I will say it until people understand. Lawfare is a specially constructed approach to weaponize the judiciary to create narratives for public consumption; it is the abnormal and twisted application of granular legal language, and as a result it requires oddball motions to support it.
The DOJ previously filed a motion for “Special Conditions of Release” to restrict President Trump’s defense from knowing or discussing the super-secret evidence and witnesses the special prosecutor plans to use against him. The motion was essentially that if President Trump refused the super special terms and conditions of the motion, then Judge Cannon should put him in leg irons in federal prison until he can be tried and convicted.
The special counsel wants everything kept under seal, quiet and invisible to the public so the omnipotent arbiters of justice can appropriately shape the narrative they prefer.
The Jack Smith team cannot have President Trump being all uncontrolled, willy-nilly and making fun of their case, while talking about his targeting in such a manner as their super-secret witnesses would be exposed to such duplicitous snark and horrible influence.
I do not know all the details of her case, trial and subsequent conviction; however, I do know Jessica Watkins and other Oath Keeper members were entrapped by a federal agent organizing activity under the username “1% Watchdog.” I am certain of this element because the J6 committee falsely accused me of being that user. {GO DEEP}
The Gateway Pundit ran an article today [SEE HERE] which includes an interview from prison with Ms. Watkins, who continues to claim her innocence. Ms. Watkins gave an interview to Flip the Switch with Jenn {Direct Rumble Link} video and audio below:
Again, I do not know Ms. Watkins or any of her allies and associates. However, the subpoena I received from the J6 Commitee, specifically identified her as one of the people they falsely claimed I was associated with. I have unredacted her name from the subpoena below in the hopes that her legal team (if any) can see the value it presents.
I have written about the entrapment issue HERE, as well as the value that should be clearly evident. Counselors – On behalf of your client(s) file a motion with the judge requesting a court order compelling Zello to give up the registration records of the ‘Stop the Steal J6’ channel. This will identify the person behind “1% Watchdog”. If federal prosecutors fight the request for the court order, well: (a) there’s your answer; and (b) take the next step of using the preexisting congressional subpoena as evidence to support your compulsion.
If you accept a very specific outlook into the mindset of the Lawfare operatives (Weissmann, Eisen, Berke, McCord et al) as strategic thinkers -the brain trust- behind the Special Counsel Jack Smith prosecution, then you might see the dynamic in this story.
Previously, amid his grand prose and proclamations outlining his spectacular and magnificent legal constructs, wunderkind Jack Smith was so confident in his case he strategically announced he would demand a “speedy trial” in order to preserve the great American democracy.
If you see Lawfare as a narrative construct, the pontification made sense.
However, less than two weeks later, suddenly the ever-confident Jack Smith is reversing his position and asking Florida Judge Cannon to delay the trial.
(Via NBC) – Special counsel Jack Smith has asked the judge overseeing former President Donald Trump’s classified documents case to delay the start of his criminal trial until December.
The request came in a series of new motions filed late Friday by the special counsel.
U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon had set a tentative date of Aug. 14 for the start of the trial. (more)
Remember, Lawfare is first and foremost a narrative construct intended for public media consumption. Lawfare originates from the perspective of an established legal goal, and then all of the activity is structured around supporting that goal. [A version of find me the man I’ll find you the crime.]
Lawfare is the opposite of following evidence. In fact, in its purest and most visible form, political Lawfare actually requires the ignoring of evidence.
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 PEOPLEare 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.
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.
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.
Bill Barr continued his Sunday Talk appearances this week, specifically organized by the apparatus in control of DC, to attack Donald Trump and position the executive branch of government as subservient to the interests of the United States Intelligence Community.
Don’t miss the forest when you are looking at the trees.
Barr is advocating for a system of government that has institutional interests above the constitution. According to Bill Barr, the DOJ, FBI and US Intelligence Community control the Office of the President. Look at what he is saying. The bureaucracy of the administrative state is above the chief executive office holder. The intelligence community supersedes the President.
I’m not putting words in his mouth. Barr believes the President is a functionary of, and in a lesser position than, the unelected people who control institutions that make up the executive branch of government. THIS is what he believes. Get past the parseltongue and obtuse linguistics; this is Barr’s advocacy position. WATCH:
.
Why? Why is he doing this? Does he really believe this? The answer is yes, and essentially what Bill Barr is doing is protecting the system that George W Bush, Dick Cheney and Barack Obama constructed and then used respectively. Barr is defending the surveillance state, the post-Patriot Act state of intelligence agency control over government.
Bill Barr is protecting the weaponized institutions of the Director of National Intelligence (Bush/Cheney), the Dept of Justice – National Security Division [DOJ-NSD (Obama/Holder)], the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA Court), and the Dept of Homeland Security (Bush/Cheney). These institutions, according to AG Bill Barr, are now in full control of the executive branch, full control of government, and now more powerful than the Office of the President of the United States.
This is the position of the DC system and everyone within it. This is why Bill Barr is positioning himself as the tip of the spear. This position is the entire reason why President Trump was told to hire Bill Barr, because Bill Barr had a job to do…. preserve the institutions, he helped build, at all costs. This is also why Bill Barr protected Robert Mueller, and never impeded the Andrew Weissmann effort.
Bill Barr knows what Jack Smith, Lisa Monaco, Andrew Weissmann, Barry Berke, Norm Eisen, Mary McCord, David Laufman and Lawfare are doing. Bill Barr supports that effort, because ultimately it preserves the institutions from the corrective action of Donald Trump.
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.
Comrades, dissident voice Tucker Carlson continues broadcasting his rebellious monologues on Twitter. For his latest episode 4, Carlson notes the new American dictatorship. {Direct Rumble Link} – WATCH:
Dear Leader does not appreciate the unauthorized broadcasts from dissident citizens.
Tucker Carlson is defying the gravitational pull of Fox News legal department and continuing to broadcast his monologues on the Elon Musk platform known as Twitter.
For his third episode, tonight Tucker Carlson discussed the Biden administration using the Dept of Justice to target Donald Trump, while the republican establishment, including the majority of the 2024 republican presidential candidates, generally stand aside and watch the targeting take place. {Direct Rumble Link}
What Mr Carlson outlines is accurate in the context of the DC UniParty and their aligned outlook toward foreign policy. However, Carlson is smarter than this. He knows the core opposition to Trump is not centered around foreign policy; it is one level higher; the opposition is based on economics, yes money. It is the economic policy of our nation that drives the foreign policy of our nation, perfectly encapsulated in this era when President Trump said, “economic security is national security.”
The truest reality of the thing is that foreign policy is an outcome of economic priority. So, why would Tucker stop at the neocon angle to the opposition and not drive all the way through to the core issue. Who is controlling the money? Decide for yourself. WATCH:
Democrats want power. Republicans want money. This creates the two wings of the Uniparty apparatus. Donors to democrats do so in order to support an ideological agenda based around social control; you are a prole. Donors to republicans do so in order to support financial control; you are a serf. This is the main distinction between the two corporations that align with mutually beneficial non-compete clauses.
As long as democrats allow republicans to operate systems toward their objective, the assembly of wealth, there is no opposition to the democrat agenda of social control. This is the baseline of the political frustration noted by almost all “republican” voters. The GOP politicians who are created by the billionaire donors are not acting on a priority to defend, preserve or support individual liberty. The GOP politicians prioritize what their benefactors tell them to prioritize, the assembly of wealth and financial control.
