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.
After reading the entire 75-page transcript of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) testimony to congress [READ HERE], a testimonial that almost no one in the mainstream news has written about, issues surrounding the document search against President Trump take on some new context.
The NARA officials are essentially professional DC bureaucrats with a mission to look out for the best interests of the DC system they support. It is very clear from their opinion; Donald Trump was considered an outsider to the DC system of government – and that baseline established the framework for why and how NARA took such extreme processes with President Trump.
From the transcript, one NARA official says, “I am storing 555,000 cubic feet of classified national security information. To put that in perspective, the white boxes that many of you have seen in your offices, that is a cubic foot. It holds about 2,500 pages. Another way for me to describe it, a typical stack area that we store records in a Federal records center can hold about 100,000 cubic feet. And that is a room that is about roughly the size of a football field. So you are looking at five and a half football fields floor to ceiling shelving.” {Transcript, page 24}
President Trump did not turn over the letter left to him by President Obama, nor did President Trump turn over the 27 letters exchanged between himself and North Korea Chairman Kim Jong-un. NARA was looking for these along with other documents pertaining to President Trump engaging in discussions with other foreign leaders, and NARA was angry about the perceived lack of respect shown by Trump toward their endeavor.
However, when you take the current DC establishment system, look at the history of the Trump administration engagement in foreign policy, then overlay that dynamic with the gatekeeping responsibilities outlined by NARA, what you may discover is an entirely different prism through which to view the DC motives.
One can easily argue the Deep State per se’ was looking for notes, information, contacts, tips and hints of discussions that took place between Trump and foreign leaders, that may have actually exposed the mechanisms of DC money and policy laundering.
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.
As President Donald Trump stands with his legal team to defend himself against political prosecution, his spokesperson Alina Habba delivered a statement and addressed reporters outside the federal courthouse in Miami.
Habba accurately noted the people currently in control of our government do not love this country. They are trying to tear this country apart and Donald J Trump is a tool to achieve that objective. This is their goal. This is the fundamental change they desire. Isolation, ridicule and fear are their goals as they use the weaponized power of the full governmental apparatus against their opposition. WATCH:
Keep in mind, the powers that seek to control the American political system, and ultimately the lives of every person in this nation, need the average person to feel despair, isolated and alone. Those who use weaponized power to isolate, ridicule and marginalize, need to control the mechanisms of social life in order to stop people from connecting to the majority.
We are in an abusive relationship with our government. The people running the Biden administration need to ensure the American people do not assemble against them. Every mechanism and institution are being leveraged toward that objective. When you understand that larger goal that underpins their power, you can make earnest effort to defeat this psychological war by engaging in purposeful fellowship.
As history is a guide, when the abused take to the streets, villages and hamlets, they realize they are not alone. Defeating the abuser starts first by destroying the dark imaginings of fear the abuser creates in order to retain control. Ultimately this is the purpose behind the message, ‘live your best life.‘
I have been reviewing interviews, looking at discussion, and some of them I will share in the next few articles. However, for a solid representation of the state of our current dynamic, as it relates to the targeting of President Donald J. Trump, this interview below is a solid outlook from the detractors.
CBS News legal analyst Rikki Klieman and CBS News investigative correspondent Catherine Herridge join “Face the Nation” to discuss what’s in the indictment — and what it means for Trump. [Transcript Here]
Before getting to the video, it’s valuable to see Rikki Klieman representing the interpretation of the media outlook toward the indictment handed down by Special Counsel Jack Smith. It is also valuable to see CBS’s Catherine Herridge represent the defenders of the institutions, from the outside vulgarian personage of Trump.
Klieman buys the Lawfare narrative completely, including the framework of classified documents as opposed to documents containing classified markings. She sells the Lawfare outline as gospel and makes all assertions from that position. Herridge looks at how the bureaucracy responds to Trump, including how the institutions hold power of determination higher than a President of the United States.
As Bill Barr said emphatically earlier today, “The documents do not belong to Trump,” continuing with “The documents belong to the government who created them, not the man for whom they were created.” So sayeth the defender of the omnipotent Dept of Justice. This is where a sharp intellectual knife to cut through the chaff and countermeasures is needed, and notice no one brings up the visible and practical deconstruction point.
If the documents did not belong to President Donald J. Trump, then why did the government dump them in the parking lot of the White House and tell him to deal with them?
If the documents belonged to the government, and not to the man for whom they were created, then why did that same government give them to him and force him to take them to a location of his choosing? Can you see the obtuse argument fall apart when simple pragmatic questions are raised?
The institutions are presented, by the sellers of the Lawfare narrative, as higher than the authority of the President of the United States. This is how ridiculous our government has become.
Yes, it’s true, according to the information contained in the Jack Smith indictment of President Donald John Trump, The Conservative Treehouse likely holds similar “classified documents” as outlined in the case by the special prosecutor.
Once you understand how, you then understand one of the most overlooked nonsensical aspects to the insufferable DOJ and FBI case that has been pushed in the media for the past year.
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.”
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.
You might think this is a one-off use of the “documents with classification markings” lingo, but it’s not. 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]
Rather than write 10,000 highly specific and legally granular words to deconstruct the Trump indictment, I will share the opinion of others with supporting analysis and add some substance to the issues. Later I will compile all the various points of analysis into one very granular article.
First, it is important to always remember why this indictment is taking place. The DOJ, specifically Lisa Monaco, are continuing the offensive against Trump in large part to cover for the actions of the Obama administration in the originating targeting of their political opposition. Originating Spygate operations (’15-’16), Russiagate (’16-’17), Mueller (’17-’19), Impeachment #1 (’19-’20), Durham (’19-’23) and Jack Smith ’22-present, are all part of one long continuum of weaponized DOJ and FBI operations. The entirety of the effort is to protect the actions taken by the Obama administration. [Note to congress: Questioning Durham this month is defense key #1]
In this interview {Direct Rumble Link} Jeff Clark gives his opinion of the statutory weaknesses that exist in the case as outlined in the indictment. 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. WATCH:
Granular note, putting aside the fact that classification is irrelevant to the statute being used, within the indictment please notice how the DOJ states 102 classified documents [pg 27], some that were never marked classified as noted in the indictment [count 11, page 30] but defined as classified after DOJ review, were discovered after the Trump affirmation of compliance in July 2022. This is the predicate for the FBI raid. Again, a total of 102 documents were identified as classified by the FBI/DOJ.
They were unable to use classification status as a legal mechanism to attack President Trump; instead, they use the non-production as an evidence enhancement to the ridiculous claim that Trump lied to them (sec 1001); but notice how there are only 31 documents [31 counts] outlined as national defense security issues. This would mean approximately 70 classified documents are memory holed by this special counsel.
70 defined “classified” documents retrieved, no description provided, those documents not a part of any legal contention – they just disappear. I suspect we know what those sets of documents pertained to, and they have everything to do with DOJ and FBI conduct in Russiagate.
Last night I participated in a conversation. This article is written as an outcome of that conversation, as requested by those who participated.
Essentially, the framework of the conversation, as I initially listened, is best described as a series of questions amid a group of smart intellectual types who are very understanding of the nature of our current situation.
In various forms they were asking each other the same question. What happened in the last several years that caused Democrats, leftists and the traditional political left to switch positions on their advocacy?
Liberalism literally went from railing against Big Govt, to embracing corrupt Big Govt. Why and how did this happen?
In short, it was the same line of questioning I have seen asked by Tucker Carlson, Glenn Greenwald, Tulsi Gabbard and various traditionally liberal people as well as people on the right side of the continuum.
Why and how did traditional liberalism so suddenly flip from being, big picture – ‘anti-government’, to suddenly embracing corrupt government enterprise, and supporting the intelligence apparatus, federal govt (writ large), institutional oppressive law enforcement and FBI etc.? What happened?
After listening to this conversation quietly, as I am prone to do, my remarks -with citations and examples- silenced the room.
At the conclusion of my remarks, everyone asked me if I had ever written about this, and if not – why not? I did not have an answer, so consider this a promise fulfilled. Perhaps you might find value.
