, I don’t see the world lasting that long at least in terms of being in the pre-Tribulation era), the strategy must be to keep what we have while making gains on the rest. Paxton would make an excellent AG, but can someone fill his shoes in TX?
Yes,and the lawyer who made the closing arguments at his impeachment trial, Tony Buzbee I think.
He was fantastic. I would definitely take him for Solicitor General.
I’m thinking there might be another bull dog role for Ken Paxton.
Excellent post in an excellent series.
Nice work SD.
MAGA
I think we need three tough, dedicated, and ruthless lawyers in the WHC. #1 will be WHC and run the shop, being the legal “eyes and ears” of the WH versus the silos. #2 & #3 will do personnel and work on breaking as many silos as possible. We need “mean” a lot more than button down, go along to get along, politicians.
As I read the article the name that kept coming up in my head was Mark Levin. Some here don’t like him, but he is very much anti-marxist and a strong constitutionalist.
If I remember correctly, Mark Levin was/is all in for non-natural born citizen Ted Cruz becoming president; which, means Levin is not at all as strong a Constitutionalist as is demanded for WHC.
Levin knows which side of the bread is buttered and switched to being a Trump supporter when his radio audience started to leave him and his ratings were shrinking.
Which tells us that maybe is too easily controlled by “likes”, favorites, and $$$.
Levin is also pro-constitutional convention so that whoever is a member of that convention can have free reign to gut the existing constitution and put into a new one all their hidden dreams. Mr. Levin is no Monroe and certainly nothing near worthy of holding the ink pot for Madison.
Levin is the guy who doxed, or tried doxing, Sundance a while ago.
Still like him?
Why did Levin do that? I never heard about that.
Mark Levin
January 23, 2016
Hey Sundance, aren’t you the guy who used to be a manager at a grocery store? Sure you are. Heck, we even share the same first name, Mark. See how much we have in common? Come on, loser, do I have to reveal you or will you do it yourself over at the kook site “Conservative Treehouse?” Crawl out from under your rock now.
https://www.facebook.com/marklevinshow/posts/hey-sundance-arent-you-the-guy-who-used-to-be-a-manager-at-a-grocery-store-sure-/10153900325648832/
There is something very sad about watching a once heralded hero destroy his career credibility because he refuses to accept, acknowledge or admit his preferred candidate, Senator Ted Cruz, has some very serious and factual weaknesses.
Today radio talk show host Mark Levin accuses this site of antisemitism.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2016/02/13/oh-dear-mark-levin-accuses-the-conservative-tree-house-of-antisemitism/
I never liked Levin.
Why is Mark Levin so enraged with Sundance & The Conservative Treehouse?
https://stellasplace1.com/2016/01/24/why-is-mark-levin-so-enraged-with-sundance-the-conservative-treehouse/
Levin’s fiance’s son worked for the Ted Cruz campaign.
Sundance exposed it and Levin attacked him.
I used to like Mark but he lost me a few years ago when he pushed for a con-con. No strong constitutionalist would do such a thing. It pays to have a long memory.
Mark Levin lost me with his crazy stance on Ukraine.
No, I stop listening to him years ago.
Mark Levin is an entertainer first and foremost. NOT a constitutionalist!!!
Levin always has his finger up in the air, checking on which direction the wind is blowing
Ol’ Yeller?
No.
Wasn’t it Mark Levin who doxed, or tried doxing, Sundance a while ago?
Pretty sure it was.
Levin is not to be trusted in the Trump administration.
Mark Levin is a firebrand and a critic like Steve Bannon. Hard pass.
Why is Mark Levin so enraged with Sundance & The Conservative Treehouse?
https://stellasplace1.com/2016/01/24/why-is-mark-levin-so-enraged-with-sundance-the-conservative-treehouse/
Why is Mark Levin so enraged with Sundance & The Conservative Treehouse?
https://stellasplace1.com/2016/01/24/why-is-mark-levin-so-enraged-with-sundance-the-conservative-treehouse/
John Eastman was the first person who came to mind as I reached just a few paragraphs into the article.
Does the White House Counsel have a staff? Then many of the possibilities already suggested could be hired for it, perhaps?
Round up every MAGA lawyer already persecuted and put them under Eastman’s supervision.
Fires in every belly.
And while we’re mentioning staff – there’s a young lawyer who has been doing sterling pro bono work for the J6 political prisoners. He’s often interviewed on the warroom and was also on the late great Lou Dobbs’ podcast, I think.
The J6 prisoners could all be pardoned and this young lawyer could be hired as part of Eastman’s staff, perhaps? I wish I could remember the name. I think his first name is Joe but not sure.
Another detail I remember about him – one of his primary concerns is a J6 prisoner who has celiac disease (for real, not the imagined variety).
The prisoner has not been provided with an alternate diet – and therefore is likely to be slowly murdered in this fashion…if he hasn’t died already.
Eastman has what it takes. Perhaps McBride is the Joe you are looking for.
YES! Thank you – that’s the person.
Frankly, our enemies have done us a favor.
Compare now to 2016, we have a list of lawyers that have run into the buzzsaw, fighting the good MAGA fight, we know the warriors, and the clinkers, those who are only in it for self-aggrandisement, etc.
Hm? Maybe.
👍
Perhaps a reference chart of term 1 personnel in the various positions at the top of each of these posts going forward would be helpful/reminder of who was there before. Yes, we remember the big names/big traitors, but handy chart each time would be helpful.
Thanks bunches for all you do.
The White House Counsel under PDJT was a full-on traitor and snake.
I have a vague memory of his name as Pat Ciccione?
With the president having absolute power in the executive branch, it is important that Trump be willing to ignore the opinion of the WHC when necessary.
I suspect sundance would agree with that if this were 2020.
However, it’s not, and PDJT needs the best possible MAGA-loyal White House Counsel – John Eastman is perfect.
That is why it is called legal advice.
As I read the lead-in my mind went immediately to Ken Paxton.
Or Tony Buzbee (Paxton’s lawyer during his impeachment)
“Buzzsaw” Buzbee for maximum effect!
Dude was casually ruthless.
Buzbee’s epic moment was when he told the Bush family to get out of Texas. Woa mama! That was one of the best closing arguments I have ever heard.
John Eastman. Excellent idea.
I absolutely love this idea.
The Sea Island gang will set their hair on fire. And I would not do anything to help extinguish the flames.
Ken Paxton?
John Eastman, assisted by Stephen Miller (America First legal)
Or Ken Paxton, although he would be more effective as AG.
Yes! Put Stephen Miller on the rotating Staff!
I wanted him for Chief of Staff.
No on Paxton, need him on AG.
Ken Paxton is a great Texas asset. I believe, however, that he is still under threat of prosecution of some form of securities fraud.
Excellent, thank you. We are constantly blessed by your diligence and insight. The Lord uses whom he will. Your mighty efforts and righteous contributions are as a play book for our supplications and thanksgiving. Now once again we take the field ready to pray, to go deep at a moments notice.
Psalm 37:3-5,7
How about recruiting a judge such as Cannon as WHC. I am thinking judiciary branch might be more sympathetic when the battle inevitably moves into courts and Judiciary sees IC abusing one of their own.
I like that – thinking outside the box for sure.
Did some research ,not finding anything overtly problematic about Eastman, can’t think of anything else
Did you check out Eric Dubilier, esq? I read some law articles on him after Sundance brought him up, and this man is FEARLESS, knows what and who he is up against, and would have no qualms in taking on the IC Community.
I love John Eastman – believe he is awesome, and with the 2 candidates Sundance proposed these two have the intellect and courage needed.
I would encourage you to check out Eric Dubilier, esq.
Yes, Dubilier made mincemeat of the court and the government’s case against one of the ‘Russian’ companies that was accused of interfering with the election in 2016.
Eastman immediately jumped to mind. He strikes me as a calm and determined force. The effort to crush him supports my belief in him.
I wonder why “larger dissemination” of this White House Counsel post was necessary? Perhaps this question will be answered in due course. In the meantime, let’s file this question away and see what develops.
To smoke out more operatives.
Appears to have been effective.
Also, spot that doesn’t require senate approval. Need to keep senate approval threads hidden.
I find one flaw in this reasoning….In one 4-year term President Trump can set the cornerstone for a reconstruction effort that will take at least 15 years.
God says he will turn everything around in one day.
“God helps those who help themsevles”.
Cleta Mitchell
Would love to see Cleta Mitchell put in charge of the Federal Election Commission and clean up that house of cards.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_law_clerks_of_the_Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States_(Seat_9)
Maybe a previous clerk.
Nooooo.
Yes, John Eastman is the one who has skin in the game!
Dershowitz might do it
Barf
he’s FAIR and has already lost a lot over defending the constitution (Trump), I’m comfortable with my opinion.
Attack vector= EPSTEIN
why am I in moderation?
Dersh wants limelight. And he still would vote D.
A big fat NO.
Dershowitz is a smart trial lawyer. But does he have what it takes to go up against the IC? Consider me skeptical.
Before I read his name as I was reading the above article, I immediately thought of John Eastman. He has the legal expertise and the chops for it. In addition, he has been vilified and legally assaulted.
If you want to call it “legally” assaulted.
Awesome, Sundance, thank you!
I personally believe John Eastman to be a bull dog; looks cuddly, but with jaws of steel that will not let go! He is also a prayer warrior and has faced the fire of the furnace for the last 4 years. I believe he will do the RIGHT thing in the face of controversy.
I so agree! We deserve our present day Patrick Henry’s, Thomas Jefferson’s and John Adams’. All willing to pledge their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor…to save this country for liberty’s sake!
Thank you, Sundance, for your thoughtful brilliance!
You mentioned Jeffrey Clark and I read the link you gave. There is an update in that he wasn’t disbarred, but according to the Wash.Examiner, the panel was recommending suspension of his law license: “If Clark’s law license does get temporarily suspended, it could complicate any effort for him to rejoin the Trump administration immediately if the former president wins reelection.” Do you think he has nerves of steel? I don’t know much about John Eastman. I wish there was a younger version of Giuliani available.
Steve Sadow
Great choices!
Ken Paxton, Texas Attorney General. Went up against the corrupt Bush clan and won. I have listened to him in interviews, he has a keen awareness of how these people operate.
Paxton for AG makes more sense. His understanding of Red State AG stances will prove invaluable in waging lawfare against the administrative state, among other things.
High stakes in the highest place.
I do not doubt President Trump knows by now where to look but we need to make sure he and his advisors read Sundances Posts on “Staffing” again and again.
Godspeed Mr. President.
Thank you Sundance for the teachings.
Sorry for the second post, however, after reading some of the comments, and also looking through articles (LawandCrime, etc.), I would like to revise my opinion!
Eric Dubelier has already taken on the Weissman/Elias team when he took on Robert Mueller’s fake case against the Russian company, Concord.
This man is FEARLESS, and VICIOUS! He does not appear to seek limelight, and he has worked in what he termed “the Real Justice Department” before it was corrupted.
I will include him in my prayers, and I believe between he and John Eastman, the WHC’s office would be perfect to handle the vipers nest in the IC Community!
A thoroughly corrupt disciplinary panel authorized by the corrupt DC bar has recommended that Jeffrey Clark’s law license be suspended for two years. I’m certain that the corrupt DC swamp will follow through on that recommendation as a part of the lawfare strategy being pursued against President Trump. My question is-could President Trump appoint him anyway, even if Clark’s law license was suspended? I would be 100% in favor of doing so if it wasn’t explicitly illegal to do so. I don’t know the law so I’m looking to be educated/informed.
John Eastman would be a brilliant choice. So would Eric Dubelier and Jeffrey Clark.
Perhaps a highly paid law clerk for Jeffery Clark. I don’t think you need to be a licensed lawyer to research and assist.
I have the same question — because we can predict that any licensed lawyer who serves in any capacity in a Trump 47 administration will be disbarred. We can also predict that if a Trump 47 administration uses disbarred lawyers in any capacity, articles of impeachment will be brought in the House of Representatives by some coalition of Democrats and RINOs for employing disbarred lawyers for legal work.
Stephen Miller 🤔? …..America First Legal (.org)
John Eastman came to my mind. I like the collaboration idea, but would opt for someone outside the federal legal system, knows the legal system from another perspective, isn’t part of “professional republican advisors”, is younger than Eastman, would collaborate and know the workings of the WHC if it became necessary to slip into that position behind the scenes or publicly and most importantly if would protect the Office of the Presidency AND President Trump by never falling for the BS con job of the opposition to undermine PDJT.
The collaborative partner I would choose is Stephen Miller.
All good, but…
Why can’t the White House Counsel have as large a staff, perhaps rotating, as they need? Why only two or three?
Great suggestions here on this thread already – “Collect ‘Em All”!
A possibility, for sure. It would keep the opposition guessing.
President Trump should follow Sundance’s recommendation and appoint Eastman, Clark or Dubelier (or any combination thereof) regardless of any lawfare disbarment shenanigans. If the House pursues impeachment that will draw out the worst of the UniParty Rinos and make it easier to clean them out.
I like this idea. All 3 would be great. The Office of the Presidency will be bombarded from all sides. No one should stand alone and take all the heat.
Not only loyalty and courage but in depth knowledge of constitutional law.
John Eastman, Esq. fits the bill.
Very encouraging treatise, Sundance. Thank you. Maybe there is hope, after all.
Just thinking out loud.
IF the Dems don’t steal another election and Trump gets his rightful position back…
There should be a list of folks for each position (not publicly shared so the IC can’t go after them in advance and tear their lives to shreds) – kind of like a continuity of operations list. So, start with Eastman, but have a “bench” behind him so that when the IC successfully targets someone, another can step in seamlessly while not abandoning the first pick to their evil clutches.
It’s really sad, and disgusting, that it has come to this. But, THANK YOU SUNDANCE!
I don’t know of anyone on the planet who has put as much thought and consideration into this from a non-pretending perspective.
Sorry, did not read ahead to you – we think alike…
Eastman’s Legal Eagles (as in the American Eagle).
John Eastman. He has skin in the game…and maybe an axe to grind. What better place to grind it than on the neck of the IC and other deep state swamp denizen? Eastman is the man for this job.
I think this pick is very well thought through Sundance.
Nice.
Sundance you are wrong about the Supreme Court ruling. “The recent Supreme Court decision gives tremendous power, ABSOLUTE POWER within the Executive Branch, to the office of the President.”
From page 2 of the ruling “(1) Article II of the Constitution vests “executive Power” in “a President of the United States of America.” §1, cl. 1. The President has duties of “unrivaled gravity and breadth.” Trump v. Vance, 591 U. S. 786, 800. His authority to act necessarily “stem[s] either from an act of Congress or from the Constitution itself.” Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U. S. 579, 585. In the latter case, the President’s authority is sometimes “conclusive and preclusive.” Id., at 638 (Jackson, J., concurring). When the President exercises such authority, Congress cannot act on, and courts cannot examine, the President’s actions.”
All “ABSOLUTE POWER” is in, and from the President as executive. The office of the president includes the cabinet members, appointees and employees that work on his behalf. The office has no power on it’s own. The President tells the office what to do, not the other way around and the recent ruling backs this up.
The President is a person. The Office of the President are his servants.
Excellent clarification.
SO, the President and his Office (servants acting on his behalf) have absolute power.
As long as the official acts are from the top down and not the bottom up. The notion of a captured President is dispelled. Trump is already stating that if elected he will declassify the details of his attempted assassination. Expect executive orders.
Be prepared for the “personal acts” to be the next attack point for Trumps enemies. Trump should stay in DC or on a Military base if elected to avoid jurisdictional issues with a State. The less “personal acts” the better. If the President is not in a State then he is not subject to the jurisdiction of the State. Think about what happened with the “perfect phone call” that was official business. Next expect private phone calls to be targeted. This gets to the heart of what Sundance is getting at. The person that decides who gets physically close to the President during his next administration has to filter out the Carol, the Stormy and the like that will expose the President to “personal acts” that will be criminalized, whether actually criminal or not. Very important to get the right person to do the job for Trump.
Thank You for sharing!!