Giuliani on Latest Developments and Legal Processes, Two Groups Have Distinct Approaches
There has been considerable debate and discussion about the next steps for President Trump in contesting the election outcome. According to media reporting on the discussions it appears the White House is listening to several opinions including a group containing Sidney Powell (outside campaign) and a group led by Rudy Giuliani (inside campaign).
Despite the common objective amid the two groups, there have been some stories written by media intended to diminish and/or marginalize the ongoing effort. In this interview with Rudy Giuliani, President Trump’s campaign lawyer outlines the formal approach underway by the inside campaign team. [The audio/visual isn’t great but it works]
In addition to the information provided by Giuliani, there are three distinct data-points that could align in favor of supporting President Trump’s ongoing effort:
- Acceptance by the Supreme Court of the request by the Trump campaign to hear arguments against the Pennsylvania election outcome.
- A pending DNI report by John Ratcliffe outlining foreign influence in the election.
- The outcome of the Georgia run-off election on January 5th.
If the Supreme Court agrees to hear the campaign case; and if the DNI report can show foreign interference connection to the election; and if the Georgia run-off holds momentum toward the GOP; then it is more likely a Senator will object on January 6th to the certification of the electors and request a roll-call vote in the House and Senate.
These three positive outcomes would align with congressional meetings reported today within the White House.
Everything above tracks with the known direction of the preferred “inside group”, and their advice toward President Trump.
However, the independent “outside group” containing: Attorney Sidney Powell, Attorney Lin Wood, Lt. General Michael Flynn, and now former CEO Patrick Byrne, appear to be advising for a more forceful approach with use of the 2018 executive order safeguarding against foreign interference in the election.
The narrative engineering media have accused the outside group of attempting to stimulate interest in use of the U.S. military via the Insurrection Act.
(Politico) […] But that hasn’t stopped the act from becoming a buzzword and cure-all for prominent MAGA figures like Sidney Powell and Lin Wood, two prominent pro-Trump attorneys leading efforts to overturn the 2020 election, and even one North Carolina state lawmaker. Others like Michael Flynn, Trump’s first national security adviser who was recently pardoned for lying to the FBI, have made adjacent calls for Trump to impose martial law.
The ideas have circulated in pro-Trump outlets and were being discussed over the weekend among the thousands of MAGA protesters who descended on state capitols and the Supreme Court to falsely claim Trump had won the election. (more)
In essence the DC media is attempting to isolate, ridicule and marginalize the entire effort of both groups by weaponizing a dictator Trump narrative open to use of the military via the Insurrection Act or Martial Law.
Into this fray any meeting with President Trump by the outside group is being weaponized by anti-Trump media. President Trump was pushing back against this narrative effort by media over the weekend:
It is important to remember the White House counsel would be providing legal advice from the position of “The Office of the Presidency.” The White House counsel’s job is to uphold the concentric circles of legal protection that surround President Trump or any U.S. President. There are some topics of conversation that White House counsel would not allow to take place inside the oval office.
The distinction between White House counsel (Pat Cipollone) and Trump Campaign counsel (Rudy Giuliani) is the former looks out for the “office” while the latter looks out for the political interests. The distinctions are narrow, but the distinctions are very real.
The difference between the two sets of advisors is a distinction the media enjoy exploiting to give the appearance of division. This creates friction and leads to turmoil. The DC media know this game well, and any time there is a republican president in office they use this marginalization and isolation narrative to stir up trouble.
As a direct outcome The New York Times published an article on Saturday morning attempting to create division and pushing a narrative intended to create trouble amid two aligned groups: Inside Campaign group and Outside Campaign group.
NEW YORK TIMES – President Trump on Friday discussed making Sidney Powell, who as a lawyer for his campaign team unleashed a series of conspiracy theories about a Venezuelan plot to rig voting machines in the United States, a special counsel investigating voter fraud, according to two people briefed on the discussion.
It was unclear if Mr. Trump will move ahead with such a plan.
Most of his advisers opposed the idea, two of the people briefed on the discussion said, including Rudolph W. Giuliani, the president’s personal lawyer, who in recent days sought to have the Department of Homeland Security join the campaign’s efforts to overturn Mr. Trump’s loss in the election. (more)
The larger goal by DC media is to isolate President Trump by fracturing his base of support. The outside group (Powell, Wood, Flynn, Byrne) are fighting a different type of confrontational battle, while the inside group (Giuliani, Ellis et al) are attempting to bridge their legal effort with congressional and political support.
[NOTE: White House counsel is between both groups protecting “The Office”]
Obviously the MAGA community supports both approaches. However, to no-one’s surprise the approach of the more confrontational outside group feeds a yearning for justice amid a 2020 election outcome that is filled with evidence of fraud and injustice.
Unfortunately, for whatever reason, one of the outside group, Patrick Byrne, went on Twitter on Sunday and kicked-up a hornets nest of division which plays directly into the hands of the DC media who thrive on the division narrative.
While Mr. Byrne may have the best intentions in mind, saying President Trump is “lied to” by his advisors is not the best approach. Byrne may believe the confrontational strategy of the outside group is a better plan, and he may forcefully advocate for that approach, but going public with the content of an oval office meeting is never a good idea.
The content or context of a meeting in the Oval Office should always be kept private, and outlining conflict for the purpose of position advocacy never ends well.
The public airing of internal debate (or conflict) only leads to the principle officer (President Trump) having to draw distinct lines amid participants. Internal conflict made public only fuels the division narrative.
If Patrick Byrne feels the president is not being served by his advisors, apparently he had four-and-a-half hours to make that exact point. There is no value in taking an antagonistic approach public, and again it only feeds division…. which is what the media are seeking to exploit.
The conflict narrative is worsened by Mr. Byrne going onto Newsmax [SEE HERE] and podcasts [SEE HERE] to keep pushing his message that President Trump is not being served…. Byrne also gave interviews to Epoch Times:
At a certain point enough purposeful animosity is simply enough. No doubt the most gleeful group watching Byrne at work are the same media who can take a backseat and appreciate the division of President Trump’s base of support.
There is a certain predictability to all of this:
- Wednesday Night – Michael Flynn recommended (Newsmax) impounding Dominion machines by order of President Trump; and noted military possibilities.
- Thursday – The DC media stirred up the controversy around the insurrection act by painting Trump supporters as unstable. Joint Chief’s General Milley said the military would not engage in any political effort.
- Friday – Sidney Powell and Patrick Byrne meet with President Trump in the Oval Office.
- Saturday – The New York Times framed the Powell/Byrne meeting as a radical effort to remain president.
- Saturday night – President Trump pushed-back against the Martial Law narrative.
- Sunday Patrick Byrne criticizes the White House advisory group, President Trump’s Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, and the office of White House counsel.
Notice the fuel for division is from the outside group. What happens next is predictable:
- Monday (tonight) sensing the president is being boxed into a division narrative; which ultimately weakens him and fractures the base of support; President Trump’s campaign lawyer Rudy Giuliani has no other option other than to push back against Sidney Powell and Patrick Byrne.
The bottom line is people within the MAGA community must resist the urge to fracture and divide based on differing opinion of approaches. Everyone wants the same goal and nerves are on edge among patriots who have poured their heart and soul into supporting President Trump amid the face of four years of overwhelming adversity.
President Trump loves this country and is not a quitter amid adversity. No-one loves this nation more than President Trump and his base of supporters. Everyone wants the best possible outcome.
Bottom line: Let Trump be Trump!
Breathe…
Post a Comment