Tag Archive for: Legal Insurrection

Legal Insurrection Through Lawfare — Part Two

“Insurrection is an art, and like all arts has its own laws.” — Leon Trotsky

“‘Lawfare’ is a weapon designed to destroy the enemy by using, misusing, and abusing the legal system and the media in order to raise a public outcry against that enemy.” —   Professor Susan Tiefenbrun, Thomas Jefferson School of Law.

“Just the minute the FBI begins making recommendations on what should be done with its information, it becomes a Gestapo.” — J. Edgar Hoover

“The great intel institutions which were designed to protect us against the Marxist onslaught have, in the end, become the most subversive of America’s institutions.  Anyone today could look at the American intelligence community and guess it was an “organizational chart for the old KGB.”  — J. Michael Waller

“A nation can survive its fools, even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within…for the traitor appears not to be a traitor…he rots the soul of a nation…he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist.” — Marcus Tullius Cicero

“Cultural Marxism, critical theory, and the other excreta of the Comintern’s Frankfurt School have rotted American society from within.”  — J. Michael Waller


James Clapper, and then John Brennan, were the workhorses who culturally changed the Intelligence Community into politically correct “diversity and inclusion” via Obama’s 2011 Executive Order 13583.  The EO established government-wide initiatives.  It was a presidential decree to transform the culture of the entire federal bureaucracy through implementation of “critical theory.”  The Marxist cultural revolution of Antonio Gramsci and Herbert Marcuse was successfully installed.

Clapper’s Enterprise Strategy was just the intelligence community portion of Obama’s carefully planned White House initiative to inject critical race theory into the entire federal workforce and to use that workforce as an engine of societal change.

In Big Intel, Mike Waller tells us that few in our intelligence agencies dissented.

CIA operations officer, Scott Uehlinger, who resigned and went public in 2017, said, “The twin serpents of politicization and political correctness—a Soviet term by the way—walk hand in hand throughout the intelligence community, as well as every other government agency.”  He added, “The U.S. intelligence community is in the midst of a severe crisis.  It has been used, or perhaps allowed itself to be used, as a tool of political destruction, against some of the same U.S. citizens it was created to protect.”

When the Obama-era political abuses surfaced, Uehlinger said, “We are seeing the widespread abuse of intelligence by an incumbent administration to target political opposition.  Long a technique in the developing world—a tactic I often witnessed as a CIA station chief working abroad—the Third World has come to roost in the United States.”

Former FBI agent and whistleblower, Steve Friend, who was suspended indefinitely without pay, commented, “FBI requires two separate diversity trainings per year.  No instruction on due process or cruel and unusual punishment rights.”

The men and women employed in the 18 different intel agencies have reincarnated the Nazis of Nuremburg with their, “Just following orders.”

The Department of Justice is the most heavily politicized of the U.S. government.  In 2016, 91.6% gave to Democrats.  Homeland Security employees came in at 75% Democrat, and the Department of Education was as high as 96% Democrat. The National Education Association has never donated to a Republican presidential candidate.

All federal government departments have moved from very liberal to radical via the red diaper/red thread chain of the Obama administration hierarchy.

Critical theory and Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) remained practically undisturbed by Trump and then emerged revitalized on the first day of Biden’s administration.

Legal insurrection through lawfare is being planned via Professor Rosa Brooks at Georgetown University Law Center.  J. Michael Waller, author of Big Intel: How the CIA and FBI Went from Cold War Heroes to Deep State Villains, comments, “It’s a feeder school to the Justice Department, to Supreme Court clerks and to the entire intelligence community.  Everything is planned there.”

A group of people meet at Georgetown University Law School to think through how to seize power from Trump if he were elected in 2024.  The intricacies of what they have planned are mind boggling.

They are planning an insurrection.

In his interview with Tucker Carlson, Waller discussed the Transition Integrity Project. What he exposed was extremely disturbing.

The Transition Integrity Project — Rosa Brooks

Red diaper baby, Rosa Brooks, law professor at Georgetown University and former Pentagon senior official, and Nils Gilman, a former vice chancellor of the University of California, Berkeley and historian at the Berggruen Institute, initially organized the Transition Integrity Project (TIP) in late 2019.  Other participants in the project include Michael Steele, John Podesta, Jennifer Granholm, Trey Grayson, Donna Brazile, William Kristol, Edward Luce, Max Boot and David Frum.  Despite all of them being left of center, the TIP is considered bipartisan and, as such retains a 501c3 tax-exempt status.

The Project involves over 100 current and former senior government and campaign leaders, academics, journalists, polling experts and former federal and state government officials…and in 2024, retired generals, who were chosen by Rosa Brooks for Obama.  Retired generals are not civilians.  They’re still subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice and they’re involved as co-conspirators about overthrowing our government and eliminating a duly elected president.

TIP is a short-term project run under the auspices of the organization Protect Democracy which was founded by lawyers from Obama’s White House Counsel. “Protect Democracy” echoes the mainstream media mantra, “Our Democracy is in Danger.”  We do not pledge allegiance to “the democracy for which we stand,” but to “the Republic for which we stand.”  Joseph Goebbel’s propaganda of repetitious lies is perpetuated by America’s “Pravda” media in calling America a “democracy.”

The TIP was to decide the outcome and results of the 2020 election.  Their conclusion was that with a Joe Biden win, there would be no protests or street violence, but if Donald Trump won, America would end.

Their 2020 meetings were kept secret other than Washington Post’s report of their outcomes before the election.

Brooks is an adjunct scholar at West Point‘s Modern War Institute and a senior fellow at the New America Foundation, a liberal think tank in the United States founded in 1999. Top donors to the organization in 2021 included the Bill & Melinda Gates FoundationBloomberg PhilanthropiesFord FoundationRockefeller Foundation, and United States Department of State.  Here is the complete list of their funders.  All support critical theory and DEI.

Waller commented that Brooks, who as a senior Pentagon official selecting who the Obama generals would be, was writing about how we have to end civilian control or do away with civilian control of the military.

“She was wargaming out military coups against a sitting president, first after a disputed election and now being the host of an entire project to unseat a president who they agree would have been legally and clearly elected by a majority of the public and electoral votes.”

They are calling for a military coup.

Carlson believes Brooks is a “violence fetishist.”

Brooks has served as a volunteer advisor on defense policy to the Biden administration. She’s also a member of the pro-abortion Amnesty International USA, and has served on the board of Soros’ Open Society Foundation‘s US Programs Fund and as a senior advisor at the US Department of State’s Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor.  Brooks was also a consultant for the Open Society Institute and for the NGO Human Rights Watch.

She has contributed numerous op-eds and book reviews to the Washington PostThe New York TimesThe AtlanticThe Wall Street Journal and numerous other publications.

Rather than having secrecy as they had in 2020, in 2024, they invited media to attend.  A reporter from the far-left Atlantic Magazine was very disturbed about what they planned.  He said this was a real problematic issue for those who believe in the Constitution.

Waller stated, “Congress is funding things that they know are unconstitutional. The Justice Department is enforcing things that its lawyers know are unconstitutional.  And now you have Mary McCord in her group at Georgetown Law writing the whole orchestra for the transition after November of this year. To rip the constitution to shreds.

“This is banana republic stuff in the name of protecting the Constitution.”

Mary McCord

Mary B. McCord is another red diaper baby who shows up everywhere.

Her Juris Doctor is from Georgetown University and for almost 20 years she was an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia. In the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, she served as Deputy Chief of the Appellate Division and as Chief of the Criminal Division.  She is a national security analyst and was Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General and Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security at the U.S. Department of Justice.

McCord joined Georgetown University Law Center’s Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection (ICAP), a left-of-center academic center at the law school that engages in legal cases on First and Second Amendment issues, among others. McCord’s work at the center has been in leading opposition to unlawful militias, stating that the second amendment affords no protection to private “militias.”  She also has participated on the National Task Force on Election Crises alongside other Leftist election policy advocates.

Georgetown University Law School receives a ton of federal money, but they also received Chinese money. Last year, they got a $30 million grant from a Taiwanese businessman who made his fortune as a financier of the Chinese Communist Party on the mainland.  This was Georgetown’s largest gift in its history since it was founded in the 1700s.

To give you the full flavor of her personality, she and Andrew Weissman hosted a live taping of their podcast, “Prosecuting Donald Trump” at Georgetown University.  She also did a PBS Hour with Judy Woodruff on “Trump’s false election claims being red meat for extremist groups.”

McCord was appointed legal counsel for the January 6th committee by Speaker Pelosi.  She testified to Congress, that the “insurrection” will require not only criminal enforcement mechanisms, but also “a civil enforcement mechanism that would allow the U.S. Department of Justice to seek injunctive relief and civil forfeiture against armed paramilitary actors and their organizations.”  Link  (The only people armed on January 6th were the capitol police, but McCord had insinuated in other venues that protestors had hidden arms under their coats despite firearms being illegal in DC.)

Her article, It’s Time for Congress to Make Domestic Terrorism a Federal Crime appeared in the website, Lawfare.  Imagine who would become targets.

McCord was also counsel for the Trump impeachment committee, both one and two, and is a statutorily designated amicus curiae for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review.

She has also discussed “Analyzing and Defeating Right-Wing Extremism” with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

McCord is married to Sheldon Snook, who also worked for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia. In fact, it was McCord who got her husband his job as administrative assistant and court liaison to the public and news media.  She recommended him to Judge Hogan, of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, as she had previously clerked for him.  Snook also served as spokesman for the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.  He currently works in a similar capacity for the U.S. Supreme Court.  Snook is a key player.

Staging the Coup

Waller states, “…This has just become one big club, one huge business, one big grift in many ways, but one big political war now, where you have a merger between hardcore political activists, violence fetishists and public enemy types and the people who are supposed to be inside our system to serve our country and protect our Constitution.

“The great intel institutions which were designed to protect us against the Marxist onslaught have, in the end, become the most subversive of America’s institutions.  Anyone today could look at the American intelligence community and guess it was an ‘organizational chart for the old KGB.’”

If Trump is elected, the TIP has formulated their plans to thwart his goals.

Look at Rosa Brooks from Georgetown Univ. and Mary McCord and her husband, Sheldon Snook. They know Trump only has one term, so their allies inside the government will slow walk everything, and already hundreds of pieces of litigation are ready against as yet unnamed Trump administration officials.  They intend to hamstring the entire team and all his appointees and Trump’s appointees who don’t already have clearances won’t get them.

McCord is a Washington insider with a husband on the supreme court staff, so they are networked with the Justice Department and the judges.  Sheldon Snook will make sure Trump’s people are kept in the right judicial venues to assure a court circuit who will rule favorably in their cases.  Worse comes to worse, they will remove Trump via their bought and paid for DEI and critical theory military.

We Still Have Time to Stop Them

Carlson asked what the RNC was doing and Waller said he didn’t know.  Waller made the comment that Rona McDaniel had a big florist and limousine bill, but no one knows if she was organized to attack against these entrenched interests.

He then mentioned that the Heritage Foundation has their “action plans,” as well as the America First Policy Institute, but both of these organizations are “controlled opposition.”  Their membership and donors include globalist Council on Foreign Relations members, the do-nothing Council for National Policy, and the American Legislative Exchange Council, which is funded by the Koch orgs and has long promoted a constitutional convention.

Congressman Pete Sessions is chairman of a subcommittee that has jurisdiction over Georgetown University.  He wrote a stinging letter to Rosa Brooks’ regarding the TIP results and the baseless accusations she made in her Washington Post article of September 3, 2020, just prior to the election.

Mary McCord was cited by Sessions for her recent comments, per NBC, that “We’re already starting to put together a team to think through the most damaging types of things that he [Trump] might do so that we’re ready to bring lawsuits if we have to.”

“It would be highly inappropriate,” Sessions said, “for a university that relies on federal funding to conduct partisan political activity intended to undermine a lawfully conducted election.”

Georgetown University Law Center needs to be shut down.

Conclusion

The last two chapters of Big Intel are a roadmap for what needs to be done.

America’s intelligence community, her entire federal bureaucracy, her universities and colleges, her corporations and board members, have adopted cultural Marxism, DEI and critical theory.

The Marcuse aficionados are planning a repeat of the 1917 Russian Revolution.  Only this time, it is happening in the “land of the free and the home of the brave.”

©2024. Kelleigh Nelson. All rights reserved.

U.S. Senator Cotton’s Letter to Iran’s Leaders Clarified

When Arkansas junior Senator Tom Cotton sent his open letter on Monday, March 9th to “The Leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran” signed by 46 other Republican colleagues, 7 declined, it caused a ruckus.

Cotton’s letter endeavored to  remind Iran’s Ayatollah Khamenei, President Rouhani and Foreign Minister Zarif of the Constitutional authorities.  The Executive Branch’s power in Article II, Sec.2 gives  it the right to negotiate foreign agreements. The Legislative Branch, in this case the Senate, must provide its “advise and consent” to treaties on a two-thirds vote and a three-fifths vote in the instances of Congressional-executive agreements. Anything not approved by Congress, such as the current Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between President Obama and Ayatollah Khamenei is deemed an executive agreement which could end with current term of the President in January 2017. Thus “the next President could revoke the executive agreement with the stroke of a pen and future Congresses could modify the terms of the agreement at any time.”

From the President to leading Democratic Senators, the short missive was rebuked as an unwelcome ‘stunt’ interfering with the Executive Branch of government prerogative of engaging in foreign relations.  President Obama considered it “ironic” considering  the signatories of the Cotton letter in league with those notorious hard liners in Tehran.  He alleged they were seeking to upend the MOU. The New York Daily News published a front page  picture of the Cotton letter accusing the signatories of being ‘traitors’.  For the first 48 hours that continued to be the criticism of Sen. Cotton and the GOP leadership in the Senate, with the exception of the 7 who agreed with the White House for different reasons. Senator Corker (R-TN) thought it was unhelpful as he was endeavoring to line up Democratic votes for his Senate Bill 615, The Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act (INARA) of 2015 co-sponsored by embattled Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ).

Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif while calling the Cotton letter, “a propaganda ploy” argued:

“I wish to enlighten the authors that if the next administration revokes any agreement with the stroke of a pen, as they boast, it will have simply committed a blatant violation of international law,” according to Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The executive agreement was not bilateral but rather multi-lateral with the rest of the Permanent Members of the UN Security Council, plus Germany, subject to a resolution of the Security Council.

That majority of US international agreements in recent decades are in fact what the signatories describe as “mere executive agreements” and not treaties ratified by the Senate.

That “their letter in fact undermines the credibility of thousands of such mere executive agreements that have been or will be entered into by the US with various other governments.”

Ayatollah Khamenei considered the Cotton letter reflective of the “US disintegration”. According to the Mehr news agency, the Supreme Ruler said:

Of course I am worried. Every time we reach a stage where the end of the negotiations is in sight, the tone of the other side, specifically the Americans, becomes harsher, coarser and tougher. This is the nature of their tricks and deceptions.

Further, he said the letter was ‘a sign of the decay of political ethics in the American system”, and he described as “laughable long-standing U.S. accusations of Iranian involvement in terrorism.”

Jen Psaki 3-11-15  Legal Insurrrection

Source: Legal Insurrection

Notwithstanding the roiling criticism of the Cotton letter, comments by Secretary Kerry at a Senate Armed Services Committee Hearing on Wednesday, echoed those of State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki on Tuesday who said, “historically, the United States has pursued important national security through non-binding arrangements.” Kerry said in his testimony that the Obama Administration was “not negotiating a legally binding plan” but one from “executive to executive,” Politico reported. Kerry insisted such a deal would still “have a capacity of enforcement.” Thus, he confirmed that the proposed Memorandum of Understanding  between the P5+1  and Iran was non-binding on the parties hinging on verification of conditions.  Something hitherto unachievable with the Mullahs who have a tendency to hide developments. This despite representations by President Obama that the negotiations in Geneva were making good progress towards that goal. Kerry said it was non-binding because we currently don’t recognize the Islamic Republic of Iran, passed embargoes arising from the 444 day Tehran US Embassy seizure and hostage taking in 1979 and adopted Congressional sanctions against its nuclear program. Further, the State Department considers the Republic a state sponsor of terrorism, something Ayatollah Khamenei categorically disagrees with as witnessed by his comments on the Cotton letter.  But seeing is believing when it comes to the Shia autocrats in Tehran proficient practitioners of taqiyya, otherwise known as lying for Allah. Iran ‘reformist’ President Hassan Rouhani suggested that diplomacy with the Administration was an active form of “jihad” equivalent to the 2,500 mile range cruise missile Iran unveiled this week.

Two legal experts on the matter of executive agreements disagreed with the position of Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif and Secretary Kerry in the context of the Cotton letter. Daniel Wiser writing in the Washington Free Beacon asserted  that Cotton was correct and Zarif wrong. They concurred that future US Presidents could revoke the agreement over a bad deal, meaning, violation of provisions by Iran:

Jeremy Rabkin, a law professor at George Mason University and an expert in international law and Constitutional history, said in an email that “nonbinding” by definition means that the United States “will not violate international law if we don’t adhere to its terms”—contrary to Zarif’s assertion.

“In other words we’re saying it is NOT an international obligation, just a statement of intent,” he said.

“What Kerry seemed to say was not that his Iran deal would be in the same category but that it would not be legally binding in any sense, just a kind of memorandum of understanding,” Rabkin said. “I wonder whether he understood what he was saying. It was more or less conceding that what Cotton’s letter said was the administration’s own view—that the ‘agreement’ with Iran would not be legally binding, so (presumably) not something that could bind Obama’s successor.”

Cotton responded with a Tweet, saying:

Important question: if deal with Iran isn’t legally binding, then what’s to keep Iran from breaking said deal and developing a bomb?

Wiser then cites a National Review article by a second legal expert, John Yoo, a law professor at University of California, Berkeley and a former Justice Department official in the George W. Bush Administration:

The Cotton letter is right, because if President Obama strikes a nuclear deal with Iran using only [an executive agreement], he is only committing to refrain from exercising his executive power—i.e., by not attacking Iran or by lifting sanctions under power delegated by Congress. Not only could the next president terminate the agreement; Obama himself could terminate the deal.  Obama’s executive agreement cannot prevent Congress from imposing mandatory, severe sanctions on Iran without the possibility of presidential waiver (my preferred solution for handling the Iranian nuclear crisis right now). Obama can agree to allow Iran to keep a nuclear-processing capability; Congress can cut Iran out of the world trading and financial system.

But the fracas over Cotton’s letter continued unabated. An unidentified resident of Bogota, N.J.  “C.H.” shot off a petition to the Obama White House website, “We the People,” expressing the view that the 47 signers were in violation of the 1799 Logan Act and may have jeopardized achievement of a nuclear agreement with Iran.  Further “C.H.” contended that the Republican Senators might be subject to possible criminal actions brought under provisions of the hoary law that private individuals are barred from engaging in foreign relations. The petition took off like a rocket with upwards of 165,000 signatures heading for over 200,000 in less than 48 hours. That will allegedly require a response by the President, as witnessed by an earlier petition on support for medical marijuana.

But “C.H.” is wrong. Members of Congress in either chamber are exempt from that restriction. Moreover, there have been a number of instances where the many of the Democratic Congressional and Administration critics of Cotton and his Republican colleagues have engaged in private foreign relations episodes.  Among those who undertook such actions were Vice President Biden, Secretary Kerry when they were Senators and current House Minority leader Nancy Pelosi, and the late Teddy Kennedy.  In Pelosi’s case, following her assumption of the House Speakership in 2006, she went off to Damascus in 2007 to sit with President Bashar Assad, despite the protestations of the Bush Administration who were trying to isolate the Syrian dictator.  However,  Republicans have done the same thing when it also suited their political purposes.

Finally, there was another groundswell campaign seeking to gain passage of Sen. Corker’s INARA.  Christians United for Israel (CUFI) flooded Capitol Hill with more than 57,000 emails from members across the US in support of passage of INARA because they were worried about Iran’s possession of nuclear capabilities.  The CUFI initiative was triggered by the March 3rd address by Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu before a Joint Meeting of Congress  who made it abundantly clear that he believed the Administration’s 10 year phased deal was a “very bad deal.”

 writing in the Legal Insurrection blog about the Cotton letter controversy concluded:

And to think, all of that wailing and gnashing of teeth from Democrats wasted over a non-binding agreement, one that would have absolutely no legal sway over Iran.

RELATED ARTICLES:

What You Need to Know About the White House’s Talks With Iran

Is Obama Sidestepping Congress and Going to UN on Iran Deal?

Iranian President: Diplomacy with U.S. is an active jihad

Saudi Nuclear Deal Raises Stakes for Iran Talks

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review. The featured image is of Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AK) poses for photographers in his office on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, March 11, 2015. Source: Carolyn Kaster— AP.