Affidavit is far too dangerous for the American public to see

But you can read “their” version in the New York Times

National Archives Insight
National Archives Insight

The Department of Justice, under Merrick Garland, is arguing this affidavit is far too dangerous for you the American public to even be able to see. Now it’s the affidavit under which we instituted an unprecedented raid of a former President of the United States (Donald Trump). It was a raid by men working for the current existing President of the United States (Joe Biden). The two men might be running against each other in 2024. They’ve already run against each other in 2020. But you, the American public this information is too sensitive for you to even be able to see. This is what Merrick Garland’s Department of Justice is arguing, but simultaneously they are leaking exactly what those documents are to the New York Times so that their base in left-wing media knows what is going on, while you the American public cannot be trusted to even know what the dangerous documents that Donald Trump allegedly took with him to Mar-a-Lago.

The New York Times is publishing, “the government has recovered more than 300 documents with classified markings since Mr Trump left office. That doesn’t mean that they are classified. A declassified document would also have classified markings; it would have both markings. I wouldn’t put it past them to word things in certain ways to exaggerate the danger. These could be declassified documents that previously had classified markings. If you don’t think the New York Times isn’t duplicitous to pull something like that, think again.

There are four different New York Times reporters listed as the authors of this piece and all of those authors have written extensively about the United States government’s decisions to investigate Donald Trump. Impeachment I, Impeachment 2, Russia collusion, and all the other frameups.

But we don’t know if 300 documents are true. We know it’s true if the Department of Justice wants it to be true. Because they are leaking like crazy, I guarantee that Donald Trump and his legal team read this article and got more information from this New York Times article than they have been able to get from many of the details surrounding the warrant.

National Archives are good for vague accusations without ever proving anything

The left controls the media, so they will let them run with it…

National Archives Insight
National Archives Insight

I’ll be happy to tell you what I believe is taking place. The Department of Justice is simultaneously placating all of their left-wing allies by leaking to the New York Times while telling you that you can’t be trusted to know what was inside of Mar-a-Lago. They haven’t even given Donald Trump an accurate accounting of what was taken from inside Mar-a-Lago so his legal advisors are not even aware of exactly what has been seized. I believe they won’t tell Mr Trump what documents were taken, because of course he would release that to the public and the public would quickly decide it’s just not that big a deal. It’s easier for Biden and Garland to use the media to cast about vague accusations without ever proving anything.

Perhaps everyone is missing the larger context under which this investigation is taking place; namely this is a pretty strong indication that Merrick Garland recognizes he has nothing on January 6th. I think the media, the Donald Trump hate apparatus while concentrating on the details of this story, they’ve missed a big detail here. Look how quickly the media, the politicians the socialists who are driven insane by Donald Trump, jump from crime to crime, grasping for straws. If Merrick Garland had any evidence that Mr Trump instigated or aided in any way the January 6th riots, this Mar-a-Lago thing would have never happened. Using the FBI in a heavy-handed raid could easily backfire (I believe it has backfired); Merrick Garland wouldn’t have pulled that “documents” trigger unless he was desperate.

Look how quickly they pivoted from January 6th

Trump must be innocent of sedition, insurrection, treason…

National Archives Insight
National Archives Insight

Look how quickly they pivoted from January 6th. The left has been saying January 6th will lead to sedition, insurrection, treason, and all of these different potential charges that they were going to levy against Donald Trump. Look at how quickly they pivoted. For months, all summer long, we heard that January 6th was the new event that was going to once-and-for-all grab Donald Trump by the balls, and it was going to end his political career; he was going to walk out in handcuffs. But look at what happened almost without nary a comment out there; they pivoted from January 6th to the FBI raid over confidential documents with very little bridge between the two. To me this is evidence that Merrick Garland is letting everyone know out there, “We don’t have him on January 6th there’s nothing that we can get him on January 6th.”

We don’t have him on January 6th, nor on anything in the Mueller report, impeachment one, impeachment two, all of the Russia collusion, everything that has been alleged about Donald Trump has now boiled down to this a few papers for an archivist’s vanity?

Think about it. From treason to “did he have documents that he wasn’t supposed to have” that were directly connected to his presidency and may have been packed up there and ended up in his basement in Mar-a-Lago as opposed to with the National Archives?

Isn’t the safest place in America for documents the National Archives?

How can, “where a document is stored” be the beginning of the end of the Republic?

National Archives Insight
National Archives Insight

Let’s think about this for a moment. If these documents are so incredibly dangerous, why do the National Archives need them? There isn’t anyone even at the archives who are qualified to say if the documents are classified or not. I mean why do I ever hear anyone saying, “Hey this is really a national secret; let’s store it in the National Archives? I mean isn’t the safest place in America for documents the National Archives?”

Have you ever been to the National Archives? It’s really not that big of a deal. I have a Ph.D. and I was doing some work there. I went and looked up records surrounding the Russian Revolution. Two weeks after the November Revolution, the U.S. Embassy received this letter, the first formal notification of the establishment of a new Soviet regime. It was a letter from Trotsky. You can go in. You can request documents; they’ll bring them out to you. I’ve been to the archives a few times; it’s not the place where you would want super secretive documents to be stored and I don’t hear anybody asking the question

If these documents are so incredibly top secret and classified why do we want a library, the National Archives, to have them? We’re not talking about these documents being seized and being brought under armed guards bringing them to the CIA or the FBI or someplace like that. No, we’re talking about the historical record being kept. That’s the only issue; so that these documents can be in possession of the National Archives; all the while they won’t be able to be reviewed for years by the general public. Yet they’re so important that the classification status makes them top secret and everybody is in danger now.

It wasn’t until 1979 that there were even any rules surrounding presidential records. Before that, it was very commonplace for presidents to keep all their papers so they could write books so they could tell the historical story of their time in office.

Think about how messed up this entire story is; the National Archives is arguing that they should be able to have possession of documents from Donald Trump’s presidency instead of Donald Trump. How will he write his history?  This seems like a very minor conflict and frankly why wouldn’t Trump have the right to keep letters that were written to him and why would the National Archives even have the right to have access to those in the first place, aside from a moronic law, the Presidential Records Act. We only have this law because we hated Nixon so bad that we decided to try to steal his papers from him. It seems now that we hate Trump so badly we sure as hell don’t want him writing books about his four years.

This National Archives dispute isn’t even serious

Everything they’ve thrown at Trump would be serious, if it were true

Joe Biden
National Archives Insight

To me, it’s not even a serious dispute. How in the world is this such a dispute that for the first time in over 200 years of American history we’re gonna have a sitting attorney general of the opposing political party sign a warrant to allow FBI agents to storm the gates of the top political rival? And this is over all the letters from the presidency that the National Archives selfishly think that they should have?

This is a ridiculous dispute that has been (for political reasons) escalated far beyond where it should have ever gone. Let me just take a moment to think about the Mueller report and the allegations against Donald Trump, even though we now know that they were not true. Let’s think about that idea that Russia colluded and caused the outcome of our election to be different; that’s a significant allegation. It’s not true but it’s an allegation that a sitting president is working in conjunction with a foreign government to overturn what was the will of the people. I mean to subvert that will and end up president the United States. Now that was a lie; it was all made-up. There was no basis to it but it was a significant allegation.

If I told you right now that China had been working in cahoots with Joe Biden to put him into a presidential office and subvert the entire will of the American electorate, that would be a significant claim deserving certainly of massive investigation. Now impeachment one over the Russia collusion that’s serious. And Ukraine and all that, the same. Impeachment two, over January 6th also a joke, but those were more significant. People went into the capital because they were unhappy with the outcome of the 2020 election and Trump allegedly encouraged them to go there. OK, it’s not true but it’s a significant accusation. The accusation that Trump had an inappropriate phone call with the Ukrainian prime minister and that he was asking him to do diligent research on his top political opponent Joe Biden all right; it’s not true. It’s illegitimate but it’s at least something to think about. But what we’re talking about here is whether the National Archives has a document letter or Donald Trump has a document. This is what was used to justify a federal raid on a former president’s home. This is not a significant dispute

To try to underhandedly use the laws of this nation to eliminate your political opposition is deplorable. This is impeachable this is a crime worthy of prosecution, but it ain’t Donald Trump who is impeachable or worthy of being charged with a crime. It’s Merrick Garland and I’m making the case against him.