Trump is not a paranoiac after all

The prevailing fashion, in the legacy media and (of course) on the political left, is to suggest that President Donald J. Trump is a dangerous would-be authoritarian. Part of that narrative is to suggest that he is a paranoiac – having delusions of grandeur and persecution. Both parts of that narrative are now failing. Voters across the land are changing their votes, in fresh appreciation that Donald Trump did “make America great again.” (One appreciates a good thing the most when one loses it – or someone else steals it or destroys it.) Now evidence is surfacing everywhere that the persecution of Trump was as real as his grandeur – or more real. That persecution should concern all Americans, not merely former Presidents and other public figures.

What is a paranoiac?

In clinical psychiatry, paranoiac means someone suffering from a relatively simple psychosis called paranoia vera. Classic paranoia vera includes overweening pride, and a tendency to blame every misfortune on the bad acts of others. A paranoiac will suspect deliberate manipulation of events most would attribute to “bad luck,” or selective application of the law.

But the key to diagnosing paranoia requires proving – or merely assuming – that the assertions the paranoiac makes are incorrect. Perhaps he has invented for himself a life he does not lead. Or either he does not suffer the persecution of which he complains, or what he really suffers is the natural consequence of his own bad behavior. This behavior can vary from simple obnoxiousness to actual (and potentially provable) violations of the law. It can also include behavior that would convince a reasonable and prudent person that the subject presents a danger to himself and others, prompting said reasonable and prudent person to warn the appropriate authorities.

But can the diagnosis remain valid when the assertions the subject makes, turn out to be correct? Suppose a sheriff serves someone with a foreclosure notice, for nonpayment of mortgage installments. Now suppose that, upon an investigation of an unrelated lead, a bank examiner finds that the loan officer handling this person’s loan, received the payments but never processed them. Now that would be just the sort of persecution of which a paranoiac would complain. And a real hazard exists that it might never come to light.

The Donald Trump case

New evidence involving Donald Trump’s troubles, now reveal a breathtaking conspiracy – or conspiracies – against him. This evidence first began surfacing in one of four criminal cases now pending against Donald Trump. United States v. Trump, Nauta, and Oliveira, 9:23-cr-80101-AMC. On April 22, the former president’s lawyers filed a motion to compel discovery. Before the day was out, Judge Aileen M. Cannon had ordered the unsealing of the first of several documents that team had filed under seal last year. They filed it under seal because – allegedly – classified documents are involved. The judge, having reviewed the documents, decided they should come out into the open.

Those specific documents showed that the Biden White House had repeated conversations with Jack Smith, the special counsel investigating Trump. Furthermore, the White House was colluding with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) to lay a trap for Trump. This concerns how Trump came to be in possession of certain records. He didn’t carry them all out of the White House on January 20. NARA sent him several boxes. Then came the Mar-a-Lago Raid, in which the FBI hoped to find those boxes missing. They were going to charge Trump with malicious destruction of official Archives. Unable to charge him with that, they charged him with unlawful possession – of documents they had placed into his hands.

Julie Kelly, who dropped the above short thread, gave further details two days ago.

Further evidence

That was only the beginning. Judge Cannon unsealed more documents relating to why Smith indicted Waltine Nauta, the former president’s valet. A member of Smith’s team tried to suborn Nauta’s lawyer with promises of a judicial appointment. That member, or another member, also applied pressure on Nauta to “turn government’s evidence” against Trump. Neither ploy worked.

On May 1, Judge Cannon dropped a hint that she would unseal documentary evidence that Judge Beryl Howell, who had been investigating the matter in Washington, D.C., ruled that another of Trump’s lawyers, Evan Corcoran, was not entitled to claim the attorney-client privilege. Judge Cannon has scheduled a “sealed telephonic conference” on this matter for May 8.

Trump has now filed, not under seal, a motion to dismiss, alleging vindictive and selective prosecution. The voluminous unsealings now serve as supporting evidence.

Trump’s motion runs to 27 pages, with 151 pages of additional exhibits. In it he cites retention and/or removal of classified documents by President Biden, former President Clinton, and seven others. (They include Sandy Berger, who famously removed documents in his socks.)

On Friday came fresh revelations that White House and Special Counsel’s Office operatives were meeting in September 2021, plotting how to set Trump up.

Incidentally, Ms. Kelly refers often to Jay Bratt, Smith’s lead prosecutor. He stands relatively short – only 5’2” tall – and displays his own symptoms of paranoid personality related to his short stature.

Withholding of information from Trump – and disobedience of orders!

Even that isn’t the worst revelation. Also on May 1, James O’Keefe released his first footage of interviews with Amjad Anton Fseisi, formerly of the CIA. He boasted that the Director of Central Intelligence, and the directors of several other “three-letter agencies,” conspired together never to brief President Trump on certain critical happenings around the world. O’Keefe released this very long-form post:

Then he released this post revealing that the CIA fired Fseisi for talking too much.

Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) angrily called for an immediate investigation. The next day, Trump himself gave an earful.

Well, it’s shocking to see how stupid somebody can be. If this guy is for real, you[‘d] want to get rid of him. CIA, Central Intelligence Agency. This is not an intelligent guy to be openly talking to a woman [whom he just met] that walks up and starts asking him questions and talking that way. So he may be bragging or showing off to some young lady. I have no idea [what he] spoke, but I’d get rid of him real fast. If he’s for real, get rid of him.

That last refers to the Classic O’Keefe M.O.: entice disclosures by using operatives who might appeal sexually to the subject.

Yesterday morning, Jim Hoft (The Gateway Pundit) revealed findings of an April 10 hearing by the House Oversight Committee. They interviewed several National Guard officers – and a command sergeant major – concerning the January 6 Event. At issue is why the National Guard did not deploy to prevent any untowardness at the Capitol. These witnesses said the orders to stand down came from the Pentagon. Specifically, Joint Chiefs Chairman Mark Milley ordered all military personnel to disobey the President and not send in the National Guard. The charitable explanation was that they expected Trump to order the Guard to stop the Congressional election-certification proceedings. But one must ask: did General Milley, like then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi and D.C. Mayor Bowser, want something to happen at the Capitol for which to blame Trump?

Where is now the case for paranoia?

A propos of the documents case, Christina Laila, Associated Editor at The Gateway Pundit, revealed that Jack Smith filed another motion before Judge Cannon that actually gets him into worse trouble. Waltine Nauta’s lawyers filed a motion for extension of a deadline Cannon had set for them. Nauta’s lawyer said the contents of some boxes of documents were “in a different order” than when originally scanned. In his response to that motion, Smith admitted that the FBI had moved some of the documents out of their original order in the boxes! His response then admits that this contradicts what the government originally told the Court. They said the boxes and documents were exactly as the FBI found them. And that’s not true!

The Government acknowledges that this is inconsistent with what Government counsel previously understood and represented to the Court. See, e.g., 4/12/24 Hearing Tr. at 65 (Government responding to the Court’s question of whether the boxes were “in their original, intact form as seized” by stating “[t]hey are, with one exception; and that is that the classified documents have been removed and placeholders have been put in the documents”)

Again, one cannot sustain a diagnosis of paranoia, or a finding of paranoid ideation, if the subject’s assertions prove correct. If “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence,” then that evidence is now available and incontrovertible.

But the evidence covers more than the persecution of a President, both during and after his tenure in office. It covers willful interference with the President’s ability to discharge his powers and duties effectively. And it covers a separate act of outright mutiny. As such it proves that the Deep State exists, and had nefarious motives. This is worse than mutiny. It constitutes treason – levying war against the American people.