Latest News

June 10, 2023


Perhaps you heard Friday that two of Trump’s personal attorneys working on the Mar-A-Lago documents case were suddenly off that case, with the assumption in the media being that they’d quit in frustration or been fired by Trump.  That is not what happened.

The attorneys, Jim Trusty (you’ve seen him on FOX NEWS) and John Rowley, did NOT resign, according to reliable source Sundance at CONSERVATIVE TREEHOUSE.  These are the two attorneys who had been forced by Special Counsel Jack Smith to testify before the grand jury --- violating attorney-client privilege, but who cares, right? --- and after their forced testimony was used in the indictment, they had no choice but to resign from the case.  “Despite the lawyers providing no damaging information against Trump,” Sundance wrote, “the DOJ used language in the indictment to turn Trump’s lawyers into material witnesses.”

So not only has the DOJ contorted the Presidential Records Act (with Biden’s okay) to criminally target a political enemy, they’ve also fixed it so he has to say goodbye to his legal counsel.  Pretty slick, huh?  If these federal attorneys don’t watch out, they’re going to sully the image of the legal profession.    

Oh, and there’s more sullying.  Since these lawyers were well aware that the President had full declassification authority --- just as Trump has insisted all along --- rendering the “classified documents” charge bogus, the case is no longer about that.  Instead of talking about classified material, the charging document specifies the more subjective category of “documents vital to U.S. defense security.”  Smith didn’t say anything about classified documents in his remarks, either.  As Sundance says, “The classification status is moot, nonexistent, except to create the predicate for the proverbial FBI nose under the tent.”

How it worked:  Lisa Monaco, the Obama attorney who’s second-in-command at the DOJ and probably running this whole scheme, got a warrant to look for classified documents, but because of Trump’s declassification authority, she never even intended to use them as a cornerstone for the case.  They used a fraudulent premise to get permission to do the search, and then made the indictment fit what they found.  It’s getting harder and harder to find family-suitable names to call these horrid people.

With the firehose of indictment news that’s been spewing forth, one of the best take-aways is from Kimberly Strassel at THE WALL STREET JOURNAL.  Here’s the full quote from FOX NEWS “Special Report” last night…

“This [the fact that he’s the GOP presidential front-runner] is really the most concerning aspect of this, in that we now have a Democratic President and a Democratic attorney general, who have brought an indictment against the former Republican President who’s the leading contender to be Joe Biden’s opponent this fall.  This is the kind of thing that we would laugh at if it were coming from another country.

“And that in my mind is the biggest question...we’re now meditating on the contents of this particular indictment.  But the question for me is, why did we have to get here in the first place, knowing the stakes and the potential turmoil of this?  The Department of Justice had all manner of tools at its disposal to deal with this in a different way.  It could have requested to go and search Mar-A-Lago and see if there had been anything left behind.  There could’ve been civil charges that were brought.  Jack Smith, rather than issuing an indictment, could’ve put out a report, and maybe detailed some pretty unpleasant behavior, but let the American people decide.  And instead...this case is unknown territory because of the Presidential Records Act.  I just would like to think that if we’re gonna go down this road, that they would do so only with the most rock-solid of cases, not something that’s uncharted territory.”

Amen to that.  But Strassel could easily have answered her own question about why it had to go down this particular way.  The DOJ’s goal was NOT simply to handle the dispute with the National Archives.  The goal --- the obsession --- was to finish off Trump once and for all so he couldn’t be on the ballot next year, even to throw him in prison for the rest of his life just to make doubly sure.  A stake through the heart, so to speak.  And after years of trying, this is the best they could come up with.  They simply used what they had to go after him with, “unchartered territory” or not.  In that sense, it sounds a lot like what DA Bragg did to him in Manhattan.

Another thing the DOJ didn’t care about was the inappropriateness of the Mar-A-Lago raid.  A senior FBI official-turned-whistleblower, Steven D’Antuono,  told Congress four ways in which the raid violated standard protocols.  These are outlined in a letter sent Friday by Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, to AG Garland, concerning “additional information recently obtained by the Committee about the execution of a search warrant on President Trump’s residence.”  What they learned, he said, “only reinforces our grave concerns that your reported actions are nothing more than a politically motivated prosecution.”  Screenshots of the letter are reproduced here.  Highly recommended reading...

The EPOCH TIMES had a story on this by Mark Tapscott, shared by REDWAVE…

Here’s a quick summary of the four points:

1.  The search wasn’t conducted by the Miami Field Office, but was usurped by the DC Field Office.

2.  The Department didn’t assign a U.S. attorney to investigate this case, as would be customary.

3.  They “assertively pushed” for a warrant instead of trying to get the owner’s permission.

4.  The FBI refused to allow President Trump’s attorneys to be present before conducting the search. (As memory serves, the attorneys who arrived were made to wait at the end of the long driveway.  In the August heat.)

Read the full letter to see the list of materials Jordan is calling for the DOJ to produce; it covers virtually all communications and documents related to the Mar-A-Lago raid.  Merrick Garland has till 5 PM on June 16 to turn them over, at which time he will...just continue to ignore it, I’m guessing.

Legal professor Jonathan Turley, speaking with Harris Faulkner on Friday’s FOX NEWS TONIGHT, brought up an interesting scenario.  He said the biggest problem for the special counsel is “not Trump, it’s time.”  Smith needs to have the trial over before the election.  It’s in the prosecution’s interest to have a speedy trial, because if Trump becomes President before there’s a verdict, he can pardon himself.  (Yes, apparently the President can do that, although without support from the House, he surely would be impeached afterwards.)  Even if Trump doesn’t get across that finish line himself, some other GOP candidates are already saying they would pardon him if they’re elected.  Vivek Ramaswamy has been clear that he would.

Turley said that according to the Sixth Amendment and federal statutes, the trial is supposed to be speedy “unless there’s a waiver” by the defense.  (Tell that to the political prisoners held for many months without bail after January 6.  I digress.)  The idea is also supposed to be --- in theory, ha --- to avoid having a case interfere with an election.  But that consideration seems ridiculous in this case, because we all know that’s the reason it even exists --- to interfere with an election.  As Turley put it, “This case is going to be one of the issues IN the election.”

Finally, you’ve heard about the audio-only recording that purportedly shows Trump, as former President, waving around documents that he knows are still classified.  BREITBART NEWS offers some extremely good context for what this was.  It had to do with Gen. Mark Milley and HIS --- not Trump’s --- lunatic plan to invade Iraq.  The documents Trump seems to have been talking about would supposedly disprove the narrative, furthered by Milley, that Trump was the one who wanted to invade Iraq.

CNN’s sources had pointed out to them the sound of rustling papers, assuming this is proof that Trump was showing people the classified paper.  On the contrary, it’s no proof of anything.  But we want to know who leaked that recording --- evidence in the case --- to CNN?  It has to be the prosecutors.  Get ready to polish up that Emmy Award, CNN.


RELATED READING:  Legal analyst Margot Cleveland already has another column, written shortly before the charges in the indictment were revealed.  The FBI, she says, has gone beyond unequal treatment under the law and, with the help of the corrupt media, “is using its power to decide our elections and the destiny of our republic.”


Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!

Comments 1-7 of 7

  • Ralph O. Haynes

    06/12/2023 08:40 AM

    At what point are saner people going to step up within our government and say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. This administration, along with the Entire Obama administration has been trying to get rid of President Trump with lies, rumors and innuendo for 7 years now. WE, THE PEOPLE have to begin a letter writing campaign and high lawyers need to file legal paperwork against these actions. IT CAN BE DONE.

  • Charlotte Kingsdale

    06/11/2023 11:58 AM

    Governor, I only comment on the merits of the indictment Cases 1-31 [1] and ask you this question:

    Did President Trump had “unauthorized possession of, access to, and control over documents” named in counts 1-31 and are these documents “related to national defense”? (pp 28-33 of indictment)

    To simply dodge EO 13,526 [2] as law in effect (pp 5-9 of indictment) as ALL your quoted "legal experts" do, will not be helpful to legally answer this question!

    [1] gov.uscourts.flsd.648653.3.0_2.pdf (
    [2] The President Executive Order 13526 | National Archives

  • Paul Kern

    06/10/2023 05:42 PM

    Like I always knew. All that has occurred has been an attempt to take down Trump believing it would take down MAGA and America First. Only those on the left and RINOs living in their bubbles believe the feds. All alphabet agencies need to be cleansed. As Stalin is reported to have said," Show me the man and I'm ll show you the crime" I see a Star Court he would like being created. I understand from the ACLJ that due to Constitutional constraints not likely for a trial before the presidential elections. The people controlling the President will work hard to find a work around. That pesky Constitution they say! Not surprised if China and the UN try to interfere. They hate all of us with a red-hot hatred. The enemy is physical and spiritual. We need God to raise up sons of Issachar!

  • Sandra walker

    06/10/2023 03:49 PM

    Governor Huckabee, Thank You for giving us the TRUTH!!! WHY are they able to do this to Trump… isn’t there anything we can do to stop this???

  • Leslie Dimmling

    06/10/2023 12:19 PM

    What has been happening to our country is beyond disturbing. But the ones I most blame are NOT those seeking power, distorting truth, and cheating however they can. This is the sinful condition of mankind, and the motivation behind many who lack a moral compass. It cannot EVER be approved or supported but it can be understood, as greed and hate magnified. The ones I REALLY blame for the current state of affairs ( persecuting Trump, sexualizing children, etc) are those who VOTE for these bottom feeders and put them into a position to run OUR lives. I mean those who are knee jerk DEM voters, those who are seeking financial gain from a DEM win, and those so shallow that instead of voting on the reality of who made the country stronger, safer from it's enemies and better for it's people, they voted about personality and a dislike of "mean tweets". I hope you will all pay for your shallowness at some point. Your children stand to inherit a nation which will more resemble Nazi Germany than the US of 1776. That is indeed a great pity, unless many people change course NOW.

  • Carol A Herrera

    06/10/2023 12:04 PM

    Just have a question. I noticed I can no longer share any of your news on Facebook. Any reason why that is no longer available?
    Always appreciate the information which you provide.


  • Peter L. Hadley

    06/10/2023 11:28 AM

    Since Mr. Democrat Alan D. is so well versed on the Constitution and the Law - what are his thoughts about a Supreme Court Judge getting involved to put a stop to This Unconstitutional Crime of the New York City charges against Trump and Garland and this latest Crime against LAW & ORDER?