Join the fight and contribute to our war chest

Ditch the ads for $5 per month or $49 per year

The deep state is finding itself in a bind. Their sham cases against President Trump are hitting snags and unraveling fast. The latest to crumble is the saga of the classified documents—a case that’s just dripping with political irony, especially when you consider Joe Biden’s mishandling of classified documents, which ended up in his dusty, unsecured garage and even in the hands of his ghostwriter, who then attempted to “destroy evidence.” Yet Joe won’t face charges; apparently, his memory’s too shot for him to stand trial. Then there’s Hillary Clinton, who famously used BleachBit on her computer to erase data while under subpoena in her own classified documents ordeal. She walked away scot-free, while President Trump is staring down the barrel of some 40-odd charges.

RELATED: My Corvette go BRRRRR: Special Counsel Hur shocks America during House testimony on Biden’s classified docs interview…

Is there a silver lining here? There’s a strong chance this case might get dismissed. That’s the take from investigative journalist Julie Kelly after she attended the latest court hearing in this slow-motion, unraveling dramatic political hit job.

Here’s what Julie had to say on X about the new shift in the sham classified documents case against President Trump:

NEW: From FLA courthouse in Trump’s classified documents case with a prediction.

Robert Hur report and testimony is the biggest elephant in the room. The term “arbitrary enforcement” used frequently by both the defense and Judge Aileen Cannon.

Cannon hammered the fact no former president or vice president has been charged under Espionage Act for taking and keeping classified records including national defense information–which represents 32 counts against Trump in Jack Smith’s indictment.

Prediction: Cannon won’t dismiss the case based on the motions debated today–vagueness of Espionage Act and protection under the Presidential Records Act.

But it’s very likely she will dismiss the case based on selective prosecution, a motion still pending before her.

Cannon pressed both defense and Special Counsel to explain when the “crime” of willful retention of national defense information begins–she noted the date in Jack Smith’s indictment as to when Trump first violated the Espionage Act. January 20, 2021, the day he left office

Jay Bratt, representing special counsel office, confirmed the “crime” began that day because as a former president, he was entitled to retain the documents.

Cannon again asked for historical precedent as to when a former president or vice president faced charges for similar conduct. Bratt of course said there is none.

She added “vice president” on numerous occasions for a reason–Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and Mike Pence all skated on criminal charges. Trump is the only one who has not.

Cannon: “Arbitrary enforcement…is featuring in this case.”

Cannon also addressed the “foreseeability” as to Trump’s awareness he was committing a crime by keeping classified/national defense information.

“Given the constellation of what happened before”–meaning no criminal prosecution of former presidents including Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan and vice presidents–Cannon suggested Trump could have reasonably expected he was in the clear.

Also of interest: Jay Bratt claiming there is no official process for a president to obtain or keep a security clearance. His argument is Trump’s clearance automatically expired at the end of this term–which contradicts how former government officials maintained clearances long after their service ended. Trump’s elimination of John Brennan’s clearance was raised. But there is a problem. The Dept. of Energy, learning of Smith’s indictment against Trump in the summer of 2023, retroactively revoked Trump’s “Q” security clearance. Bratt says the government has emails and a draft memo to revoke Trump’s clearance. Cannon’s counterargument is–but if there is no formal process for authorizing or removing a president’s security clearance–why did DOE need to memorialize it post-indictment. Bratt didn’t really have an answer.

Julie added one additional thought after posting her report thread from the courthouse:

Without saying so directly, what Judge Cannon suggested is that any former president or vice president who took unauthorized records and failed to return them to the proper authority committed a crime the day he left office.

Also important to note that Judge Cannon, who is pretty measured in comparison to most judges, made these points in a rather heated fashion. She is very aware of the double standard at play in the non-prosecution of Joe Biden.

But there’s another new twist in this sham of a case, involving a valet who’s just gone public about working with the authorities. Up until now, his identity was under wraps, but with his coming out, he’s now open to scrutiny and investigation—something Smith probably hoped to dodge.


Aformer valet going public about his cooperation with authorities in Donald Trump classified documents case is a setback for prosecutors, a former federal prosecutor has said.

Neama Rahmani was reacting to Brian Butler’s decision to do a CNN interview about Trump’s alleged hiding of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida.

Butler described unknowingly loading boxes of documents onto Trump’s plane before the FBI raided Mar-a-Lago in search of presidential records.

Rahmani told Newsweek that it was a setback for special counsel Jack Smith, the chief prosecutor in the classified documents case. Until now, Smith had identified Butler only as “Trump Employee 5” in court documents so that Trump supporters would not uncover his identity.

Rahmani also said that Butler’s public statements may be an assistance to Trump’s lawyers.

“If you’re the prosecution, you generally don’t want cooperating witnesses to give statements before trial, because it gives the defense a preview of their testimony and they may say something inconsistent on the witness stand,” Rahmani said.

“But Smith can’t tell Butler not to talk to the defense or the media. Making a witness unavailable can be an ethics violation. All prosecutors can do is tell witnesses they don’t have to talk to anyone, but leave the decision to the witness,” he said.

But it’s not just this case that’s falling apart against President Trump. The Georgia case is also coming undone, courtesy of the massive scandal involving Big Fani and the simple truth that there was never any solid evidence against Trump to start with.

Here’s a closeup of the images:

Karma seems to be going to town on Fani and the whole Georgia “deep state” squad:

And don’t forget about Jack Smith’s big J6 case in D.C., teetering on the brink and unlikely to reach trial before the next election rolls around, all thanks to Trump’s smart move to bump it up to the Supreme Court. But wait, there’s more. As it turns out, the J6 Committee, with Liz Cheney at the helm, decided to sit on evidence showing that President Trump had actually tried to call in the National Guard. He wasn’t out to incite a “riot” or an “insurrection” at all.

The Federalist:

Former Rep. Liz Cheney’s January 6 Committee suppressed evidence that President Donald Trump pushed for 10,000 National Guard troops to protect the nation’s capital, a previously hidden transcript obtained by The Federalist shows.

Cheney and her committee falsely claimed they had “no evidence” to support Trump officials’ claims the White House had communicated its desire for 10,000 National Guard troops. In fact, an early transcribed interview conducted by the committee included precisely that evidence from a key source. The interview, which Cheney attended and personally participated in, was suppressed from public release until now.

Deputy Chief of Staff Anthony Ornato’s first transcribed interview with the committee was conducted on January 28, 2022. In it, he told Cheney and her investigators that he overheard White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows push Washington D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser to request as many National Guard troops as she needed to protect the city.

He also testified President Trump had suggested 10,000 would be needed to keep the peace at the public rallies and protests scheduled for January 6, 2021. Ornato also described White House frustration with Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller’s slow deployment of assistance on the afternoon of January 6, 2021.

Not only did the committee not accurately characterize the interview, they suppressed the transcript from public review. On top of that, committee allies began publishing critical stories and even conspiracy theories about Ornato ahead of follow-up interviews with him. Ornato was a career Secret Service official who had been detailed to the security position in the White House.

Cheney frequently points skeptics of her investigation to the Government Publishing Office website that posted, she said, “transcripts, documents, exhibits & our meticulously sourced 800+ page final report.” That website provides “supporting documents” to the claims made by Cheney and fellow anti-Trump enthusiasts.

Plus, another chunk of that sham case just crumbled, all thanks to a Secret Service agent who stepped up to set the record straight.

Greg Price:

BREAKING: The driver of the Beast on January 6 testified to the J6 committee that President Trump never physically assaulted secret service agents or lunged for the steering wheel when they refused to take him to the Capitol.

This was the chief claim that lying former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson made in her June 2022 testimony to the J6 Committee.

The transcript from the driver was also never released by the J6 Committee… It was only revealed today.

The deep state’s plans are coming undone, and that’s no shocker. When you base your entire game on lies and political takedowns, things are bound to collapse eventually. Here’s hoping we witness even more of their schemes falling apart real soon.