At 5:30 p.m. on August 1, 2023, Special Counsel Jack Smith allowed the public to view a crazed federal indictment returned by a District of Columbia Grand Jury which announced three criminal conspiracy charges against the 45^th President for legally challenging the presidential election of 2020 as rigged and fraudulent. His claimed co-conspirators are the lawyers who brought cases challenging fraud and the illegal manipulation of state laws based on COVID and advised the President about the constitutional basis for challenging the election’s certification in the House of Representatives. A member of his campaign staff who coordinated the recruitment of elector slates in battleground states is also a claimed co-conspirator.

Every single item in the indictment involves constitutionally protected speech under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. According to Smith, the 2020 election challenges were criminal because Trump was spreading “destabilizing lies” which created an environment of distrust for the government. Since numerous lawyers, White House staffers, campaign staffers, and administrative state apparatchiks disagreed with Trump about the fraud, Trump’s stubborn insistence that fraud occurred constituted a crime. In other words, “disinformation” or disfavored dissent now not only gets you censored by the Security State. Now, even if you are President of the United States and you spread information the security state deems false, you can now be imprisoned, just like in totalitarian dictatorships. Trump was not indicted for the riot on January 6, although Smith alleges that his previous “lies about fraud” in the election created the anger in his supporters which resulted in violence.

This indictment thus says, for the first time, that the United States is now indicting a former President for legal actions he took as President challenging the election of his successor at a point in the current election process where he is leading his successor in all polls. Biden, for his part, is provably enmeshed in a foreign bribery and influence peddling scheme which sees fresh evidence by the hour. The unprecedented nature of these charges does not even take into account the numerous previous challenges to presidential elections brought in U.S. history which were treated as constitutionally protected actions or the seditious Hillary Clinton/Joe Biden/Barack Obama Russiagate hoax which sabotaged Trump’s presidency and effectively disenfranchised those who voted for him in 2016. As this writer has repeatedly noted, the Security State’s Transition Integrity Project envisioned utilizing the 2020 summer Antifa and BLM anarchists for massive street violence if Trump were declared the winner of the 2020 election and utilizing the U.S. military to prevent a Second Term.

Outrage about this indictment was universal among those with even the most limited knowledge concerning the First and Sixth Amendments. Democrats, on the other hand, were popping wine in the streets of D.C., declaring that this piece of garbage was “the big one.”  Watching them, former Trump spokesman Stephen Miller appropriately compared the piling up lawfare indictments of Trump to the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution.

Fox News legal commentator Andy McCarthy, a never Trumper if there ever was one, was “shocked beyond belief” by Smith’s legal theory, noting that he could charge anyone under this theory who doubted the validity of Joe Biden’s 2020 election. Smith, who briefly appeared on national television to make a statement did not even address the substance of what his indictment said. Instead, he railed about the violence of January 6^th and the heroism of Capitol and D.C. police “who stood up to the mob” and fought for the “Republic.”  McCarthy called this “pure demagoguery” noting that the indictment was not about the violence on that day but protected speech and legal proceedings. Jonathan Turley and other regular legal experts expressed similar outrage wondering if Smith’s haste to bring an indictment involving no more than adopting the narrative from the House’s phony January 6^th inquisition in legal papers and slapping untested statutes on them, was a step way too far with massive backfire potential. Professor Turley called it “a free speech killing indictment” which endangered the continuance of the Republic.

The Judge assigned to the case is Tanya Chutkun, an Obama appointee who has it in for Donald Trump. She denied Trump’s challenge to Congress’ J6 subpoena of Trump’s presidential records saying that Biden had overruled Trump’s executive privilege claim and Trump “was not King,” although he thought he was. She has also declared the J6 riot to be an insurrection which sought to overthrow the government and has sentenced J6 defendants to even harsher jail terms than the other rabid federal judges in this District. The 45^th president’s lawyers will undoubtedly move for a change of venue since he cannot get a fair trial in Washington, D.C. They will also move to dismiss the indictment on First Amendment grounds. If the judges at the D.C. District Court have an honest bone remaining in their bodies, they will recuse themselves from hearing the case based on their outrageous behavior concerning J6 defendants and their repeatedly displayed out-of- control Trump derangement syndrome.

You can help us stop this. We are circulating a petition to stop this. The U.S. Congress must defund Jack Smith. They must start impeachment proceedings against Attorney General Merrick Garland. Congress must cut the funding for any federal actions against Donald Trump. In addition, state legislators in Georgia and New York must defund the Trump prosecutions in those states. During the month of August, we need millions of signatures on this petition. We will then present it to the Republican House of Representatives and state legislators in Georgia and New York. Please sign and circulate the petition.