Some Thoughts On The Current Indictment

I’m a Cold War kid. I grew up reading spy novels from Frederick Forsyth, Leon Uris, John LeCarre, and books like The Spike by Arnaud de Borchgrave and Robert Moss. My father was the NASA representative to Europe, so, a lot of the novels had scenes that passed through Paris near where we lived. If I make mention of my formative years, keep that in mind. The Spike especially taught me about the games the CIA and the KGB were playing with the media to try to get favorable coverage for their own side. Both sides sought to exploit the media for their gain. As a result, both sides used some of the same techniques. It’s not necessarily the technique or technology that makes one side bad and the other not. It’s the end purpose.

In one of those long forgotten spy novels or perhaps movies, I remember the protagonist asking the antagonist something along the lines of, “How long does it take of you imitating the same techniques as your rivals in the KGB before you become just like them?” I’ve long since forgotten what the response was from the CIA Case Officer. However, I mulled that question over in my mind. If two men are fighting and one man decides to fight dirty by poking the other in the eyes, that does not mean that what he is fighting for is wrong. If the Nazis advanced the development of jet aircraft, that does not make jet aircraft bad. Clearly, it’s not the technique that is bad, but what the technique is being used to fight for.

I felt pretty smug in my answer to the question for a long time, but now, I’m not so sure. Life is complex and a solution or a truth at one time does not mean it is universally true for forever.

In the wake of World War II, the United States cynically took advantage of former Nazi scientists like Werner Von Braun to advance missile and rocket technology (Operation Paperclip). Our government used former German generals for intelligence on what fighting in Russia was like. We took notes from the sadistic Nazi experiments on humans to see if we could use anything from them and we did find uses.

I remember the Morton Downey Jr show from back in the 80s. I rarely watched the show itself because I instinctively could not stand the host. However, I do remember an interview with Downey in which he claimed he was taught his interviewing technique from an FBI Special Agent who told Downey it was a technique the FBI got from the Gestapo. It involved talking slowly and rationally at the beginning and then turning up the pressure till the interrogator is screaming. Then, the interrogator pretends to have gone too far, calms back down and resumes the process of gradually ramping the conversation up into screaming again. If we were willing to use Gestapo interrogation techniques (leaving out the violent parts) is it not reasonable to believe our intelligence agencies were willing to use Nazi propaganda techniques too?

So, we are back to Joseph Goebbels, the master propagandist. As I illustrated in a previous article, one of the techniques the Nazis used was to throw out lie upon lie about their opponents. The moment one attack was being responded to another attack was already on its way. This happened over and over again. Supposedly, Goebbels said that even if a person is able to disprove all the stories being told about them, the general public will still start to believe there is something wrong with him. Otherwise, why were there so many stories about him?

We see this now with the RussiaGate or Russian Collusion Delusion hoax, the myth of a “Pee Tape” involving Trump. When Trump said they were spying on him, it turned out to be true. The claim by Senator Dick Durbin that Trump called certain countries “shit holes” was disputed immediately by Senator Tom Cotton and Senator David Perdue who were also at the meeting. The faux outrage never happened when Obama referred to Libya as a “shit show”. Sort of like the “Kids in Cages” propaganda, when Obama was doing it, the media never said a word. Never mind that Dick Durbin has a history of lying himself. Durbin claimed that a Republican senator said to Obama that he couldn’t stand to look at him (Obama), but that claim turned out to be utterly false. The Atlantic magazine (a large portion of which is owned by Steve Jobs’ widow Laurene Powell Jobs) claimed that Trump called American soldiers “losers” and “suckers”. However, there were 21 on the record denials that this actually happened including from Generals who were actually at the meeting.

Tucker Carlson showed how the January 6 videos were manipulated to show the defendants in the worst possible light. They too were tried in the media. Of course, the media had to go on the offensive and try to shut Carlson up. We can’t have the American public seeing all the videos and thinking for themselves.

The attacks against Trump are obviously not just happening in the media, it is also the court cases against him, lawfare. Here are 23 lawsuits that are attacking Trump. If you don’t believe this is a propaganda technique aimed at discrediting Trump in the eyes of the American public, then you are naive.

Take this case in New York City where a jury found that there wasn’t enough evidence to show that Trump had raped E. Jean Carroll, yet, found him libel for denying he raped her. Explain that logic. Anyone trying to defend themselves from a false charge can now be found libel for protesting their innocence. This is the woman who named her cat “Vagina” and said that most people think that “rape is sexy.” This woman could only have won her case in a far leftist jurisdiction where the Democrats far, far outnumber Republicans.

One thing that the Uniparty may have miscalculated is the appearance of Trump becoming a martyr in the eyes of much of the American public. Americans in general love an underdog. Trump might be a narcissistic blowhard, but he was also doing what a lot of Americans wanted; not starting any new wars, getting cheap gas, securing the border (although, it did take him awhile to get it and he never started enough deportations), calling out China for unfair trade practices, etc… If Nelson Mandela had never gone to prison, would he have ever become a world statesman? Eugene Debs was the socialist candidate for president and he ran from prison once. Adolf Hitler was not harmed by his stint in prison, was he? History is full of stories about people who set out to have one outcome and inadvertently made the exact opposite come about.

Remember my rule that for the shallow strong=bad and weak=good that I illustrated in a previous article. All of the media lies and lawsuits can only work for so long. As the lies that we’re told are being replaced by new lies, some (not all by any means) of the American public are catching on. What will the mainstream media do when all of their credibility is shot? Our elites are desperate people scared of going to jail and of losing their fortunes. They will do almost anything to keep the reins of power in their hands.

We all know that this will not be the last of the Trump indictments. Trump actually stands a decent chance of winning his case in Florida. It’s as much about smearing him as winning the court case. However, whether or not he is acquitted in that clear double standard of justice (Biden and Pence have been found to have had classified documents in their possession), Trump will have many more indictments and lies told about him. The lies will not stop.

https://sharylattkisson.com/2023/06/50-media-mistakes-in-the-trump-era-the-definitive-list/

================================

P.S. I suppose it’s normal for a lot of authors to write a piece and then forget to add something important and I’m no different.

Fox host Mark Levin made the point that you have to look at what the law intended to do in the first place. The whole reason for things like the Espionage Act is to keep secrets from our enemies. Is Trump accused or even suspected of selling our secrets to say China? No, of course not. In fact, the idea itself is ludicrous. For those reasons alone, this case should be dismissed.

However, when they tried to impeach Trump the first time over a phone call asking Ukraine to investigate Biden, it turned out that Trump’s request was well founded. We are seeing that now with the Republican inquest into the thoroughly corrupt Biden family. The very same day that congressional Republicans finally get a hold on bribery documents about the Biden family that the FBI was clearly trying to hide. Maybe, that impeachment was to thwart looking into the Biden’s in the first place. The best defense is a good offense and Hillary took advantage of that when manufacturing the Russia Collusion Delusion. (See Durham Report).

Likewise, now, they claim to have a smoking gun in the form of a recording in which Trump said that the supposed Top Secret document shows that General Milley was pushing for war in Iran, and that it was he, Trump, who was trying to stop him, not the other way around. Here’s the New Yorker article. Perhaps, part of the reason for the entire attack on Trump is to try to prevent this document from exonerating Trump and showing that it was the Pentagon pushing for war with Iran, and not President Trump. Remember President Eisenhower’s warning about the Military Industrial Complex?

This is the same General Milley who openly admitted that he told the Chinese that he would warn them in advance if we were about to attack them. How is that not treason?

Above is from the indictment itself. However, this is the prosecutor’s case. What is he leaving out? CNN claims to have the full transcript. Trump was disputing General Milley’s account by saying that Milley was the one who wanted war and this classified document proves it.

At the time, Mr Trump was complaining about Gen Milley. The meeting took place not long after a story published by The New Yorker outlined how Gen Milley told the Joint Chiefs during the last days of Mr Trump’s time in office to make sure that the then-president not give any illegal orders and that Gen Milley should be made aware if there were any concerns.

“Well, with Milley – uh, let me see that, I’ll show you an example. He said that I wanted to attack Iran. Isn’t that amazing? I have a big pile of papers, this thing just came up. Look. This was him,” Mr Trump said, the transcript shows. “They presented me this – this is off the record, but – they presented me this. This was him. This was the Defense Department and him. We looked at some. This was him. This wasn’t done by me, this was him.”

“All sorts of stuff – pages long, look. Wait a minute, let’s see here. I just found, isn’t that amazing? This totally wins my case, you know. Except it is like, highly confidential. Secret. This is secret information. Look, look at this,” Mr Trump added.

Above is the discussion concerning war with Iran (kind of a big deal, bigger than some silly document in Mar-A-Lago), and Trump saying this classified document exonerates him and, instead, incriminates Milley. Isn’t that a much, much bigger deal and one that the Pentagon might have an incentive to squash?