We hear a lot about the loss of “institutional legitimacy” these days. One of the great ironies attendant on that loss is a revolution in sentiment among many—but by no means all—people who think of themselves as conservative. Hitherto, such people would have been staunch supporters of those institutions that, traditionally, had represented the rule of law, the continuity of our culture, etc. Nowadays, they look with a jaundiced eye upon once-respected institutions like the Department of Justice, the FBI, the CIA, and the rest of the national security/surveillance apparat.
How could it be otherwise? Recent revelations that scores if not hundreds of figures from that world had insinuated themselves into media, social and otherwise, to push a partisan agenda must give us pause. The stories are legion. Here’s one that just appeared in The Federalist by Margot Cleveland.
The month before Joe Biden’s inauguration, FBI sources collaborated with the New York Times’ Russia-collusion hoaxer Adam Goldman to falsely portray the investigation into Hunter Biden as a big ole nothingburger. Americans just didn’t know it at the time. However, revisiting Goldman’s article now, in light of recent whistleblower revelations and statements by former Attorney General William Barr, reveals this reality—and more.
That’s bad, right? The FBI fed faked news to our former “newspaper of record” about a partisan matter that might well have determined the outcome of a presidential election. And the response? A little feckless hand-wringing on the Right. Some clucking tongues. At the end of the day, though, expect crickets.
In one of the very best pieces I have seen about the Horrors!-Trump-had-classified-documents-at-Mar-a-Lago indictment, also published at The Federalist, former Assistant U.S. Attorney Will Scharf minutes several disturbing features of that 37-count farce. Much of what he has to say is broadly exculpatory of Trump, but one of the most disturbing items concerns the 38th item in Special Counsel Jack Smith’s partisan cudgel: the indictment of Trump’s aide Walt Nauta.
Why was Nauta indicted? Smith alleges he was guilty of “conspiracy to obstruct justice.” What he is being punished for, however, is refusing to betray his employer, Donald Trump. “Just turn state’s evidence on the bad orange man and we’ll let you go.” That, more or less, is what the Feds said.
They came down heavy on Nauta’s lawyer, Stanley Woodward, too. As Scharf explains, Woodward alleged in a court filing that
during a meeting with prosecutors about his client’s case, the head of the Counterintelligence Section of DOJ’s National Security Division Jay Bratt ‘suggested Woodward’s judicial application [for a DC Superior Court judgeship] might be considered more favorably if he and his client cooperated against Trump.’
Got that? It might have been an out-take from “The Godfather.” But no, it is business as usual in the Department of Justice circa 2023. Of course, we do not yet know that the allegation is true. If it is, Scharf’s description of it as “truly wild misconduct” is an understatement. I think it is very likely true.
As Scharf notes, “Woodward is a highly accomplished lawyer. He spent a decade at Akin Gump, a top law firm, clerked on the D.C. Circuit, and has very substantial experience in government investigations. This is not some fly-by-night TV lawyer. He is a legal heavyweight, and he is leveling an extremely serious allegation of misconduct against a senior official at DOJ.”
Let’s say his accusation turns out to be true. What then? If past performance is any guide, the erring prosecutor might or might not get a slap on the wrist and the whole thing will be buried. Maybe he will go on to a lucrative TV posting, à la Andrew McCabe or Peter Strzok. Maybe he’ll be shuffled to another department. Don’t expect any real consequences.
Such cases, and they are legion, bring me back to that irony I mentioned at the outset of this column. The world seems increasingly divided between those who continue to have confidence in our institutions and those who, finding them bankrupt, have withdrawn their support.
This dividing line shows up in many different ways. One prominent fissure shows itself in the commentary on Jack Smith’s indictment. On one side, there are commentators—including such eminences as former Attorney General William Barr—who tell us that Trump’s holding on to those documents at Mar-a-Lago was heinous. On the other side are those (like me) who think it was no big deal.
There has been a lot of talk about how he had “the nation’s most sensitive secrets” strewn about a closet or lining a bathroom. But nothing I’ve seen—certainly nothing in Smith’s indictment—rings any alarm bells to me. Joe Biden had hundreds of boxes of classified documents strewn about his garage and elsewhere in his house. He took those documents when he was a senator or vice president. Before, that is, he was president with the plenary power to declassify anything he wished and take home or on holiday anything he wished.
There has been a lot of talk about how the United States is more and more subject to a “two-tier” system of justice, which is to say a system of injustice. It pains me to acknowledge it, but it is true. Henry VIII had his Star Chamber, a similarly unjust form of meting out justice. Through it he got rid of the people who stood in his way or did not do what he wanted them to.
The functionaries and factota of the administrative state are busy trying to do to Donald Trump what Henry did to his enemies. They might just be able to peck him to death, or to jail. It won’t be a victory for the rule of law. But it will surely increase the rancor and divisions that are tearing apart the governing consensus that once ruled in this country.
The absurdity of the indictment is that Smith must argue that the documentary material containing national defense information seized from Mar-A-Lago are not presidential records. If that be true, then NARA had no authority to receive them in the first place. Conceptually, the theory of this case is the same as C.J. Roberts’ reasoning for upholding the penalty provision of Obamacare as a tax even though the statute said it was a penalty. The one benefit of this case is that it has exposed many self-described “principled conservatives” who have abandoned the basic principles of US criminal justice in order to “get Trump.”
A lot of people never imagined that the corruption seen in other 3rd world banana republics would be staring at them in America where the Magna Carta and British law finally reached a zenith in 1787 & 1789 by ratifying a Constitution, assisted by ten Amendments, to secure individual liberty for the masses, and additionally, putting a chain around the three branches of the new government. Fast forward to 2023.
As long as the supply chain remains intact and people have credit cards to keep them treading water they are not about to risk what they see happening to the J6 first wave of assembly to make their concerns known. This just does not yet seem like 1776. They will put off the risk associated with assembly and dissent until they they have no choice but to tolerate the consequences.
The regime needs a population that, although wary, is not about to give them trouble before the next stunt is pulled to coalesce and solidify power. Donald Trump, Tucker Carlson, Newsmax and internet alternative opinion pieces, such as American Greatness, American Thinker and many others provide the nervous and frightened, the inquisitive and the patriotic, the info, associated with discussions, which the Regime will not speak about and it is on such sites that concern and dissent can be seen and frequently commented upon.
The Rule of Law has been morphed by so many woke interpretations that the likelihood of recognizing it is far more likely to come from middle class Americans managing their families and jobs, independent from government association and/or influence, than those subject to academia, social media and the MSM. They are more like the child who correctly described the Emperor’s new clothes.
Because many of the experts have expounded so much which is clearly untrue it is becoming impossible to tolerate their sophistry any longer. As an example anyone interested in reading some of the compilations of ridiculous Trump hit pieces that makes MSNBC personalities, such as Morning Joe, seem brilliant, by comparison, should wander over to the National Review website and read a few articles, and also view the comments, by many who were once respected thinkers and writers. Some, such as Andy McCarthy, have become infected with the TDS virus and despite the fact that they do their best to sound intelligent and informative they are gradually making conservatives wonder about any past credibility they once enjoyed.
America is under attack. Founding principles, core values and the Constitution are under siege. Americans are one election away from making a difference and yet it is only Donald Trump who calls out the enemy correctly which most average Americans, and even the other presidential candidates, fail to adequately characterize and denounce. The enemy is vicious and demonic. Trump has made his platform far more than about Making America Great Again. He has made it about retribution and restoring the Rule of Law.
This is the final opportunity where the slim chance of voting our way out from under dictatorial tyranny is possible. You can be certain the powerful in control will use every illegal means they can to prevent that from happening.
The one benefit of this case is that it has exposed many self-described “principled conservatives” who have abandoned the basic principles of US criminal justice in order to “get Trump.” Exactly!