Investigations, Investigations Everywhere. Not a One Is Legit.

45th PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP needs to get back on the campaign trail, but endless lawfare is preventing him from doing so. He doesn’t need to resume campaigning because he is doing poorly against the illegitimate Joey Biden. Trump is doing well. Polls show growing support for him even in the bluest states.  (See e.g., here and here.) Trump needs to be out campaigning for his own well-being. He seems to truly enjoy rallying his base and any curiosity seekers. Alas, it hasn’t been possible, with him having to be in court and consulting with his myriad legal teams constantly. That might change, though.

On Tuesday, Federal Judge Aileen Cannon in the classified documents case against Trump, brought by the Biden regime’s D.O.J. and special counsel Jack Smith, was postponed from a May 9th deadline to an indefinite future date because of the time required to vet the ‘sensitive materials’ Trump may intend to use in trial pursuant to the Classified Information Procedures Act. That evidence could pile up given he has been charged with 40 counts of illegally retaining classified materials in 2021 and obstructing attempts by the feds to retrieve them thereafter. This necessarily means the trial cannot possibly start on May 20th as originally intended. This further means the likelihood of the case going to trial (or being decided) by the election is remote, which is, minimally, a partial victory for this tormented patriot.

This is not only because it frees up at least some time for him to campaign, but it also takes the story off the front pages of the news. Further, it means his legal team will have more time to flesh out the skulduggery behind the scenes in this frivolous persecution and, assuming he wins in November, which seems likely, to quash the bogus investigation altogether and dismiss the charges once and for all. 

Judge Cannon also has yet to rule on some previously filed motions by Trump’s team and those of his two co-defendants, aide Walt Naulta and Mar-a-Lago maintenance worker Carlos De Oliveira. Then there’s the not-so-little matter of Smith’s admission the alleged classified materials retrieved from Mar-a-Lago had been rearranged somehow, putting into serious question the chain of custody, among other things. I suspect the latter played into the equation here a lot.

Further, the House Judiciary Committee appears poised to hold A.G. Merrick Garland in contempt over his refusal to turn over audio of Biden’s two-day interview with former Special Counsel Robert Hur. After debate and markup on May 16th, the Committee will send the resolution to the full House for a vote. The audio files were subpoenaed by House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) in February.

Garland has refused to comply, claiming they were irrelevant and political. (Lol…) A transcript of the interview showed Biden to be terribly confused about matters he wouldn’t be expected to be, but was just a “sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory,” according to Hur’s bombshell 388-page document about him having “willfully retained and disclosed classified materials,” but which, without proferring evidence, Hur didn’t think could be sufficiently proved.

Jordan is now also launching a probe into Smith’s evidence-tampering in FL.

Now We Know What Biden Does in the Basement.

HE SCHEMES. Then Biden must direct others within the Deep State to execute his sinister plans. Most have nothing to do with policy, and those that do, revolve around corruption or buying off voters. The rest of the schemes just have to do with self-centered and egotistical plans to maintain power, wealth, and prestige.

One of those very schemes was revealed on Monday when Florida federal district court judge, Aileen Cannon (a Trump appointee), released an unredacted version of Trump’s motion for discovery (here) in the so-called ‘classified documents case’ now underway against the 45th president.

RealClearInvestigation’s Julie Kelly published images of both the redacted and largely unredacted versions of key evidence on X (here) and her Substack, providing an illustration of just what the Department of Justice and Special Counsel Jack Smith have been trying to conceal, to wit, that the regime was directing NARA in how to deal with Trump. A summary is here. (Recall there is also legitimate question as to the legality of Smith being special counsel at all.)

Recall the accusation against Trump was that he purloined and refused to return presidential papers found at Mar-a-Lago in 2021 to the National Archives and Records Administration. In his defense, he claimed the papers were not classified and he was under no obligation to return them,  pursuant to the Presidential Records Act, although he was in the process of returning them anyway, keeping them under lock and key until then.

Recall also that Joe Biden has kept massive amounts of records from his days in Congress and as Barack Obama’s vice president, even though he was never protected under the P.R.A. like Trump. Biden claims to have ‘cooperated’ in returning his documents, some of which were casually laying around near his Corvette in his garage, and other unprotected places where anyone (including his crack-cocaine-addicted son Hunter) could find them. Many Biden dox remain at large even decades later. Much remains a mystery surrounding their whereabouts. 

An example of what was redacted appears to cover up affirmative collaboration between the Biden regime and NARA to concoct a prosecutable case against Trump. On his newscast on Real America’s Voice on Tuesday, Grant Stinchfield speculated that Biden realized he would never win over Trump, and therefore, decided to get him set up by his D.O.J. and Merrick Garland in anticipation the legal problems that would inevitably arise could keep the regime in power. Stinchfield is astute, but I think the rationale was much simpler. I think it was simply a case of ‘whataboutism,’ where Biden was getting some heat about his many outstanding documents, and had the D.O.J. push NARA in Trump’s direction. I could be wrong—my belief here is predicated on the usual reliability of Occam’s Razor or law of parsimony.

What is so particularly despicable is that Smith had absolutely no basis whatsoever to redact the portions of the documents Kelly published. They were not classified or in any way inappropriate to reveal: they were simply unflattering to the extent the portions showed only collaboration and—dare I mutter the word?—collusion. 

F.O.I.A. dox tipped Trump off on this by Jan. of 2024.

The Longest Presidential Election—Ever. The Most at Stake—Ever.

TUESDAY WAS A BIG DAY for the House Judiciary Committee. Special Counsel Robert Hur testified. Rep. Tom Tiffany (R-Wis.) probably elicited the most useful testimony of the day when he probed the special counsel about a letter, dated Feb. 5th, that the White House Counsel sent to Hur days prior to his February report becoming public. Highlights here.

Tiffany asked Hur if the White House had requested him to “change [the report’s] references to the president’s poor memory.” Yes, Hur confirmed. This contradicted claims made by Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) who, earlier in Tuesday’s hearing, claimed that Biden did not “seek to redact a single word of Mr. Hur’s report.”

Hur was consistent. In an exchange with Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), he answered a question about pressure from the White House. “They did request certain edits and changes to the draft report,” he said. Hur had concluded “that no criminal charges are warranted” in his investigation into Biden’s mishandling of classified documents despite having found records “related to foreign policy in Afghanistan and handwritten notes ‘implicating sensitive intelligence.’” No charges were warranted essentially because Biden would be a sympathetic defendant. He “would likely present himself to the jury, as he did during our interview with him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.” It is reminiscent of James Comey not similarly pursuing Hillary Clinton in 2015. (Only the G.O.P. is ever pro persecuted.)

That wasn’t the end of it. The White House sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland only days after forwarding a communique to Hur which objected to his report suggesting Biden’s mental status had declined because Biden couldn’t recall basic facts when interviewed by investigators. An example was his inability to identify when he was VP or when son, Beau, died. The hypocrisy is blinding. I anticipate John Solomon’s analysis on Hur’s testimony Wednesday.  

This is important because, obviously, such requests from the Biden regime or Biden himself would constitute ‘obstruction of justice,’ not altogether dissimilar to the charge Dems made against President Trump with Robert Mueller and the Trump-Russia-collusion hoax which was eventually nixed by then-A.G. Bill Barr.

Tuesday evening anti-climactically found Trump and Biden winners in the Georgia and Mississippi primaries, winning all the delegates. Washington State also held its all-mail-in primaries, and who knows when they’ll be tallied. The G.O.P. caucuses in Hawaii this night, too. Biden also won the Northern Mariana Islands.  Republicans caucus there on 3/15. No electoral votes at stake.

Biden now has 2,007 delegates, more than enough to win the Democratic nomination, which requires 1,968 on the first ballot. He has taken all up for grabs except 20 uncommitteds, and the three that went to Palmer, thanks to American Samoa. Trump has 1,181 delegates at 11 p.m., falling just shy of the 1,215 needed to clinch the G.O.P. nomination once and for all, though not everything has yet been reported.

25th Amendment or Bust

THE BIDEN REGIME is running scared. Before all the other news broke on Friday, Rep. Claudia Tenney (R-N.Y.) made her own by writing to Attorney General Merrick Garland (letter here) requesting that he and Biden’s Cabinet bring 25th Amendment proceedings to oust Biden from the White House based upon findings in Robert Hur’s “alarming” report from the day before, referring to Biden as being likely perceived by a jury as a “sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory,” and adding, “[I]t would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him” of a crime “that requires a mental state of willfulness.”

Her reasoning was that if Biden wasn’t competent to stand trial, he certainly wasn’t competent to serve as president. (Technically, Hur didn’t allege, though it was implied and could be inferred, that Biden wasn’t competent to stand trial—only that a jury wouldn’t likely convict him.  I’m not sure that’s true either, outside of, say, Washington, D.C., New York City, or a few other districts.)

Tenney concedes Sec. 4 of the 25th requires a vote by 2/3 of both houses of Congress to get him out, but her demand adds heat to what may ultimately become an inferno. Let there be light…

Biden won’t go away on his own volition, it is clear. And ‘Doctor’ Jill, who is as arrogant bitch and he is a prick, doesn’t intend to lose her White House digs and perks. His being incompetent to hold, or even run for office means, however, his regime will have to forge some defensive measures to keep the Big Guy in, and return him to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. 

The latest stunt to reach the goals is to eliminate at least one threat, to wit, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., who is running for president as an independent. The Democratic National Committee filed a Federal Election Commission complaint (here) against the candidate and his Super PAC on Friday (when else?).

It alleged Kennedy’s campaign had coordinated with his American Values 2024 Super PAC, using it to hire vendors to garner the requisite signatures to get his name on the ballot in battleground states, like Michigan and Illinois, in violation of federal election rules which prohibit anyone from outside the campaign from gathering ballot signatures.

Tony Lyons, who heads the Super PAC, said the PAC was doing it independently and accused the DNC of “rigging” elections because Biden cannot win “a free, open and fair election” otherwise.

RFK posted, “The DNC is in no position to assert morality over anyone —they refused to have a primary and have worked against the will of the people in the past few elections. It’s sad to see the party my family built crash and burn.” Then he used the story to fundraise.  Let there be fire.

Obviously, 45th President Donald Trump’s poll numbers are so high, Biden will need every vote he can get to defeat him, even with his expected cheating.

By stunting RFK’s count, Biden might get those few extra votes since most watchers believe he is more likely to take away votes from Biden than from Trump. (Initially, I wasn’t convinced of that, but once RFK, Jr. went on the record as being in support of ‘reparations’ for blacks (since backpedaled), I changed my mind.)

Sadly, Over 10 Years After Snowden’s Disclosures, Little Has Changed.

THERE IS AN INTERESTING U.S. Supreme Court case that has received little publicity, but which was covered in some detail in theconservativeteehouse.com (CT), to the point a reporter was subpoenaed for writing about the underlying facts. The case, X Corp. v. Merrick Garland, involves governmental control over social media, and originated years ago in the Obama administration. It eventually wound its way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which on Monday declined to review the lower courts based on traditional deference afforded the executive branch in matters of military and national security. The Writ of Certiorari is here. 

There are oodles of precedential case law to support the Court’s declination to review, but CT writes that Deep State law enforcement and intelligence agencies, such as DOJ, FBI, and DHS,  have been weaponized to use this deference as a tool of lawfare against unwitting Americans in order to control or limit their thoughts, speech, and behaviors. It almost morphs these Deep State agencies into an unconstitutional Fourth Branch of Government. (I concur with CT’s position.) 

Some background: In 2014, during Obama’s reign, Twitter (now known as X) sued the federal government after it was prevented from simply disclosing the number of requests made by officials for user information that were allegedly related to ‘national security.’ Twitter wanted the number and frequency of such government requests to be published in its biannual online ‘Transparency Report.’ And it being blocked from doing so by the government unconstitutionally restrained its speech, Twitter asserted in its lawsuit. The government had also placed strict controls or ‘guidance’ on what Twitter could publish on its platform or give to researchers.

A federal district court ruled in 2020 that the government’s classification of this information was justified and that “no more narrow tailoring of the restrictions can be made.” The case went to a three-judge panel at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which affirmed the lower court’s decision, again, stating the redactions made by the government were as narrowly tailored as they could be. Some pleadings in the case have been filed under seal because of the ‘national security’ sensitivity involved, but it can be deduced the appeals court believed that the disclosure of the number and frequency of requests could somehow tip off foreign enemies of what the government was aware/not aware of and that could somehow give them unspecified advantages.

This sounds like a very strained rationale. The Surveillance State and weaponization of law enforcement and intelligence agencies became particularly prevalent under Obama and then-A.G. Eric Holder. The deference the judiciary gives isn’t one some Americans are willing to give after The Snowden Revelations of 2013 or The Twitter Files of 2023, or all that came in between. One might perhaps be more understanding if government had an established pattern of integrity in conducting its business. It too often doesn’t.  Over-classification is one thing; weaponizing the process, another thing altogether. It’s why Warrant Canaries had to be hatched.

Attorney Hampton Dellinger: A Master in Conflicts of Interest

THE ILLEGITIMATE OCCUPANT of the White House, Joey Biden, doesn’t even have the decency to be embarrassed by his blatant corruption and conflicts of interest of some major players in his contemptible world. Case in point: an attorney named Hampton Dellinger, who on Oct. 3rd he nominated to head the Office of the Special Counsel, an agency charged with investigating whistleblower complaints and allegations of misuse of federal office for partisan political ends. The OSC is supposedly an independent federal investigatory agency with authority over the Civil Service Reform Act; the Whistleblower Protection Act; the Hatch Act; and the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act. Dellinger is, un-coincidentally, a former colleague of son Hunter, both of whom worked at a law firm representing Ukraine energy company, Burisma.

House Oversight & Accountability Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) is just one who is concerned given it comes at a time when whistleblowers from the Internal Revenue Service and Justice Department have come forward with inculpatory evidence against Hunter Biden in an ongoing investigation. It is a blatant and preposterous conflict of interest that, as an attorney, should concern Dellinger too, pursuant to either the Rules or Code of Professional Conduct for attorneys. The position requires Senate confirmation, but the Senate is majority Democrat. Whether they will do the right thing and refuse to confirm such a brazenly biased candidate remains to be seen, but cynicism runs rampant these days. 

Instead, I’d wager they will selectively overlook the factors that disqualify Dellinger and instead, highlight the fact he was also a partner at the Washington, D.C. law firm, Boies Schiller Flexner LLP in the Crisis Management and Government Response team from 2013 to 2020 (which also corresponds with the timing of Joe Biden’s stealing of the presidential election.) They will likely focus on Dellinger’s previous nomination to the assistant attorney general heading the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Policy from 2021 till this past June, when, inter alia, he vetted potential judicial nominees; oversaw departmental rulemaking, and handled policy assignments from A.G. Merrick Garland and others.

It was in 2014 that the younger Biden brought Burisma to the firm as a client for the firm, at the same time he was given a seat on the now-controversial Ukrainian energy concern’s board of directors. 

My Government, the Thief

IT’S EASY to call the U.S. a government a den of thieves if you’re a middle-middle to upper class American who pays confiscatory income taxes to the loathed and corrupt Internal Revenue Service. It is if you’re a rich Russian, too.

On Wednesday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken pledged yet more money to the corrupt government of Ukraine, consisting of $1 billion in military and other financial aid. To slap Russian Vladimir Putin in the face and rub salt into the wound, Blinken said that included in the package is $5.4 million in seized assets which appear to belong to a Russian oligarch. Blinken has also apparently directed that sum be earmarked for Ukraine’s veterans’ services.

In a characteristically arrogant statement, Blinken declared, “Those who have enabled Putin’s war of aggression should pay for it.” But being America’s top diplomat, it is disconcerting for him affirmatively nix peace talks that Beijing has tried to broker. Blinken is okay with the status quo given he has not only ruled out a negotiated settlement, but a possible ceasefire as well. This, despite the fact the world has known Ukraine was unprepared for a ‘counteroffensive’ that was built up in newsrooms around the world. The hallowed New York Times reported recently that U.S. officials are disappointed Kiev has become so “casualty averse.” 

The seized Russian funds that have apparently already been transferred to Ukraine are reported to belong to an oligarch named Konstantin Malofeyev, who is a banking, telecommunications, and media tycoon. This is believed to be the case because Attorney General Merrick Garland boasted that $5.4 million in Malofeyev’s purloined assets had been turned over to the State Department to “remediate the harms of Russia’s unjust war.” He further bragged that “while this represents the United States’ first transfer of forfeited Russian funds for the rebuilding of Ukraine, it will not be the last.” Whether Garland was virtue-signaling or feeling very generous with money that is not his to give is not clear. 

AFP said Malofeyev was “indicted in April 2022 for violating sanctions related to the 2014 Russian-backed secession war in Ukraine’s Donbas region and its takeover of Crimea.” The U.S. seized money Malofeyev held in a Texas bank. This ought to be adjudicated by a tribunal of proper jurisdiction lest the U.S. be guilty of larceny. Just being an indicted rich Russian isn’t sufficient for such a taking. (It’s  sort of a variation on, IMO, unconstitutional but still allowed civil asset forfeiture.)

Executive Privilege for a Dem, but Not for Them

TRUMP ADVISOR PETER NAVARRO was convicted on Thursday by a D.C. jury in Federal District Court, after four hours of deliberations, for failing to comply with a subpoena from the Jan. 6th committee to testify and produce documents. Each of the misdemeanor counts carry up to a year in prison and a possible $100,000 fine. Navarro served as director of the Office of Trade and Manufacturing Policy, and briefly as the director of the National Trade Council.

When Navarro refused to testify, based on executive privilege his boss had invoked, he was held in contempt of Congress and the matter was referred to dirty cop, Merrick Garland, at the Department of Justice in June of 2022. This was shortly after another Trump advisor, Steve Bannon, was similarly charged, and later convicted in July of 2022. (Bannon has since appealed his conviction and has managed to stay out of jail and continue to produce his M-S video podcast on Rumble, War Room,” which covers all things MAGA, along with occasional diatribes on trans-humanism.) Never mind Dem A.G. Eric Holder, accused of the same thing, was never convicted…by his fellow Dems.

Navarro’s defense to the contempt charges was he had been personally directed by 45th President Donald Trump to not cooperate with the Committee due to executive privilege, a established principle of law that the executive branch cannot legally be forced to disclose their confidential communications when it would adversely affect the operations or procedures of the executive branch. Judge Amit P. Mehta, however, refused to allow Navarro to make that argument in court. 

For one thing, the judge wasn’t convinced Trump had invoked the privilege, but he was also clearly (and I believe incorrectly) construing Navarro’s failure to appear as a strict liability crime. He may be legally right, but technically wrong: after all, fundamental due process demands a defendant be allowed to assert the best defense he has. It may be a lousy one, but he should be able to raise it nonetheless. 

As for Trump’s invocation of privilege, that is a matter of fact for the jury, not the judge, to decide (not that a D.C. jury is likely to be at all unbiased, but I digress…). The judge seemed to want Trump to testify as to his privilege and his request that Navarro honor it, but to do so could theoretically put Trump in legal jeopardy too, while his testifying about it would, in and of itself, breach the very privilege sought to be protected. There is a circularity in logic there that is hard to legally reconcile. 

The Smoking Cluster Bomb Threatening Biden’s Regime

ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT were filed against the illegitimate occupant of the White House, Joey Biden, on Friday. They were filed by Rep. Greg Seube (R-Fla.) over Biden’s apparent involvement in his son, Hunter’s, corrupt business matters. The full impeachment resolution by Steube is here.

More specifically, Seube based the articles on four charges against Biden: abuse of power, obstruction of justice, fraud, and financial involvement in drugs and prostitution. The charges are based largely on evidence obtained by House Republicans in committee hearings. The body of evidence is, at this point, quite substantial and growing daily. 

Biden previously maintained he never spoke to his son about his foreign business, but the narrative has evolved over time, with another incarnation maintaining he was never directly involved with his son’s international business dealings. Then it was he never was in business with his son. The change in narrative was necessitated by Devon Archer’s disclosure to former Fox News host Tucker Carlson that he had received a personal letter from then-Vice President Joe Biden, who had hand-written, “P.S. Happy you guys are together,” at the end of the letter, referring to Hunter and Archer’s new business venture together. That letter was also noteworthy in its reference to Joe having been sorry to talk to Archer at a luncheon. Why would the then-Vice President of the United States be apologetic for missing one of his son’s business partners at lunch instead of ‘hosting’ President Hu of China?

Steube says he has the receipts for bribery, extortion, obstruction of justice, and financial involvement in drugs and prostitution. Some has been brought to light and more is forthcoming. His impeachment resolution can be read here.

Unfortunately, it likely will not ultimately matter because the Senate has no apparent interest in pursuing anything Biden. Mitch McConnell is downright recalcitrant, leading people to wonder why. The most obvious reason, comporting with the doctrine of Occam’s Razor, is that he, and others of his ilk, are also compromised and obviously do not want the rocks lifted to expose the worms underneath. For now, there wouldn’t appear to be proof of this—just speculation—but some of us also firmly believe

Brandon (as his collaborators in the destruction of the United States, Attorney General Merrick Garland and Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas) must be stopped from driving the trajectory of this country into further chaos, tyranny, and invasion. This republic is too important to be destroyed so systemically by these traitors.

Another I.R.S. Whistleblower Allegation of D.O.J. Malfeasance Emerges.

 AN  I.R.S. WHISTLEBLOWER has made a new claim that the Department of Justice has been interfering in the Hunter Biden probe for years. It has, this person says, displayed political bias in favor of the Bidens, and corruption by their interference in the probe. The story was released by Just The News. The I.R.S. agent who is the whistleblower made his/her claim in a letter to I.R.S. Commissioner Daniel Werfel on May 18th. The letter was made public on Monday in connection to a package of information sent to both Congress and the Office of Special Counsel. It can be viewed here.

The I.R.S. supervisory special agent had previously informed Congress the D.O.J. removed the entire team from the investigation into apparent tax-related crimes committed by Hunter Biden in an act of retaliation and political favoritism. The objective was to avoid any possible charges from ever being filed against Hunter. What better way to do that than to remove the team that has been uncovering esoteric financial information and evaluating it all, giving rise to a deep body of institutional knowledge into what appears to be serious financial and tax crimes?

The whistleblower also alleges that the Biden-appointed officials in the D.O.J. intentionally hampered efforts by Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss’s office to properly investigate Hunter. For example, the D.O.J. refused permission for Weiss to continue his investigation in D.O.J. jurisdictions. (This also runs counter to Attorney General Merrick Garland’s sworn statement before Congress that the D.O.J. was not actively involved in the Hunter Biden investigations, meaning Garland may have committed perjury.)

The whistleblower told Commissioner Werfel:

“For the last couple years, my SSA and I have tried to gain the attention of our senior leadership about certain issues prevalent regarding the investigation. I have asked for countless meetings with our chief and deputy chief, often to be left out on an island and not heard from. The lack of IRS-CI senior leadership involvement is deeply troubling and unacceptable.”

Subsequently, the whistleblower was chided by a superior for breaking the chain of command by going to the Commissioner and “referred for investigation.” The whistleblower has filed a formal complaint to the Office of Special Counsel.