We need your help! Join our growing army and click here to subscribe to ad-free Revolver. Or give a one-time or recurring donation during this critical time.

Jack Smith appears to be in panic mode at the moment, deploying every tactic and all of his weaponry to confront the resilient Trump, who appears to be slipping from his grasp in the court of public opinion. However, Jack is well aware that he doesn’t require public support to undermine President Trump; all he needs is a strategically positioned Obama-appointed judge to aid in carrying out his agenda. Jack attempted to use one of the left’s most potent weapons against President Trump: “stochastic terror.” However, his plan backfired when appellate court judges shut him down and told him to put his “big boy” pants on.

Investigative reporter Julie Kelly shared the bombshell information in a thread on X. Here’s some of what she had to say:

Reading now DC appellate court ruling that mostly upholds gag order on Trump.

One thing is very clear: This panel strongly refuted the media’s description of the order as “narrow.”

“The district court’s order, however, sweeps in more protected speech than is necessary.”

On balance–while the Dem judges certainly take their shots at Trump–the decision is a defeat for Judge Chutkan and Jack Smith in particular.

As far as public statements re potential witnesses–Chutkan prohibited all comments on those individuals including former WH officials.

“The district court’s ban on speech that ‘targets’ witnesses and trial personnel reaches too far. The ordinary meaning of statements that ‘target’ a person is statements aimed at or directed toward a person or entity.”

This ruling narrows the scope to include statements “concerning their potential participation in the investigation or in this criminal proceeding.”

Noting that potential witnesses including individuals who speak critically of Trump (Bill Barr, Mark Milley, Mike Pence), the judges argue Trump has a right to fight back as long as it doesn’t pertain to the trial.

“Mr. Trump has a First Amendment interest in publicly debating those individuals’ commentaries in a way that is independent of and disassociated from any role they might have in the trial. Yet the Order would proscribe such speech because it would speak about someone who is a reasonably foreseeable witness, even if Mr. Trump’s speech would have nothing to do with their witness role or the possible content of any testimony.”
OMG LOL this is so embarrassing for Jack Smith.

Recall–Smith is the one who asked for a gag order prohibiting Trump from posting mean things about him.

3 Dem judges basically said: put your big boy pants on.

Image

Chutkan gag order above.

DC appellate court version below.

You can read the rest of Julie’s thread here.

We foresaw the weaponization of “stochastic terror” a year ago. Revolver published a compelling piece on the subject that is both informative and eye-opening.

Revolver:

Liberals and the left have been stealthily and subversively designing a justification for sweeping speech crackdowns for the past decade, under the label of “stochastic terrorism.”

[…]

Basically, “stochastic terrorism” is the idea that, when somebody on the right criticizes somebody, they aren’t really just making a political argument. Instead, they are trying to “stoke hatred” in the expectation that some random third party will be “radicalized” and then commit political violence on their behalf.

In the modern sense of the phrase, “stochastic terrorism” was first coined by a left-wing blogger in 2011, who used it to describe the nefarious terrorist activities of, er, Sean Hannity:

Stochastic terrorism is the use of mass communications to incite random actors to carry out violent or terrorist acts that are statistically predictable but individually unpredictable.  In short, remote-control murder by lone wolf.

This is what occurs when Bin Laden releases a video that stirs random extremists halfway around the globe to commit a bombing or shooting.

This is also the term for what Beck, O’Reilly, Hannity, and others do.
…

The stochastic terrorist is the person who is responsible for the incitement.  For example they go on radio or television and stir up hatred toward a particular person or group.

The random actor, or “lone wolf” as the term is used in law enforcement and intel, is the person who responds to the incitement by carrying out the violent or terrorist act against the target person or group.  For example they shoot someone or detonate a bomb.  While their action may have been statistically predictable (e.g. “given sufficient provocation, someone will probably do such-and-such”), the specific person and the specific act are not yet predictable.

But “stochastic terror” really took off as a favored term with the arrival of Donald Trump, and the concomitant conclusion on the left that America was becoming a fascist dystopian hate-hellscape.

We’ve loaded this article with valuable insights and essential information, so you can get a comprehensive understanding of this method of attack. After all, if you’re not aware of what you’re actually up against, how can you hope to win the war?

READ: Behold, the Regime Unveils Its New Catchphrase for All Political Dissent: “Stochastic Terrorism”

Revolver sees the writing on the wall when it comes to “stochastic terrorism.”

Unfortunately for President Trump and the American people, shenanigans like this will persist. Trump, along with any conservative, cannot expect a fair trial in liberal-run cities where “justice” has been discarded in favor of weaponized politics, similar to what we see in hellholes like North Korea.

SUPPORT REVOLVER — DONATE — SUBSCRIBE — NEWSFEED — GAB — GETTR — TRUTH SOCIAL — TWITTER