Those who understand the construct of Lawfare understand the purposes and intents. Lawfare is an outcome of a radical activist pivot point that happened during the Obama administration.
Prior to the Obama-era the radicals tearing down government defended the transparently guilty, their allies and fellow traveling communists. Those who were arrested for violence the radicals supported, were defended, excused and their activity justified.
After the election of Obama, as noted first by author Jack Cashill, something changed; the radicals reversed their position. Instead of defending the transparently guilty, the Obama aligned usurpers -now with actual power at their fingertips- began accusing the transparently innocent.
In the “anger games” era of Barack Obama, the radicals began attacking the innocent and using their allies in media as part of the attack narrative. George Zimmerman, Darren Wilson, the Baltimore-six, etc. The list is long; we tracked them all with detailed research; however, the theme amid every story was the same. Isolate, ridicule and marginalize the transparently innocent target and make them appear guilty.
When you think about the construct during the 2016 election and the entirely fraudulent Trump-Russia collusion narrative, you see the same theme continued. Stand back and elevate yourself and you see this era of using completely false accusations transposed over the election. Essentially, accuse the target, Donald J Trump, of something he was transparently innocent of doing.
After they lost the 2016 election, the radicals did not stop. They continued constructing entirely false Lawfare stories with the intention to frame the transparently innocent. This approach had two benefits; (1) radical Lawfare maintained the attack position blocking any reversal of Obama policy, and (2) the Lawfare process covered up their unlawful activity.
Using Lawfare constructed by Main Justice and the FBI, the Crossfire Hurricane investigation became the special counsel Mueller investigation, which became impeachment investigations, which became the Durham investigation, which became the J6 investigation, which became the Jack Smith investigation. All of it was/is one long Lawfare operation.
In the classified documents case, Florida federal judge Aileen Cannon has noted the Lawfare construct of this fraudulent legal case. In practice “Lawfare” is about manipulating the narrative of a manufactured legal controversy or premise, and sometimes actual laws themselves, to change public opinion about the target of the Lawfare action. Judge Cannon clearly sees this playing out in the background of the case.
(Via NBC) – Judge Aileen Cannon has granted Donald Trump a delay in the classified documents trial by pushing back a court deadline in the case.
On Monday, Judge Cannon temporarily stayed a May 9 deadline for Trump and his two co-defendants in the federal case to submit court filings. It relates to Section 5(a) of the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA), which would disclose what sensitive materials Trump intends to use at the trial.
[…] Cannon submitted court filings on Monday “temporarily staying” the CIPA request regarding what classified materials the defendants intend to use in the trial and what expert witnesses Trump’s legal team intends to call at the trial in Florida.
Cannon did not offer any explanation as to why the May 9 CIPA deadline has been indefinitely postponed, only stating that an “order setting second set of pretrial deadlines/hearings to follow.” (read more)
NBC may pretend not to know why Judge Cannon has changed the hearing date and purpose; however, CTH, you and journalist Julie Kelly can clearly see why Cannon is slowing down the process simultaneous to her putting increased sunlight on the case.
Recently, the special counsel was forced to admit they staged the pictures they gave to the media during the raid on Mar-a-Lago. Again, the purpose of Lawfare is to create the optics of unlawful action to manipulate public opinion; therein, lies the motive for “staging” images under false pretenses.
[VIA Julie Kelly] […] Jay Bratt, who was the lead DOJ prosecutor on the investigation at the time and now is assigned to Smith’s team, described the photo this way in his August 30, 2022 response to Trump’s special master lawsuit:
“[Thirteen] boxes or containers contained documents with classification markings, and in all, over one hundred unique documents with classification markings…were seized. Certain of the documents had colored cover sheets indicating their classification status. (Emphasis added.) See, e.g., Attachment F (redacted FBI photograph of certain documents and classified cover sheets recovered from a container in the ‘45 office’).”
The DOJ’s clever wordsmithing, however, did not accurately describe the origin of the cover sheets. In what must be considered not only an act of doctoring evidence but willfully misleading the American people into believing the former president is a criminal and threat to national security, agents involved in the raid attached the cover sheets to at least seven files to stage the photo.
Classified cover sheets were not “recovered” in the container, contrary to Bratt’s declaration to the court. In fact, after being busted recently by defense attorneys for mishandling evidence in the case, Bratt had to fess up about how the cover sheets actually ended up on the documents.
Here is Bratt’s new version of the story, where he finally admits a critical detail that he failed to disclose in his August 2022 filing:
“[If] the investigative team found a document with classification markings, it removed the document, segregated it, and replaced it with a placeholder sheet. The investigative team used classified cover sheets for that purpose.”
But before the official cover sheets were used as placeholder, agents apparently used them as props. FBI agents took it upon themselves to paperclip the sheets to documents—something evident given the uniform nature of how each cover sheet is clipped to each file in the photo—laid them on the floor, and snapped a picture for political posterity. (more)
While it is always best to prepare for the worst while hoping for the best, there are a lot of reasons to be optimistic that Judge Cannon will eventually dismiss this ridiculous Lawfare case. If she does not dismiss the case, one of the reasons she may elect to keep the case going is simply to allow more sunlight on how the case was constructed.
The use of Lawfare requires lies, manipulation, dishonesty, deceit and a lying press. Once you put honest sunlight on a Lawfare operation, the fraud starts to collapse….. Just ask George Zimmerman, Darren Wilson and the Baltimore Six.
