Men Who Defy Christ the King and His Laws Are Their Own Worst Enemies, Now and For Eternity

Much is going on in the mad, mad, mad, mad anti-Incarnational world of Modernity as one of naturalist titans seeks to solidify its iron grip on all the levers of political, social, economic, cultural, educational, and legal powers with an open boldness that is but the inexorable result of the false, naturalistic, religiously-indifferentist, and semi-Pelagian precepts of the modern civil state, starting with the United States of America in 1776 and then 1787, that sought to create social order on a secular basis without any formal references to the true God of Divine Revelation nor the authority of His true Church to govern men in all that pertains to the good of souls, upon which the very fate of nations rests.

As I have noted so many hundreds of hundreds of times on this website, the totalitarianism that has descended upon is the result of what happens when men are divided by one theological, philosophical, political, and social error after another. Men who do not understand First and Last Things must perforce become instruments in the creation of hell, where is endless agitation and conflict, on earth. Men who are slaves to the devil, either by means of having souls steeped in Original Sin or, in the case of the baptized, in the effects of unrepented Mortal Souls, which work their wicked effect in darkening intellects and weakening wills on an objective basis even though many who commit them are not aware of nor would ever accept the objectively evil nature of their actions, are preparing themselves to live in a dungeon of abject totalitarianism that is the devil’s torture chamber where the souls of the unjust are tormented without end. Although those who seek to control all the levers of national life by working to oppress “dissenters” from their whatever “infallible” pronouncements must be accepted as a matter of secular “faith,” by perverting all sense of natural justice by indemnifying the guilty, victimizing the innocent, criminalizing political differences, and by suppressing and mocking all objective truth, whether supernatural or natural, think that there is no accounting for their duplicity and cruel demagoguery, they will indeed be held to account by Christ the King, Our Divine Judge, when they die if they have not repented of their public crimes by that time.

There are many matters that need to be discussed in summary form before proceeding to examine the farcical nature of the “Get Trump” obsession on the part of almost everyone in the organized crime family of the false opposite of the naturalist “left” as though he, Trump, actually stood for anything other than his own-self-interest, which is defined narrowly in a one-way code of “loyalty” that requires a perpetual bond of fealty from anyone he believes he has assisted but can be broken if someone who had once supported him strongly offers even a mild word of criticism and disagreement. All the immorality, the amorality, the illegality, and the unconstitutionality committed by the denizens of what is called “left” against Donald John Trump has been entirely superfluous because the narcissist from the Borough of Queens, City of New York, New York, has always been and will ever remain his own worst enemy.

What is really at stake in the “Get Trump” obsession that has been ongoing now for eight solid years is an  attack upon the legitimacy of anyone and everyone who opposes what the Grifter-in-Chief, who has not a core belief in his frail frame nor in his frailer mind, such as it is, is doing at this time by bringing to fruition the “transformative” policies of the man under whom he served eight rather profitable years to himself and the rest of the Sponge Joe family, namely, Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro. The “left” takes no prisoners and Frank Marshall Davis’s protégé, Obama/Soetoro has always dripped with contempt at those who “bitterly cling to their guns, their God, and their religion.” Such people are beneath contempt to wannabe despots such as Obama/Soetoro, which is why every effort must be made to blunt whatever chances they might have to try their hand of Sisyphus’s always losing efforts to push those “conservative” boulders up Mount Progressive before being crushed by the boulders again and again. Donald John Trump has been and continues to be targeted because he is seen to be a spokesman for “reactionaries” even though Trump’s own belief system is purely visceral and based primarily upon whether others praise him, enable him, and do not for one moment dare to criticize the “success” of the warped program known as “Operation Warp Speed.”

A secular commentator summarized the contempt that Obama/Soetoro and his claque (Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., John Brennan, James Clapper, Loretta Lynch) have for “dissenters,” which explains the continuing effort to discredit Donald John Trump, whose relegation to prison would, they believe, permanently imprison whatever “movement” Trump believes he is advancing and render those who support him virtual enemies of the civil state:

With the arraignment of Donald Trump on charges brought under the Espionage Act, America’s cold civil war pitting blue cities against red regions has gotten considerably hotter. But that’s inevitable when you manipulate the nation’s laws to designate the leader of a movement representing one half of the country a traitor.

Legal experts say the Justice Department’s case against Trump is strong. Even many on the right agree. “This indictment contains serious charges,” says Trump’s former Vice President Mike Pence. The former president is “toast,” says his onetime Attorney General William Barr. But to others, the 37-count indictment looks like a reboot of the 2020 letter signed by 51 former U.S. spies claiming Hunter Biden’s laptop was Russian disinformation. The package is so big it’s got to be real, when in fact it’s just Bubble Wrap all the way down.

Debating the indictment’s details—the DOJ’s legal theory, which documents do and do not belong to Trump under the Presidential Records Act, etc.—is a ritualized expression of faith that the law is still impartial and the justice system is in the hands of serious men and women, devoted law enforcement officials who even when it looked most hopeless over the last seven years never once veered from their mission and now finally got their man. But it’s just playacting, for the stark fact is this: The never-ending campaign to get Trump is evidence the country has gone mad.

“Here’s what I was hoping,” journalist Joe Klein wrote on his Substack. “That Trump would be charged with espionage. Full stop.” Of course he did, as did the majority of the media hastening America into open conflict. The Espionage Act was written for times like these. Enacted in 1917 to criminalize antiwar activism, the statute is a political weapon designed to bypass the Constitution and prosecute the ruling party’s domestic opponents. The fact that Trump has been charged with crimes under the Espionage Act is evidence that the world’s oldest democracy has fallen into the hands of a corrupt and pathological ruling faction that has turned federal law enforcement into a people’s commissariat serving a cohort of performative elites who still harbor the fantasy that a former American president is a Russian spy.

The appropriate legal framework through which to view the indictment is election interference—it’s the latest leg in the Department of Justice’s ongoing effort to bar Trump from the White House that began in 2016. For the purpose of obtaining a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant to spy on Trump’s campaign, the FBI alleged that the Republican candidate and his aides were Russian agents. The bureau was acting on behalf of the rival campaign, worried that the deleted emails from Hillary Clinton’s private, unsecure email server were in circulation. They wanted to know if Trump aides had any foreknowledge that evidence of her arrangements with foreign powers and enterprises would be leaked as an October surprise. Russia “collusion” was the information operation built up around the FBI’s phony justification for its digital break-in of the Trump campaign.

For the 2020 election cycle, federal law enforcement used the same plot points for the same purpose: to shield the Democratic candidate from revelations of corruption that might thwart his chances. The FBI was especially concerned about Hunter Biden’s laptop, which it had taken into its possession in 2019. To prevent the voting public from learning of the evidence of Biden family corruption sourced to the laptop, the bureau set up a censorship task force and labeled reports about it “Russian disinformation”—just Vladimir Putin again, so keen to keep Trump in the White House he’s polluting the infosphere by smearing Joe Biden and his son. After the election, social media platforms acknowledged how the FBI had defrauded the public, and press organizations that had participated in the cover-up admitted that the laptop was genuine.

The incumbent has problems this time out as well. The FBI can no longer hide the evidence alleging that Joe and Hunter Biden each demanded $5 million from the owner of Burisma, a Ukrainian energy firm once under Ukrainian and international investigations. A year after vacating the vice presidency, Biden boasted before a New York audience that in March 2016 he threatened to withhold a $1 billion loan guarantee from the Kyiv government if it didn’t fire the prosecutor investigating Burisma. The charges against Trump deflect attention, for the time being at least, from Biden’s alleged bribery scandal as well as his own problems for possessing classified information he wasn’t supposed to have.

So the Trump indictment is a cover-up for Biden as well as an early effort to tilt the 2024 vote away from Trump. But it’s part of a second storyline, too, and though it intersects in places with the DOJ thread, it represents something significantly more dangerous than one political faction turning the spy services against the other faction. After all, that’s a standard feature of all third-world security regimes, but few caudillos risk setting the stage for domestic conflict.

Charging Trump under the Espionage Act plays on a theme first developed by Barack Obama when he ordered CIA Director John Brennan to produce an Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) concerning Russian interference in the 2016 election. Published just before Obama’s term ended, the January 2017 report concluded, without evidence, that Putin had sought to help Trump win the election. Sourced to the brazen fabrication known as the Steele dossier, the ICA anchored the collusion narrative and served as the foundation for Robert Mueller’s special counsel investigation of Trump and his aides.

Obama’s strategy worked: The Russian collusion narrative crippled Trump’s presidency. More importantly, he used the authority of the executive branch to declare Trump’s presidency, and by extension the political movement that supported it, illegitimate. Because the election was compromised, so in effect was the electorate that chose as commander in chief a man who, according to the ICA, had been assisted by a foreign power. Trump was a foreign agent and the more than 60 million people who voted for him were, at best, useful idiots. As Obama likes to say, that’s not who we are as Americans.

Thus the Espionage Act charges are crucial to advancing the traitor narrative. Obama tipped you off more than six years ago that Trump wasn’t really American and here are the charges to prove it: He betrayed U.S. secrets because he’s working on behalf of a foreign power.

That narrative is due to be reinforced when the special counsel charges Trump, as seems nearly certain, with offenses related to January 6. After all, the point of referring to the raucous and sometimes violent three-hour-long demonstration at the Capitol as an insurrection more dangerous to our domestic peace than 9/11, Pearl Harbor, and the Civil War wasn’t just to drive news coverage. And charging January 6 defendants with seditious conspiracy wasn’t just to enhance their prison sentences. No, the purpose was to bulk out the narrative that Trump and the voters who favor him are in a fundamental way not American. Accordingly, since Trump and his followers are foreign agents, it follows that they don’t really have constitutional rights, and can’t complain about their votes being nullified through election interference, since they’re not really American in the first place.

Some may be tempted to see the current indictment as Obama turning the tables on Trump—you pushed the idea I didn’t have a U.S. birth certificate and now look who’s laughing, foreign spy. Except it was Clinton whisperer Sidney Blumenthal who invented the birther hoax. And then there’s the fact that all of us will pay for the plot to set Americans at each other’s throats.

The fallout from the permanent bureaucracy’s war on Trump has turned millions of Americans into combatants in a conflict started by Democratic Party bosses and spy masters. Trump’s followers aren’t brainwashed cultists for believing attacks on him are assaults against them, too—the political and legal establishment describes them as domestic terrorists to designate them as targets of counterinsurgency warfare tactics developed during the global war on terror. It seems that Washington is breeding at home what it nurtured in the Middle East—civil war. That it strikes our political class as a good idea to renew hostilities between Americans after more than 150 years of peace is further evidence that the current regime is pathological. It’s no small thing to arrange for two sides that bled each other to live side by side again. Look at the last half century alone, from Lebanon and Somalia to the former Yugoslavia and Syria—many countries never find a way to get along after blowing each other’s brains out. America is an exception. Indeed it is an astonishing fact that after our own fratricidal conflict, America became the most powerful nation in world history. And yet the fabric of our domestic peace is fragile and now we are tempting fate: Brother calling brother traitor may be the prelude to a renewed nightmare. (The War on Trump Is a War on Millions. Other secular commentaries that make similar or related points include: Classified Info: Washington’s Most Powerful Weapon and 6 Reasons DOJ’s 'Get Trump' Docs Case Is Seriously Flawed. For a spoof of how supposedly “secret” and “classified” intelligence information is pretty much well known despite those classifications, see this short clip from Get Smart as Secret Agent 86, Maxwell Smart, played by Don Adams, who was a Catholic, and his wife, Agent 99, are stuck in a phone booth filling up with water that was boobytrapped by KAOS agents and Smart attempts to instruct a telephone operator to keep a secret of a supposedly secret phone number: Get Smart - Max and Agent 99 become stuck in a phone booth that fills with water.)

This is all very well and except when one considers the simple fact that the United States of America has never been as “united” as naturalists, whether those of the false opposites of the left or right or somewhere in between, have convinced themselves to have believed was the case.

As has been noted several times in the past on this website, there was no “unity” during the War for Independence as only about one-third of the approximately four million people living in the thirteen colonies turned American states support the “patriotic” effort. Another third was loyal to the British Crown while the last third was pretty indifferent to the outcome, although the “patriots” of the late-1770s, much like the “patriots” during the War between the States and those during other wars (the War of 1812, the Mexican-American War Spanish-America War, World War I, World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Persian Gulf War, the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars, the “Global War on Terror,” etc.) sought to silence opposing voices, which is, after all, why the National Espionage Act of 1917 was enacted into law by Congress at the behest of the authoritarian promoter of “democracy” and virulent anti-Catholic, President Thomas Woodrow Wilson:

What does that mean with respect to the Espionage Act? It means that the law should simply be repealed and that Americans need to start demanding repeal rather than simply pleading with the Justice Department to enforce it in a more judicious manner.

Let’s keep in mind that the law is the fruit of a rotten foreign intervention. Hardly anyone defends the U.S. intervention into World War I. That war was, quite simply, none of the U.S. government’s business. President Wilson, however, was hell-bent on embroiling the U.S. in the conflict. Wilson believed that if the force of the U.S. government could be used to totally defeat Germany, this would be the war to finally end all wars and to make the world safe for democracy.

Wilson’s mindset, of course, was lunacy. Sure enough, the U.S. intervention resulted in Germany’s total defeat, which was then followed by the vengeful Treaty of Versailles, which Adolf Hitler would use to justify his rise to power. Nazism and World War II soon followed. So much for the war to end all wars and to make the world safe for democracy. Tens of thousands of American men were sacrificed for nothing.

Moreover, Wilson had to force American men to fight in World War I. He conscripted them. Enslaved would be a better word. When a government has to force its citizens to fight a particular war, that’s a good sign that it’s a bad war, one that shouldn’t be waged.

In fact that was one of the reasons for the Espionage Act—not to punish people for spying but rather for criticizing the draft and the war. The law converted anyone who publicly criticized the draft or attempted to persuade American men to resist the draft into felons. And make no mistake about it: U.S. officials went after such people with a vengeance, doing their best to punish Americans for doing nothing more than speaking.

One example was Charles Schenck, who was prosecuted and convicted of violating the law after circulating a flier that opposed the draft. When the case reached the U.S. Supreme Court, the Court upheld the conviction, one of the earliest examples of judicial deferment to the military, a deference that would become virtually complete after the U.S. government was officially converted to a national-security state after World War II.

Another example was Eugen Debs, who got convicted for criticizing the war and for encouraging men to resist the draft. President Wilson called Debs “a traitor to his country.”

How in the world can such prosecutions and convictions possibly be reconciled with the principles of a free society? Freedom necessarily entails the right to criticize government for anything, including its wars, its enslavement of people, its tyranny, and anything else. Perhaps it is worth nothing that both Schenk and Debs were socialists, something that today’s crop of Democrat presidential candidates might want to take note of.

Longtime supporters of FFF know that one of my favorite stories in history is the one about the White Rose, a group of college students in Germany who, in the midst of World War II, began distributing pamphlets calling on Germans to resist their own government and to oppose the troops. (See my essay “The White Rose: A Lesson in Dissent.” Also, see the great movie Sophie Scholl: The Final Days.) When they were caught and brought to trial, the members of the White Rose were berated by the presiding judge, who accused them of being bad German citizens and traitors, just as Wilson, the Justice Department, and the U.S. Supreme Court had said of Americans who were violating the Espionage Act.

Today, any U.S. official would praise the actions of the White Rose, but that’s just because it was foreign citizens opposing an official enemy of the U.S. government. The fact is that if the White Rose members had done the same thing they did in Germany here in the United States, U.S. officials would have gone after them with the same anger and vengeance as German officials did. And they would have used the Espionage Act to do it.

It’s time to acknowledge that the horror of U.S. intervention into World War I and the horrible consequences of that intervention. It’s also time to rid our nation of the horrific relic of that intervention, the Espionage Act. We need to continue  demanding the dismissal of all charges against [Julian] Assange. But let’s not stop there. Let’s repeal the tyrannical World War I-era Espionage Act under which he is being charged to ensure that this cannot happen to others. (Repeal the Espionage Act.)

When federal agents removed top-secret documents from former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence last week, they carried with them a search warrant citing possible violations of the Espionage Act.

Ah, the Espionage Act! How that must have sounded comfortingly confirmatory to those leftists who still believe, despite the total lack of evidence, that Trump was elected and governed in collusion with Vladimir Putin’s Russia. These reports surely have some folks gleefully contemplating the prospect of the 45th president being consigned to the 10 years in the slammer that is the maximum penalty for violations of the Espionage Act.

But as the left-wing Substacker Matt Taibbi pointed out, “Anyone thrilled at the prospect of trying to prosecute a former president under the Espionage Act has blacked out the recent history of this law.” It’s a history of liberal Democrats invoking a notoriously overbroad statute to curb freedom of the press and penalize criticism of government policy.

The Espionage Act of 1917 passed two months after the United States, with 56 dissenting votes, had declared war against Germany. President Woodrow Wilson and Congress were responding, as former Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-NY) explained in his 1998 book “Secrecy,” to pre-1917 sabotage. In July 1916, German agents blew up the Black Tom munitions dump in New York harbor, with an explosion loud enough to be heard in Connecticut and Maryland.

The Espionage Act was passed with bipartisan support and was supplemented by a Sedition Act banning “abusive language.” This was used to prosecute and jail socialist presidential candidate Eugene Debs, who had received some 900,000 votes in 1912. Thankfully, a Republican Congress allowed the Sedition Act to expire, and President Warren Harding, a Republican and a journalist, commuted Debs’ sentence and invited him to the White House.

The Espionage Act was not used much in the century after Wilson because the government classifies so much material, including widely disseminated newspaper articles, that just about anyone could be targeted.

But recently, there have been exceptions. In 2013, the Obama Justice Department used the Espionage Act to justify wiretapping trunk lines and 30 separate Associated Press phones. It snooped on Fox News reporter James Rosen’s phones and named him as a “co-conspirator” in an Espionage Act leak case.

The Obama administration, wrote former New York Times reporter James Risen in December 2016, “prosecuted nine cases involving whistleblowers and leakers, compared with only three by all previous administrations combined.'”

The overbreadth of the Espionage Act makes this easy. The law’s Section 793(d) says that “a person lawfully in possession of information that the government has classified as secret” — and the government notoriously overclassifies material, including editions of The New York Times — “who turns it over to someone not lawfully entitled to possess it has committed a crime.” Espionage!

A further section, 793(g), is a conspiracy count that says that anyone who conspires to help a source hand over such material has committed the same crime. In other words, a lot of journalism could be prosecuted as a felony — and so could a lot of conduct of former government officials, even presidents. This gives government prosecutors a license to target and jail political opponents, as Wilson targeted and jailed Debs.

In the century after Wilson, most administrations resisted this temptation. When President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who had served in the Wilson administration, was advised days after Pearl Harbor to prosecute the Chicago Tribune for an article implying that the U.S. had broken Japanese codes, he brushed the idea aside.

The Obama administration had a different approach, however. And the Mar-a-Lago warrant suggests that the Biden administration does as well.

The Obama FBI, as we now know, sent a lawyer to lie to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to obtain a warrant to spy on the Trump campaign. Now, President Joe Biden seems to be using the ludicrously overbroad Espionage Act to suggest to the credulous Left that Trump stashed nuclear secrets in Mar-a-Lago to be turned over to his friends in Russia.

In his account of the Espionage Act of 1917, Moynihan wrote, “Gradually, over time, American government has become careful about liberties.” That now needs a rewrite.

Suddenly, in what we are told are the moderate, norm-observing Obama and Biden administrations, U.S. government has become much more cavalier, not more careful, about liberties. The arc of justice has bent backward, toward the days when Wilson jailed Debs. (The Espionage Act of 1917 once again rears its ugly head. The author of this article. Dr. Michael Barone, who was the co-author of the first edition of The Almanac of American Politics in 1972, has written since that he believes the indictment brought by One Set of Laws for All Jack Smith is valid even if it is politically motivated: The Trump Indictment: Irresponsibility Squared.)

Yes, the suppression of political dissenters in a country founded on a welter of naturalistic errors that have metastasized rapidly ever since as to overthrow even the residue of whatever remained of Judeo-Masonic decency and courtesy in civil discourse, especially as competing sides debate the undebatable, seek to change the unchangeable, and to declare as true that which is false, is nothing new whatsoever. It is simply part and parcel of American history even though most people, including most Catholics are utterly unaware of the fact, content as they are to live in the myths of

Americanism and American exceptionalism.

This all having been noted, however, as I explained recently (was it recently) in Christ the King Alone Has One Set of Laws That He Will Apply to Everyone When They Die, Donald John Trump is his own worst enemy. Knowing full well that he has been targeted by the agents of the Deep State since he announced his campaign for the 2016 Republican Party presidential nomination and that, as former Special Counsel John Durham summarized succinctly during his testimony before the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, June 21, 2023, that the Department of Justice under Attorney General Loretta Lynch and the Federal Bureau of Investigation under James Brien Comey permitted Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton to escape prosecution for the illegal and unauthorized transfer, retention and mishandling of classified information while they simultaneously did Mrs. Clinton’s bidding to investigate the Russian Collusion hoax and deliberately hid her role from the bureau’s agents assigned to the case (see John Durham testimony: FBI's treatment of Hillary Clinton under microscope at hearing and that there is an absolute, iron-clad double standard of justice in the United States of America given the entrenchment of statists throughout it administrative and judicial nooks and crannies (see Bidens Allegedly ‘Coerced’ Burisma Executive to Pay $10M in Bribes, This Delaware businessman received jail time from the feds because he wasn't a Biden, What We Know About The Biden Bribery Scheme From FBI Doc, Hunter Biden plea deal reeks: How could THIS take five years?, Hunter Biden's plea deal is proof Democrats are 'The Untouchables' in Joe's America, Hunter Biden's Plea Deal Is A Coverup Disguised As Justice, Turley on Hunter Biden Plea Deal: 'This Is Going to Look Like You Ticketed the Getaway Driver After a Bank Robbery', and Hunter Biden's Plea Deal Is A Coverup Disguised As Justice), the former president, believing himself to be both infallible and infallibly smart, still managed to give those who have done him one injustice after another more and more legal and political ammunition with which to attempt to imprison him and thus to execute him politically. The man is stupid, filled with himself and without a clue as the fact that is even such a thing as self-knowledge that is supposed to help one know his own personal limitations and failings. Then again, it is a hard thing to have such knowledge without the light provided by the Holy Faith and it is even a harder thing to act virtuously without belief in, access to and cooperation with Sanctifying Grace.

As noted in Christ the King Alone Has One Set of Laws That He Will Apply to Everyone When They Die, that Trump does not see anything wrong in asking his lawyers to misrepresent facts to prosecutors and to the members of a Federal grand jury after having received a subpoena to surrender the documents requested by the National Archives and Records Administration, whose officials certainly did escalate the matter legally by filing a criminal referral with Merrick Garland’s Ministry of Injustice, which relied upon the aforementioned National Espionage Act and not the Presidential Records Act that should be controlling when it comes to presidential papers and documents, is itself more important to the fate of Trump’s immortal soul than whatever might happen to him in the documents case or in Alvin Bragg’s baseless case in the County of New York. However, it is not an insignificant matter that the man who told Bret Baier of Fox News Channel’s Special Report that he kept the documents because he had to get his “golf shirts” out of them even though he has been the former president since January 20, 2021, and has lots of time to go to golf tournaments and give speeches, nevertheless knew precisely what was in those boxes, many of which he took with him on his trips to his golf course in Bedminster, New Jersey:

Now, far be it for me to criticize the paper of record's reporting, but last year I made a throwaway joke that solved the mystery. I would like to introduce you all to an advanced political theorem known as "my boxes."

Former American Conservative columnist Rod Dreher had asked last year, around the time of the Mar-a-Lago raid, what reason Trump could possibly have for refusing to return the boxes. It was somewhat of a hobby among the professionally credulous to wonder what machinations could be behind Trump's decision to hold on to these boxes, despite legal peril. Among some resistance liberals, there were unsupported accusations that Trump may have been selling classified documents or using them for nefarious purposes.

For the past year since then, whenever a new bit of information dribbles out about the case, someone on Twitter alerts me that another point has been scored for "my boxes." 

All of the substantive reporting, as well as the recently filed indictment, has backed up the "my boxes" hypothesis. In August, The New York Times reported that Trump told several advisers, in response to the National Archives' demands that he return the boxes: "It's not theirs; it's mine." The Washington Post reported in November that "Trump repeatedly said the materials were his, not the government's—often in profane terms."

This April, Fox News' Sean Hannity tried to tee up a softball for Trump, saying he couldn't imagine the former president saying, "Bring me some of the boxes that we brought back from the White House, I'd like to look at them." But Trump insisted that he would.

"I would have the right to do that," Trump replied. "I would do that."

According to the 37-count indictment filed in federal court against Trump this week, he told one of his long-suffering attorneys: "I don't want anybody looking, I don't want anybody looking through my boxes, I really don't, I don't want you looking through my boxes."

"My boxes" has always been the simplest, most durable explanation for Trump's behavior. He took the boxes because he likes boxes of stuff, and he refused to give them back for the same reason. He has a toddler's conception of property and a similar developmental level of excitement for show-and-tell. (Kid Rock allegedly got a glimpse of national security documents when he met with Trump.)  All of which is how you end up with descriptions of America's nuclear capabilities sitting in a box in a South Florida bathroom. (The 'My Boxes' Theory Is All You Need to Explain Trump's Behavior.)

During former President Donald J. Trump’s years in the White House, his aides began to refer to the boxes full of papers and odds and ends he carted around with him almost everywhere as the “beautiful mind” material.

It was a reference to the title of a book and movie depicting the life of John F. Nash Jr., the mathematician with schizophrenia played in the film by Russell Crowe, who covered his office with newspaper clippings, believing they held a Russian code he needed to crack.

The phrase had a specific connotation. The aides employed it to capture a type of organized chaos that Mr. Trump insisted on, the collection and transportation of a blizzard of newspapers and official documents that he kept close and that seemed to give him a sense of security.

One former White House official, who was granted anonymity to describe the situation, said that while the materials were disorganized, Mr. Trump would notice if they were somebody had rifled through them or they were not arranged in a particular way. It was, the person said, how “his mind worked.”

The contents of those boxes — and Mr. Trump’s insistence on hanging onto them — are now at the heart of a 38-count indictment against the former president and his personal aide, Walt Nauta. Prosecutors have accused Mr. Trump of obstructing their investigation into his possession of classified material after leaving office and putting national security secrets at risk.

His intense desire to keep the materials comes through in a text message cited in the indictment about the possibility of the boxes being moved after they were shipped to Mar-a-Lago, his Florida residence and private club.

When one employee asked the other if some could be moved to storage, the second employee, identified by multiple people as Mr. Trump’s former assistant Molly Michael, replied, “Woah!! Ok so potus specifically asked Walt for those boxes to be in the business center because they are his ‘papers.’”

At another point, she used the phrase “the beautiful mind paper boxes” in a text message, the indictment says.

Mr. Trump’s attachment to the contents of the boxes has now left him in serious legal peril, but it appears to be in keeping with a long pattern of behavior.

Mr. Trump has always hung onto news clippings, documents and other mementos, according to more than a half-dozen people who have worked for him over the years, including before his presidency.

His office at Trump Tower in New York, a corner space on the 26th floor, had a desk that was often piled high with papers. He kept keepsakes for decades, including a series of letters written to him by famous people more than 30 years ago, which he later published as a book that he sells for nearly $100 a copy.

Starting in the early months of his administration, Mr. Trump began using a cardboard box to bring papers and documents from the West Wing up to the residence at the end of the day.

In the White House, according to two people familiar with the practice, Mr. Trump was generally able to identify what was in the boxes most immediately around him. One of those people said he was “meticulous” in putting things in specific boxes — notwithstanding a picture released by the Justice Department showing classified documents spilled on the floor of a storage room at Mar-a-Lago.

Shortly after John F. Kelly took over as Mr. Trump’s chief of staff in July 2017, Mr. Kelly and other aides grew concerned that some documents were likely presidential records and might go missing if they were kept in the residence. They impressed upon Mr. Trump that the papers had to be tracked, but he was not especially interested, the people said.

Aides started examining the boxes to check for presidential records, but Mr. Trump still found ways to bring items to the residence. And the boxes began to multiply.

He could point to specific boxes that he wanted to take with him on Air Force One when he was traveling, and decline to take others, appearing aware of the contents inside the boxes he chose, both officials said.

The same was true when Mr. Trump left the White House, according to one person briefed on how he behaved. He knew the contents of the boxes around him. Some aides would periodically encourage him to condense the number he had in his immediate vicinity. Another person familiar with Mr. Trump’s habits said that when one box filled up, aides over the past two years would take it away and store it, bringing him a new one.

The charging document includes photos detailing just how many dozens of those cardboard boxes Mr. Trump had amassed. They are piled on a stage at Mar-a-Lago, stuffed into a storage room, even stacked in a bathroom, with some behind a shower curtain.

At his club in Bedminster, N.J., on Tuesday night, hours after he was arraigned in a Miami courtroom, Mr. Trump insisted to several hundred supporters that the boxes included “newspapers, press clippings” and “thousands and thousands of White House pictures,” as well as “clothing, memorabilia and much, much more.”

“I hadn’t had a chance to go through all the boxes,” Mr. Trump said. “It’s a long, tedious job, takes a long time. Which I was prepared to do, but I have a very busy life.”

That claim — that the boxes mostly contained personal items like clothing and that Mr. Trump was not aware of exactly what they held — is one he had made to his own advisers toward the second half of 2021.

Mr. Trump’s lawyers included a similar argument in a letter sent to Congress in April, claiming that Mr. Trump had little to do with how the documents were packed and shipped to Florida after he left office. In the letter, the lawyers claimed that “institutional processes, rather than intentional decision by Mr. Trump,” resulted in classified material leaving the White House.

“The White House staff simply swept all documents from the president’s desk and other areas into boxes, where they have resided ever since,” the letter said.

According to prosecutors, the notion that Mr. Trump was simply too busy to know all that he had is undercut by the facts.

As early as January 2021, as Mr. Trump was preparing to leave office after efforts to thwart the transfer of power to Joseph R. Biden Jr., he and his White House staff members, including Mr. Nauta, packed materials into boxes, the indictment says. “Trump was personally involved in this process,” it says.

On two occasions after he left office — once in late 2021 as he was reluctantly responding to demands from the National Archives to return the material he had taken from the White House and then later after a grand jury subpoena demanding the return of any classified documents still in his possession — Mr. Trump was brought a number of boxes to review, indicating that he was aware of their contents. (At the Heart of the Documents Case: Trump’s Attachment to His Boxes.)

Admitting that the two articles cited above are from sources that are unfriendly to Donald John Trump as matter of course, it is, however, nevertheless true that the former president’s possessiveness (he refers to the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, Kevin McCarthy, as “My Kevin) of people and things is part of his narcissistic personality. Trump has always put himself above the laws of God, about which he knows almost next-to-nothing, and the just laws of men if those laws interfere with his own beliefs about what is his to keep and thus dispose of according to decisions that makes without interference from others.

In many ways, therefore, Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., who is above the law on a de facto basis as he has the full weight of the Ministry of Injustice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the entirety of the intelligence community protecting him and the rest of his corrupt family at every turn imaginable, and the man he hates and wants to see imprisoned, Donald John Trump, are very much alike. Both men are vain, egotistic, narcissistic, and caustically dismissive of criticism, and both men live in Manichean bubble words of their own choosing wherein the world is divided between those who support one or the other. Who has any time for loyalty to Christ the King and His true Church when one is concerned about loyalty to himself, his family, and his own delusions of grandeur and privilege that will count for nothing but his condemnation at the Particular Judgment?

Biden deliberately kept classified documents from his thirty-six years in the United States Senate and his eight as Vice President of the United States of America in the full knowledge that he had acquired the necessary “bona fides” with the intelligence community to act without regard to the relevant laws.

Donald John Trump, on the other hand, is a risk taker who built skyscrapers, hotel complexes, gambling casinos, and golf resorts in the rough and tumble world of construction and other trade unions, some of which have had a very decided influence of organized crime figures in and around them over their histories. Trump had to play rough with the rough guys and believes that he can do the same when it comes to dealing with his sworn enemies in the intelligence and legal communities that out get him while they have done and are doing everything possible to protect the Biden Family Crime Syndicate.

Rough and tumble might work in the construction and real estate business, but it does not work with opposing statists who know full well that elections are only window dressings to empower them to restrict more and more legitimate human liberties, to spy on dissenters at will as “domestic terrorists,” to ignore the crimes of Antifa and other George Soros-backed anarchists and nihilists in the name of “democratic protests” while hammering those who merely walked into the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021, without committing any act of violence as “insurrectionists” whose lives must be ruined forever, to send the full force of the Federal Bureau of Investigation against dedicated pro-lifers such as Mark Houck and against parents who complain about the Marxist-based critical race theory, to promote the most revolutionary and treasonous agenda of opening the borders wide for human traffickers and sworn terrorists to enter the country at will, to sell out the interests of the United States of America to the Communist Chinese terror regime in Beijing, and to advance the devil’s agenda of perversity as a normal expression of “love” and of the mutilation of children’s bodies as a means to “protect children” from being “repressed” by their parents. The scions of organized crime (Mafia, La Cosa Nostra, et al.) have nothing on the state-empowered thugs of Modernity who have come to the forefront precisely because men and their nations long ago rejected the only governing force on this earth to restrain human passion and to call men to obedience by exercising her Indirect and, when all else false, her Direct Power to discipline them when the good of souls demands her motherly intervention, namely, the Catholic Church. This in-your-face and completely unapologetic totalitarianism that is upon us right now is only the logical end result of the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King wrought by the Protestant Revolution and solidified several centuries later by the rise of the welter of Judeo-Masonic “philosophies” and ideologies that have attempted to created social order out of error and to foster what is, for all intents and purposes, a secular state religion of statism from which no one can dissent without being branded a social and cultural heretic unworthy of employment and perhaps even the right to vote, own property, and perhaps even to exist.

It is not to belabor the point to explain that administration of Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., knows that it can act as it is doing because the nation is divided almost in half between those who will never vote for any member of the organized crime family of the false opposite of the naturalist “right,” especially not for anyone named Donald John Trump, and that the scandals of the moment fade into the mists of time. How many people alive today remember Chinagate, which was William Jefferson Blythe Clinton’s and Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton’s bush league efforts to sell solicit campaign contributions from Chicom arms merchants to permit the Loral space company to sell strategic information to Red Chinese government itself?

Permit me to remind you of some of the details:

The “Chinagate” fundraising scandal plagued the 1996 Bill Clinton-Al Gore campaign and Hillary was very much involved.  Chinagate aka Commercegate is the most serious scandal in U.S. history. It involves the transfer of America’s most sensitive technology, including but not limited to nuclear missile and satellite technology, apparently in exchange for millions of dollars in contributions to the 1996 Clinton-Gore re-election effort and the Democratic National Committee.

The Chinagate scandal of 1996 ended up in an award of 900,000 in attorney’s fees and costs to Judicial Watch ten years later.

The scandal was an apparent scheme by the Clinton administration to sell seats on taxpayer-funded trade missions in exchange for campaign contributions to the 1996 Clinton-Gore campaign.

concealed and destroyed records regarding the trade mission and testimony was falsified.

Nolanda Hill, a business partner and confidante of the Clinton then-Commerce Secretary Ron Brown testified in a court hearing during the litigation that the Clinton White House told Brown to “delay the [Judicial Watch] case by withholding the production of documents prior to the 1996 elections and to devise a way not to comply with the court’s orders.”

She also testified that Brown, who died in a plane crash during a trade mission to Bosnia, told her that Hillary conceived of the scheme to sell trade mission seats. Brown complained of  being “Hillary’s blankety-blank tour guide.”

Judicial Watch began an investigation and Clinton administration officials deliberately concealed and destroyed records regarding the trade mission and testimony was falsified.

Nolanda Hill, a business partner and confidante of the Clinton then-Commerce Secretary Ron Brown testified in a court hearing during the litigation that the Clinton White House told Brown to “delay the [Judicial Watch] case by withholding the production of documents prior to the 1996 elections and to devise a way not to comply with the court’s orders.”

She also testified that Brown, who died in a plane crash during a trade mission to Bosnia, told her that Hillary conceived of the scheme to sell trade mission seats. Brown complained of  being “Hillary’s blankety-blank tour guide.”

The case was so serious and so damaging that the Commerce Department asked for a judgment against itself to avoid any further revelations. The court refused and insisted the Commerce Department conduct a new search for trade mission records and authorized discovery into the illegal concealment and destruction of government records.

While there was a lot of circumstantial evidence, there was never a smoking gun.

~ Clinton friend Yah Lin “Charlie” Trie pleaded guilty to charges of violating campaign finance rules in exchange for having pending indictments dropped against him in Washington and Arkansas.

~ According to news reports in 1997, Democratic donor Johnny Chung received a $150,000 transfer from the Bank of China three days before he handed then-First Lady Hillary Clinton’s chief of staff a $50,000 check.

~ President Clinton admitted in 1997 that he invited major campaign donors to spend the night in the White House. The Clintons hosted 404 overnight guests.

~ During the investigation by the Department of Justice, about 120 people connected to “Chinagate” either fled the country or pleaded the Fifth Amendment to prevent testifying.

Ltd. They transferred sensitive US missile technology to China in the 1990s. The CEO Bernard Schwartz gave $1.5 million to various Democratic Party entities including Bill Clinton’s 1996 reelection campaign.

At the same time Schwartz and Loral convinced the Clinton Administration to transfer technology export licensing authority from the State Department to the more politically-influenced Commerce Department. Schwartz and Loral then obtained licenses from the Commerce Department that were needed to launch Loral-manufactured communications satellites into orbit from China.

They ended up advancing China’s missile program which is a threat to US national security much as the Clinton-Russian uranium deal is..

Then there was the contribution scandal involving fugitive Norman Hsu during Hillary’s last presidential run. She kept most of the money he contributed even after she knew he admitted guilt in illegal bundling of the contributions. He had raised more than $1 million for then-Senator Clinton’s presidential campaign.

There were questions, but no smoking gun.

In January 2001, immediately before Bill Clinton left office, he granted a presidential pardon to Marc Rich after his ex-wife and his friend donated a combined $1.45 million to the Clinton Presidential Library. Rich fled the country once he was convicted of tax evasion.

Even Hillary’s 2000 Senate campaign involved an illegal contribution from Hollywood mogul Peter Paul and the leveling of a $35,000 fine by the FEC. Hillary’s finance director was indicted and acquitted.

Recently, very large contributions to the Clinton Foundation and exorbitant speaking fees for Bill Clinton were proven to coincide with favors granted by the State Department and signed off by then-secretary Hillary Clinton. One extremely large donation was tied to the selling of our Uranium to the Russians.

The Benghazi scandal brings us once again to Hillary Clinton’s lack of transparency and suspected intrigue. She deleted 30,000 emails from a private server she was not allowed to use for government documents. She had no right to delete the emails and she did it when Congress announced they were going to subpoena them. (Lest we forget Clinton’s Chinagate scandal, the worst in US history.)

To rise above all the agitation one must come to the realization that, as I noted so many times before, one can never expect justice from those who are personally unjust. Fallen human nature is what it is, which means that people are prone to be hypocritical in their application of the law and duplicitous in the conduct of their own personal lives. Granted. However, we are living at a time when almost no one in public life thinks about the possibility of losing their immortal souls, either because they are religiously indifferentists/outright atheists or because they believe in or another of Protestant’s “salvation by faith alone” heresy that provides them with false assurances that they can never lose their souls. Such men can lie with impunity, make excuses for the secular saviour du jour, and never become outraged at anything done to the hated members of “the opposition,” whose very right to oppose the benighted ideologies of the moment must be repressed in the name of “saving democracy.” Woodrow Wilson and Vladimir Lenin, call your respective offices, please.

Although more will be written about the subject of Joseph Robinette Biden’s completely mercenary efforts to make money from the Red Chinese thugs in exchange for policies of appeasement, suffice it for the moment to note that Biden and Merrick Garland know that they can use Donald John Trump’s problems, many of which are self-made while others have been manufactured to suit the man to prevent him from gaining power again, to provide a very convenient cover for how bold Biden has been in using his poor “victim” son, Hunter Biden, to extort money from Red Chinese officials:

WASHINGTON — Two IRS whistleblowers told Congress in closed-door testimony released Thursday that the Justice Department waged a coverup in the tax fraud investigation of first son Hunter Biden — revealing stunning details of alleged interference and new evidence indicating President Biden was involved in his son’s foreign dealings.

Among the shocking details made public by the House Ways and Means Committee:

*The Hunter Biden probe was opened in November 2018 off the back of an investigation the IRS was conducting of a “foreign-based amateur online pornography platform,” according to whistleblower Gary Shapley.

*The first son was given the code name “Sportsman” by investigators.

*Delaware US Attorney David Weiss sought to bring federal charges against Hunter, 53, in the Central District of California and in Washington, DC, last year and was denied both times by Biden-appointed US attorneys Martin Estrada and Matthew Graves, respectively.

*According to the second whistleblower, who has remained anonymous, the investigation covered the years 2014 through 2019, during which Hunter and his “associates” received approximately $17.3 million from Ukraine, Romania and China — with the first son alone scooping $8.3 million.

*Investigators pressed for felony charges against Hunter for ducking $2.2 million in tax payments — rather than misdemeanors announced Tuesday as part of a probation-only plea deal.

*Assistant US Attorney Lesley Wolf discouraged investigators from pursuing lines of questioning related to Joe Biden, saying at one point that there was “no specific criminality,” according to Shapley.

The revelation that Biden appointees blocked charges against his son is politically explosive because Attorney General Merrick Garland testified under oath to Congress earlier this year that Weiss was empowered to bring charges outside of Delaware. Intentionally misleading Congress is a crime.

Weiss, who signed off this week on the Delaware plea deal, sought to be appointed special counsel in the case at least twice — including as recently as spring 2022 — but was turned down by the Biden Justice Department, both whistleblowers alleged.

Shapley, who sat for a six-hour deposition with the committee on May 26, took over the Hunter Biden case in January 2020 and said that investigators had turned up fresh evidence of Joe Biden’s involvement in his family’s overseas income.

That included eye-popping communications from Hunter Biden’s iCloud account, Shapley said, citing a message that directly implicated the president in an attempt to coerce money from a Chinese businessman.

“[W]e obtained a July 30th, 2017, WhatsApp message from Hunter Biden to Henry Zhao, where Hunter Biden wrote: ‘I am sitting here with my father and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled. Tell the director that I would like to resolve this now before it gets out of hand, and now means tonight. And, Z, if I get a call or text from anyone involved in this other than you, Zhang, or the chairman, I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction. I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father,'” Shapley recounted.

“We couldn’t believe that we saw that,” the second whistleblower told the committee. “That was more indication that the dad might have been involved.” 

Zhao, of Harvest Fund Management, is a Communist Party official and his fund was associated with BHR Partners, an investment fund Hunter that co-founded in 2013 12 days after he joined his Vice-President Biden aboard Air Force Two for an official trip to Beijing, the Wall Street Journal reported. 

Hunter held onto his 10% stake in BHR Partners through at least part of his father’s first year in office as president and the White House and Hunter’s representatives have refused any transparency into his alleged divestment.

The BHR venture was the first of two major Biden family dealings in China. Through the second with CEFC China Energy, Hunter and first brother James Biden received $4.8 million in 2017 and 2018, according to a Washington Post review of laptop records. A May 2017 email about the CEFC deal referred to Joe Biden as the “big guy” due a 10% cut and an October 2017 document listed Joe Biden as a participant on a call about CEFC’s attempt to buy US natural gas.

Shapley said investigators were barred from searching a guest house at Joe Biden’s Wilmington, Del. home to find supporting evidence and that Wolf objected during a meeting on Dec. 3, 2020, to questioning a key Biden family associate, Rob Walker, about the president.

“Wolf interjected and said she did not want to ask about the big guy and stated she did not want to ask questions about ‘dad'” he said. 

“When multiple people in the room spoke up and objected that we had to ask, she responded, there’s no specific criminality to that line of questioning. This upset the FBI too,” Shapley testified.

But investigators later did ask Walker about Joe Biden’s role. An FBI agent asked if there were “any times when he was in office, or did you hear Hunter Biden say that he was setting up a meeting with his dad with them while dad was still in office?”

“Yes,” Walker answered, according to Shapley, before “inexplicably, the FBI agent changed the subject.”

The Walker interview, on Dec. 8, 2020, was one of 12 investigators had planned to conduct on a so-called “day of action.” However, Shapley said, he learned the night before that “FBI headquarters had notified Secret Service headquarters and the transition team about the planned actions the following day. This essentially tipped off a group of people very close to President Biden and Hunter Biden and gave this group an opportunity to obstruct the approach”. According to Shapley, the first son’s attorneys refused to allow him to be interviewed.

As for the guest house, Shapley said that on Sept. 3, 2020, “Wolf told us there was more than enough probable cause for the physical search warrant there, but the question was whether the juice was worth the squeeze.”

Wolf added, according to Shapley, that “optics were a driving factor in the decision on whether to execute a search warrant. She said a lot of evidence in our investigation would be found in the guest house of former Vice President Biden, but said there is no way we will get that approved.”

The testimony also mentions Hunter’s infamous abandoned laptop was verified by the FBI in November 2019, but investigators thereafter were barred from seeing it, Shapley said.

“When the FBI took possession of the device in December 2019, they notified the IRS that it likely contained evidence of tax crimes,” Shapley said. 

However, the laptop was then not shared, prompting an outcry from tax investigators who wanted to look into evidence of criminality on the device — including potential crimes by Joe Biden, whom Hunter griped in a laptop message took “half” of his lucrative foreign income from countries where the elder Biden held sway as vice president.

Wolf “stated that she would not have seen it because, for a variety of reasons, prosecutors decided to keep it from the investigators. This decision is unprecedented in my experience,” Shapley said while recalling a meeting involving investigators and FBI computer analysts in October 2020.

“Investigators assigned to this investigation were obstructed from seeing all the available evidence,” Shapley said. “It is unknown if all the evidence in the laptop was reviewed by agents or by prosecutors. Based on guidance provided by the prosecutors on a recurring basis to not look into anything related to President Biden, there is no way of knowing if evidence of other criminal activity existed concerning Hunter Biden or President Biden.”

Another investigative dispute erupted in December 2020 over the question of whether to search Hunter Biden’s Northern Virginia storage unit, with Shapley saying the IRS had “prepared an affidavit in support of a search warrant for the unit, but … Wolf once again objected.”

On Dec. 14, Weiss — Wolf’s boss — told Shapley that “that if the storage unit wasn’t accessed for 30 days we could execute a search warrant on it.

“No sooner had we gotten off the call then we heard AUSA Wolf had simply reached out to Hunter Biden’s defense counsel and told him about the storage unit, once again ruining our chance to get to evidence before being destroyed, manipulated, or concealed,” he testified.

Days earlier, the second whistleblower said he had prepared an affidavit in support of searching the storage unit at Wolf’s direction.

“I would like to possibly execute this sometime next week,” he emailed Wolf Dec. 8. “I think that is
reasonable, given the upcoming holiday.”

According to him, Wolf responded the following day: “We are getting to work on this, but I want to manage expectations with you regarding timing. It has to go through us, DOJ Tax, possibly [Office of Enforcement Operations], and definitely Eastern District of Virginia, who has never seen the case before, layer in the filter requirements in the Fourth Circuit, and it’s just not clear it’s going to happen next week, even with everyone making it a priority.”

“That tells me two things right there,” the second whistleblower said. “[First,] That David Weiss wasn’t really in charge. And it also tells me that I have never had a case where, if we needed to get records and preserve them, that we didn’t do everything in our power to get a search warrant approved and get moving on that expeditiously.”

Although she allegedly blunted some of the inquiries, Wolf did support much harsher charges than ultimately were leveled, according to the testimony.

“AUSA Wolf supported charging Hunter Biden for tax evasion and false return in 2014, 2018, and 2019, and failure to file or pay for 2015, 2016, and 2017,” Shapley said. “The proper venue for a tax case is where the subject resides or where the return is prepared or filed. That meant the proper venue for the years we were looking into would either be Washington, D.C., or California, not Delaware,” resulting in the impasse with Biden’s appointees.

According to Shapley, the refusal by Graves to bring charges in the District meant Hunter’s actions in 2014 and 2015 would not be prosecuted.

“The years in question included foreign income from Burisma and a scheme to evade his income taxes through a partnership with a convicted felon,” he said. “There were also potential [Foreign Agents Registration Act] issues relating to 2014 and 2015. The purposeful exclusion of the 2014 and 2015 years sanitized the most substantive criminal conduct and concealed material facts.”

The shocking allegations came two days after Weiss revealed that Hunter Biden had accepted a deal in which he agreed to plead guilty to two misdemeanor counts of willful failure to pay taxes on at least $3 million in income earned across 2017 and 2018. The first son also agreed to enter a pretrial diversion program to avoid a felony conviction for owning a firearm while addicted to drugs.

“Attorney General Merrick Garland told Congress Weiss had all the authority necessary,” Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith (R-Mo.) pointed out Thursday. “Well, which is it?”

This past March, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) pressed Garland on whether Weiss was truly able to bring charges without the approval of other Justice Department officials, specifically if the alleged crime occurred outside Delaware.

“Without special counsel authority, he could need permission of another US attorney in certain circumstances to bring charges outside the district of Delaware,” Grassley noted at the time. “I would like clarification from you with respect to these concerns.”

Garland replied that Weiss would be able to charge Hunter Biden even for crimes that occurred outside Delaware.

“The US attorney in Delaware has been advised that he has full authority to make those kind of referrals that you’re talking about or to bring cases in other jurisdictions if he feels it’s necessary. And I will assure that if he does, he will be able to do that,” the AG said.

Grassley pressed: “Does the Delaware US attorney lack independent charging authority over certain criminal allegations against the president’s son outside of the district of Delaware?”

“If it’s in another district, he would have to bring the case in another district, but as I said, I’ve promised to ensure he’s able to carry out his investigation and that he be able to run it and if he needs to bring it in another jurisdiction, he will have full authority to do that,” Garland said.

Chris Clark, an attorney for Hunter Biden, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. 

The IRS said in a statement: “Under federal law, the IRS can’t comment on specific taxpayer matters. These are laws designed to protect taxpayers, and we take them seriously.”

Joe Biden has repeatedly denied speaking with his son about his overseas business interests, despite clear evidence to the contrary. (Biden DOJ ran interference for Hunter in tax fraud probe: IRS whistleblowers.)

“One Set of Laws for everyone,” Jack Smith?

No, there is one set of laws for statists and one set of laws for their hapless opponents in the false opposite of the naturalist right.

An Attorney General of the United States of America who had the best interests of his county at heart even on a natural level would have said something like this about the Trump case that is now before United States District Court Judge Aileen Cannon of the Southern District of Florida:

“To prosecute a former president of the United States of America, especially one who is currently a candidate for the office once again, is unacceptable in a free society.

“Even though former President Donald John Trump was personally reckless in the retention of information and willful in his efforts to resist their return while directing his subordinates to keep moving boxes so that investigators could not find them, the verdict on this matter must be left, in the first place, to Republican Party primary voters and, in the second place, to the American electorate if the former president wins the first verdict.

“Justice is not served when political opponents can be prosecuted for offenses that others have committed and for which they were never prosecuted.

“The people must decide this case, not a Federal jury.”

Yes, that is pure fantasy in today’s world, especially when the former president keeps making statements in interviews that even some of his once fervent supporters understand are going to give prosecutors more of an opportunity to secure a conviction (see, for example, Erick Erickson on Twitter: "The problem with Trump's interview with Bret Baier is that Trump has the right not to testify in his federal trial, but the prosecutor can admit the video wherein Trump admits he kept documents from the grand jury because he still wanted to go through them. So Trump would). There simply can be no proper administration of justice absent the due subordination of men and their nations to Christ the King and His Catholic Church in all that pertains to the good of souls. Period.

Nations that do not place themselves under the sweet yoke of the Social Reign of Christ the King must live under the tyranny of the shifting sands of popular sovereignty and of the caesars who curry favor with “the people.”

As I have noted in the past, the best response to the statism of Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., and his claque of handlers, enablers, and enforces as well as the statism of Jorge Mario Bergoglio was delivered by the  Archbishop of Venice, Giuseppe Melchiorre, in 1896:

In August 1896 in Padua, the second Congress of the Catholic Union for Social Studies took place. We have already seen that this organization had been created seven years before by Professor Giuseppe Toniolo, in the presence of the Bishop of Mantua [Giuseppe Melchiorre Sarto]. This time, eight bishops were present and several directors of the Opera del Congressi took part. All the eminent representatives of the Italian Catholic Movement were present (Medolago Pagnuzzi, Alessi and others). Cardinal Sarto’s address attracted considerable notice. Faced with “ardent enemies” (unbelief and revolution) “…menacing and trying to destroy the social fabric,” the Patriarch of Venice invited the participants to make Jesus Christ the foundation of the their work: “the only peace treaty is the Gospel.” He warned them against what is now called the “welfare state,” the state which provides everything and provides all socialization: “substituting public almsgiving for private almsgiving involves the complete destruction of Christianity and it is a terrible attack on the principle of ownership. Christianity cannot exist without charity, and the difference between charity and justice is that justice may have recourse to laws and even to force, depending on the circumstances, whereas charity can only be imposed by the tribunal of God and of conscience.” If public assistance and the redistribution of wealth are institutionalized, “poverty becomes a function, a way of life, a public trade…” (Yves Chiron, Saint Pius X: Restorer of the Church. Translated by Graham Harrison. Angelus Press, 2002, p. 100)

No formula of a naturalist of the “left” or of the “right” can produce true improvement that will redound to men and their nations. It is only by light of the Catholic Faith that men can see clearly enough to pursue temporal matters in light of eternity.

Get out of the diabolical trap of naturalism. Refuse to be agitated by the “talking heads” on radio and television who do not understand anything about First and Last Things and thus whose histrionics are nothing more than the injurious babbling spoken of by Pope Pius IX as they do not understand that the remote cause of all human problems is Original Sin and that their proximate causes are to be found in the Actual Sins of men and thus can be remedied only by the daily conversion of souls as they seek to grow in sanctity by cooperating with the graces sent to them by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through the loving hands of His Most Blessed Mother, she who is the Mediatrix of All Graces.

These “talking heads” make constant advertence to the genius of the “founding fathers,” men who a founding hatred for Christ the King, and their founding principles that have convinced men that they can establish a social order without regard to any religion, no less the true religion, which is the very premise of Judeo-Masonry. How can men who believe in the very principles that are the fruit of the Protestant Revolution against the Social Reign of Christ the King and of Judeo-Masonry that are the foundation of “American exceptionalism” help us to understand issues that must be viewed through the deeper, supernatural eyes of the Holy Faith? They can’t.

Consider these words of Father Edward Leen and learn from them once and for all, please!

A shudder of apprehension is traversing the world which still retains its loyalty to Jesus expressing Himself through the authority of His Church. That apprehension has not its sole cause the sight of the horrors that the world has witnessed in recent years in both hemispheres. Many Christians are beginning to feel that perhaps all may not be right with themselves. There is solid reason for this fear. The contemplation of the complete and reasoned abandonment of all hitherto accepted human values that has taken place in Russia and is taking place elsewhere, causes a good deal of anxious soul-searching. It is beginning to be dimly perceived that in social life, as it is lived, even in countries that have not as yet definitely broken with Christianity, there lie all the possibilities of what has become actual in Bolshevism. A considerable body of Christians, untrained in the Christian philosophy of life, are allowing themselves to absorb principles which undermine the constructions of Christian thought. They do not realise how much dangerous it is for Christianity to exist in an atmosphere of Naturalism than to be exposed to positive persecution. In the old days of the Roman Empire those who enrolled themselves under the standard of Christ saw, with logical clearness, that they had perforce to cut themselves adrift from the social life of the world in which they lived–from its tastes, practices and amusements. The line of demarcation between pagan and Christian life was sharp, clearly defined and obvious. Modern Christians have not been so favorably situated. As has been stated already, the framework of the Christian social organisation has as yet survived. This organisation is, to outward appearances, so solid and imposing that it is easy to be blind to the truth that the soul had gradually gone out of it. Under the shelter and utilising the resources of the organisation of life created by Christianity, customs, ways of conduct, habits of thought, have crept in, more completely perhaps, at variance with the spirit of Christianity than even the ways and manners of pagan Rome.

This infiltration of post-Christian paganism has been steady but slow, and at each stage is imperceptible. The Christian of to-day thinks that he is living in what is to all intents and purposes a Christian civilisation. Without misgivings he follows the current of social life around him. His amusements, his pleasures, his pursuits, his games, his books, his papers, his social and political ideas are of much the same kind as are those of the people with whom he mingles, and who may not have a vestige of a Christian principle left in their minds. He differs merely from them in that he holds to certain definite religious truths and clings to certain definite religious practices. But apart from this there is not any striking contrast in the outward conduct of life between Christian and non-Christian in what is called the civilised world. Catholics are amused by, and interested in, the very same things that appeal to those who have abandoned all belief in God. The result is a growing divorce between religion and life in the soul of the individual Christian. Little by little his faith ceases to be a determining effect on the bulk of his ideas, judgments and decisions that have relation to what he regards as his purely “secular” life. His physiognomy as a social being no longer bears trace of any formative effect of the beliefs he professes. And his faith rapidly becomes a thing of tradition and routine and not something which is looked to as a source of a life that is real.

The Bolshevist Revolution has had one good effect. It has awakened the averagely good Christian to the danger runs in allowing himself to drift with the current of social life about him. It has revealed to him the precipice towards which he has was heading by shaping his worldly career after principles the context of which the revolution has mercilessly exposed and revealed to be at variance with real Christianity. The sincerely religious–and there are many such still–are beginning to realise that if they are to live as Christians they must react violently against the milieu in which they live. It is beginning to be felt that one cannot be a true Christian and live as the bulk of men in civilised society are living. It is clearly seen that “life” is not to be found along those ways by which the vast majority of men are hurrying to disillusionment and despair. Up to the time of the recent cataclysm the average unreflecting Christian dwelt in the comfortable illusion that he could fall in with the ways of the world about him here, and, by holding on to the practices of religion, arrange matters satisfactorily for the hereafter. That illusion is dispelled. It is coming home to the discerning Christian that their religion is not a mere provision for the future. There is a growing conviction that it is only through Christianity lived integrally that the evils of the present time can be remedied and disaster in the time to come averted. (Father Edward Leen, The Holy Ghost, published in 1953 by Sheed and Ward, pp. 6-9.)

We should take courage from the example of the two saints whose lives were the focus of Holy Mother Church’s liturgy yesterday, Saint Paulinus of Nola, whose feast is on the universal calendar of the Roman Rite, and Saint Alban, the British protomartyr, whose feast is appointed for June 22 but not celebrated universally.

The entirety of Saint Paulinus of Nola’s life was a rebuke to the worldly-wise of his own day and, indeed, of every age, especially our own at this time. Dom Prosper Gueranger explained:

Paulinus, heir to an immense fortune, and at twenty-five years of age already Prefect of Rome, senator, and consul, was far from supposing that there could be a career more honourable for himself or more profitable to the world, than that in which he was thus engaged by the traditions of his illustrious family. Verily, to the eyes of worldly men, no lot in life could be conceived better cast, surrounded as he was by noble connections, buoyed up by the well deserved esteem of great and little, and finding repose in the culture of letters which had already from his earliest youth rendered him the very pride of brilliant Aquitaine, where at Bordeaux he first saw the light. Alas! in our days how many are undeservedly set up as models of a laborious and useful life!

The day came, however, when these lowly careers, which heretofore seemed so brimful of work and prospect, now offered to Paulinus but the spectacle of men 'tossed to and fro in the midst of days and emptiness, had having for the life's toil naught but the weaving of the spider-web of vain worlds.' What then had happened? It was this: once, when in the Campania, which was subject to his government, Paulinus happened to come to the hallowed tomb of St. Felix, that humble priest heretofore proscribed by this very Rome, whose power was symbolized by the terrible fasces borne at that moment in front of him; suddenly floods of new light inundated his soul; Rome and her power became dar as night before this apparition 'of the grand rights of the awful God'. With his whole heart this scion of many an ancient race, that had brought the world to subjection, now pledged his faith to god; Christ, revealing himself in the light of Felix, had won his love. He had long enough sought and run in vain; at least he had found 'that naught is of greater worth than to believe in Jesus Christ.'

A man of so noble a soul as Paulinus carried this new principle, that had taken the place of every other, to its utmost limit. Jesus said: "If thou wilt be perfect, go, sell what thou hast and give to the poor: and then come and follow me.' Paulinus did not hesitate: not for a moment would he neglect what was best to prefer what was least; up to this, perfect in his worldly career, could he now endure not to be so for his God? He renounced his vast possessions, styled even kingdoms; the various nations of the empire, before which were displayed his incalculable riches, were astounded at the new commerce: Paulinus sold all, in order to purchase the cross and follow his God. for he was well aware that the abandonment of earthly goods is but the entrance to the lists, and not the race itself; the athlete does not become victory by the mere fact of casting off his garments; but he strips himself solely with the view of beginning combat; no has the swimmer already breasted the flood, because he stands prepared and stripped on the water's brink.

In holy impetuosity, Paulinus rather cut, than unknotted, the cable that moored his bark to land. Christ is his steersman; and with the applause of his noble wife Therasia (henceforth his sister and imitator), he sailed to the secure port of the monastic life, thinking only of saving his soul. One thought alone held him in suspense: ought he to retire to Jerusalem where so many memories invite a disciple of Christ? Jerome, whom he consulted, answered with all the frankness of strong friendship: 'For clerks, towns: for monks, solitude. It would be utter folly to quit the world in order live in the midst of a crowd greater than before. If you wish to be what you are called,a monk, that is to say, "alone," what are you doing in towns, which surely are not the habitations for solitaries, but for the multitude? Each kind of life has its models. Ours has Paul and Anthony, Hilarion and Macarius; our guides are Elias, Eliseus, and all those sons of the prophets, who dwelt in country places and in solitudes, pitching their tents near Jordan's banks.'

Paulinus followed the counsels of the solitary of Bethlehem. Preferring his title of  monk to abiding even in the holy city, and seeking the 'small field' of which Jerome had spoken, he chose a spot in the territory of Nola, outside the town, near to the glorious tomb where light had beamed upon him. Until his dying day, Felix took the place, here below, of home, of honours, of fortune, of relatives. In his sanctuary he grew, changing, by virtue of the divine seed of the Word within him, his terrestrial form, and receiving in his new being celestial wins, the one object of his ambition, which might lift him up towards God. The world might no longer count on him, either to enhance her feasts or be the recipient of her appointments; absorbed in voluntary penance and humiliation, the former consul was nothing henceforth but the last of the servants of Christ and the guardian of a tomb.

Great was the joy of the saints in heaven and of holy men on earth, at the news of such a spectacle of total renunciation given to the world. No less great was the indignant astonishment of the scandalized politicians, of the prudent according this world, of a host of men to whom the Gospel is tolerable only when its maxims do not jar with the short-sighted prejudices of their wisdom. 'What will the great say?' wrote St. Ambrose. 'The scion of such a family, of such a race, one so gifted, so eloquent, to quit the senate! to cut off the succession of such an ancestral line! It is quite intolerable! Yet look at these very men, when their own whims are at stake; they then see nothing extraordinary in inflicting on themselves transformations the most ridiculous; but if a Christian anxious about perfection dares to change his costume, he is cried down at once with indignation!' (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year, Feast of Saint Paulinus of Nola, June 22.)

And you’re worried about what happens to Donald John Trump at a trial when we should be concerned about the fate of his immortal soul?

Are the likes of Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., and Donald John Trump anxious about Christian perfection?
Pray for them, but remember that they are but forgettable men.

Saint Alban, in particular, was opposed to Pelagianism, which is the heresy of human self-redemption that was a forerunner of Lockean liberalism and thus is at the heart of every political ideology whether or not their adherents have heard of Pelagius and his heresy.

Pelagius taught that human beings were capable of more or less stirring up graces within themselves to save their souls and to accomplish whatever it is they set their minds to doing by means of their free wills. Many people alive today have never heard of Pelagianism or its variant, semi-Pelagianism, but most Americans believe inchoately, if not more explicitly, that they can do whatever it is they want because they are Americans. Pelagianism is at the heart of “American Exceptionalism,” which is itself but variant of the “British Exceptionalism,” that has been issued to try to remake the world in the image of the religious indifferentist and Calvinist-Judeo-Masonic American “way.”

Pelagianism was fought, however, by many a saint. Saint Germanus used the cult of the Protomartyr of Roman Britain, Saint Alban, who feast is celebrated, although not universally, on June 22, to combat Pelagianism.  Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B.’s The Liturgical Year described the valor of Saint Alban and how he was hated by the anti-historical Protestant Revolutionaries:

For a thousand years Alban too reigned with Christ. At last came the epoch when the depths of the abyss were to be let loose for a little time, and Satan, unchained, would once again seduce nations. Vanquished formerly by the saints, power was now given him to make war with them, and to overcome them in his turn. The disciple is not above his Master: like his Lord, Alban too was rejected by his own. Hated without cause, he beheld his illustrious monastery destroyed, that had been Albion's pride in the palmy days of her history; and scarce was even the venerable church itself saved, wherein God's athlete had so long reposed, shedding benefits around far and near. But, after all, what could he do now, in a profaned sanctuary, in which strange rites had banished those of our forefathers, and condemned the faith for which martyrs had bled and died? So Alban was ignominiously expelled, and his ashes scattered to the winds. (Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year.)

Hatred for the past is a common theme of revolutionaries, including the one named Jorge Mario Bergoglio.

The work of Saint Alban and others to evangelize Roman Britain was not completed in their lifetimes. Unlike Saint Patrick, who worked a genuine miracle in the conversion of Ireland in his own lifetime it was not until five hundred ninety-five years later that the evangelization of Britain started again, this time under the guidance of Saint Augustine of Canterbury, who had been sent to Britain by Pope Saint Gregory the Great:

Throned on the apostolic See, our saint proved himself to be a rightful heir of the apostles, not only as the representative and depositary of their authority, but as a follow-sharer in their mission of calling nations to the true faith. To whom does England owe her having been, for so.

For many ages, the 'island of saints'? To Gregory, who, touched with compassion for those Angli, of whom, as he playfully said, he would fain Angeli, sent to their island the monk Augustine with forty companions, all of them, as was Gregory himself, children of St. Benedict. The faith had been sown in this land as early as the second century, but it had been trodden down by the invasion of an infidel race. This time the seed fructified, and so rapidly that Gregory lived to see a plentiful harvest. It is beautiful to hear the aged Pontiff speaking with enthusiasm about the results of his English mission. He thus speaks in the twenty-seventh Book of his Morals: 'Lo! the language of Britain, which could once mutter naught save barbarous sounds, has long since begun to sing, in the divine praises, the Hebrew Alleluia! Lo! that swelling sea is now calm, and saints walk on its waves. The tide of barbarians, which the sword of earthly princes could not keep back, is now hemmed in at the simple bidding of God's priests.' (Dom Prosper Gueranger, The Liturgical Year.)

Look at the hatred directed at Father Edmund Campion, S.J., for simply adhering to that which every Englishman believed for nearly a thousand years since the time of Saint Augustine of Canterbury—and which many in Britain, including Saint Helena, had embraced as early as the latter part of the Third Century A.D. as a result of the work of Saint Alban. It was during the closing of his trial that was to conclude with his being sentenced to death by being drawn and quartered that Father Campion himself noted the irony contained in his being condemned for believing what every ancestor of those who had condemned him had believed for nearly a thousand years:

"The only thing I have now to say is, that if my religion makes me a traitor, I am worthy to be condemned. Otherwise I am, and have been, as good a subject as ever the Queen had.

"In condemning me you condemn all your own ancestor--all the ancient priests, bishops and kings--all that was once the glory of England, the island of saints, and the most devoted child of the See of Peter.

"For what I have taught . . . that they did not teach? To be condemned with these lights--not of England only, but of the world--by their degenerate descendants, is both gladness and joy.

"God lives; posterity will live; their judgment is not so liable to corruption as that of those who are now going to sentence me to death." (Father Harold C. Gardiner, S.J., Edmund Campion: Hero of God's Underground, Farrar, Straus and Cudahy, 1957, pp. 160-161.)  

The exact same phenomenon has occurred as a result of the conciliar revolution. All but a microscopically small number of Catholics attached to the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism have grown to hate most of what is dismissed derisively as the "pre-conciliar church," which was the point of They Like It! thirteen years ago now. Those who have no direct memory of the "pre-conciliar church" have been brainwashed by a highly sophisticated campaign of disinformation that helped to create a "false memory" of the past that even wiped out the true memories of those who lived in that "pre-conciliar church" and loved everything about it until they were "taught" that they could not even trust their own memories.

What should we do?

Spend more time in prayer before Our Lord’s Real Presence in the Most Blessed Sacrament, if this is at all possible during this time of apostasy and betrayal.

Pray more Rosaries.

Make more sacrifices.

Do more fasting.

Pray for more crosses.

Pray for humiliation.

Enthrone your homes to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Read more books about the lives of the saints.

Stop watching television once and for all! The saints did not need to be bombarded with incessant news reports, did they?

Don’t be agitated by the lies of naturalists and their enablers.

Know that Our Lady’s Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart will triumph.

Conscious of making reparation for our own sins, which, although forgiven and thus no longer exist, are in need of our making satisfaction here in this passing, mortal vale of tears before we die, may our Rosaries each day help lift the scales of naturalism that cloud our vision, thus making us courageous apostles of the Social Reign of Christ the King who recognize and are unafraid to proclaim that Catholicism is the one and only foundation of personal and social order.

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!

Isn’t it time to pray a Rosary now?

Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.

Saint Paulinus of Nola, pray for us.

Saint Alban, the British Protomartyr, pray for us.