All Episodes
Previous Next
April 11, 2023 - Stew Peters Show
01:06:10
TRUMP LEGAL ANALYSIS – BILL BARR EPSTEIN TIES
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
In
the Trenches with Teddy Daniels.
you you you Folks, I want to talk to you about Gold Co.
There's a secret Fed bailout happening right now.
And it's looking like 2008 all over again.
Banks are collapsing and executives are taking fat bonuses.
And the White House is running to their rescue while regular people are struggling, can't pay their bills, can't fill their tanks with gas.
Then suddenly, Biden has the nerve to bail out wealthy Americans again.
Guess who's paying for that?
You are.
You are, and I am.
But you don't have to play the game anymore.
Opt out of the system.
Move your cash into gold and silver now.
Before it's too late, call Gold Co.
855-756-2296 to learn the three simple steps you can take right now to protect your savings with gold and silver.
Take action today to protect yourself and your family from financial collapse.
Before the White House takes it all away from you, call 855-756-2296 now and learn how you can get up to $10,000 in bonus silver while supplies last.
That's 855-756-2296.
Folks, there is a link right in the description of this episode.
Click on it.
GoldCo, thousands of customer reviews.
They've moved billions of dollars in precious metals.
The dollar bill is about to be worthless.
Contact GoldCo now.
855-756-2296.
And welcome to In the Trenches with Teddy Daniels.
I am your guest host today, Paul Harrell.
Thanks so much for being with us.
I'm alongside NationalFile.com reporter.
Once again, Frankie Stocks is back with us.
Frankie, as always, thank you so much for being with us here on In the Trenches with Teddy Daniels.
Hey, Paul.
Thanks for having me.
Absolutely.
There's a lot of talk.
We're going to get right into it.
Everybody is still obviously talking about the political persecution of Donald Trump.
President in exile Donald Trump being indicted by a county prosecutor.
The indictment is completely bogus.
A lot of people are trying to figure out exactly what's in the indictment.
I mean, it seems to be just a lot of What can you tell us about this interview?
So Roger Stone had Robert Barnes on you.
Robert Barnes is a widely respected constitutional expert attorney.
He's been just grinding in the defense of liberty and the defense of American freedom for years and years and years now.
And Barnes came onto the Stone program and just absolutely dissected this phony political persecution case against President Trump.
He spoke on the judge's family ties to the Biden-Harris regime.
He spoke on the judge's personal donations to the Biden-Harris regime, which appeared that they could have violated multiple laws, multiple federal disclosure and donation laws.
Pertaining to his work as a judge.
And, you know, I think Barnes brought up a really great point.
This trial needs to be moved.
It doesn't even have to go out of New York City.
Let's send it to Staten Island, where real Americans still live.
You know, the place is pretty evenly split.
50-50 GOP, 50-50 DNC over on Staten Island.
So, you know, you're getting a much more reputable, much more respectable jury pool than you're getting out of Manhattan, where the entire place has been...
Just overrun by the left to the point that only 10% of the population even bothered to vote for Alvin Bragg because they just know that the fix is in, that the chosen one is going to be installed as prosecutor, and that they're not going to have a real competition there.
So I totally agree with Barnes.
If this is to go on, it needs to be moved, and Staten Island is really a great place for it.
It's part of New York City, 50-50 GOP Democrat.
It'd be a much less biased jury pool.
Well, let's just tell you what we're going to do here.
We're going to listen to some of this Roger Stone interviewing Robert Barnes because it's comprehensive, and he really does a better job than I think any one of us could do here today on In the Trenches with Teddy Daniels.
You want to know what this Trump indictment is about?
You want to know how bogus it really is?
We're going to listen to a few clips of this.
There are very few lawyers in the country who, in my opinion, both understand the intricacies of the law but also understand the overlay of American media and politics on any legal proceeding.
Robert Barnes is among them, literally.
One of the most brilliant legal minds, but a man who deeply understands politics.
You've seen him on Infowars.
You've seen him with my friend Viva Frye.
Today he joins us in the Stone Zone.
Welcome, Robert Barnes.
Glad to be here.
Thank you so much for doing the show, Robert.
I meant every word I say.
Whenever you're on somebody else's show, I gotta stop and watch what you have to say.
You're a man who chooses his words carefully, and it's always incisive.
I also totally agree with your t-shirt.
In this country, journalists don't get prosecuted if they leak grand jury testimony or a sealed indictment to yahoo.com or CNN. Only Julian Assange gets charged and that's when he leaks embarrassing information about the deep state.
So let's start with this indictment because you've now, we had a state of suspended animation.
We knew there was an indictment.
We knew from CNN. And of all people, Mike Isikoff, the same FBI shill who pushed the Steele dossier and whose story on the Steele dossier, the Justice Department leaked to him through the FBI and then used his story to justify their FISA warrant to make this stuff up.
What is your assessment of the indictment now that you've read it?
The indictment is factually without a basis, legally without a basis, and constitutionally without a basis.
So first we'll talk about the constitutional component of it.
In my view, the Constitution has an explicit and expressed provision that is the exclusive means by which a president, former president or current president, can be criminally indicted, tried, convicted, or sentenced.
And that is that he first must be impeached by the House of Representatives on those precise charges.
And must be convicted in the Senate and removed accordingly.
The reason why the Constitution has that explicit reference to the consequences of removal, being a bar from office, being the right to indict, the right to convict, the right to sentence, that doesn't make any sense unless it's the exclusive means that doesn't make any sense unless it's the exclusive means to do so.
President Trump, of course, has been twice acquitted by the Senate, never convicted by the Senate, so I think that alone is a bar to the New York State prosecution.
Secondly, I think that it's a clear prosecution violation of selective prosecution principles in violation of that you're not supposed to be targeting your political opponent, the lead opponent of the political party, for indictment under the First Amendment, that it's punishment for speech and association and political activities, that it's selective and that it's disparate and discriminatory.
This is what Hillary Clinton was actually guilty of, is what the indictment falsely implies Trump was guilty of.
She actually falsely identified laundered information as legal fees that was meant to be for a political purpose, exclusively a political purpose, with the Steele dossier.
Let's stop right there, Frankie.
Let's just analyze that.
I mean, when they were trying to figure out what to charge Donald Trump with, what crime they're gonna charge, do they, I mean, to me, I thought this this morning when I was watching this interview, I thought, did they literally just say, well, what could we charge Hillary Clinton with?
And then they say, well, we could charge Hillary Clinton with these crimes.
Okay, well then that's what we must charge Donald Trump with.
That's what it seems like.
What are your thoughts? - Yeah, it 100% is.
I think that this was really a Soviet-style persecution of President Trump.
They identified the man that they wanted to convict of a crime.
They looked for crimes.
They couldn't find him.
So they said, well, what do we do?
What do our guys do?
Let's just project it onto him.
Let's just say that President Trump...
It violated campaign finance law.
Let's say President Trump colluded with Russia, when we all know truly that the Uniparty is colluding with Ukraine.
The entire Russia hoax that really fed into this persecution of President Trump emanates from the Uniparty's bodies that are buried in Ukraine.
Yes.
They came at President Trump as they identified the man that they wanted to charge of the crime.
They couldn't identify any crime that he committed, so they just made him up.
The entire thing was backwards of how the American system is supposed to work.
Yeah, you know, every single thing that they accused Donald Trump of with Russia, they are in fact guilty of in Ukraine.
And when I say they, it would be easy to say the Democrats, but we know Republicans are wrapped up in the Ukraine too.
We know advisors to Mitt Romney's 2012 campaign are wrapped up as well.
We know the children of U.S. politicians.
It doesn't matter.
It doesn't matter what your party affiliation is.
We have foreign governments who are making the children of politicians rich.
And there's no better example of that, of course, and no more well-known example of that than Hunter Biden.
But here in a minute, I'm going to make you known of a Republican former governor who is running for president.
I'm going to make you known, or I'm going to report on something that I can almost guarantee you haven't heard anywhere.
And we're going to do it by continuing to listen to this Roger Stone interview.
So let's get back to it.
And again, Robert Barnes on the Stone Zone.
Really good analysis here of the phony Trump indictment.
The allegations don't even rise to an election violation anyway, because the allegation is either that President Trump himself wanted to pay for this expense, and if that's so, he can spend as much money as he wants, constitutionally.
The law doesn't limit that, so that can't be a campaign finance crime.
And if he's reimbursing Cohen for it, then Cohen's exclusive purpose, not just a purpose, but the exclusive purpose, has to be solely to influence the 2016 election.
There's a timing problem.
The president doesn't do anything alleged in the indictment until 2017.
How could any of that be to influence an election that already happened?
But even if you put that aside, Cohen clearly did this for his own benefit, to show he was the Mr.
Fix-It man, to benefit the Trump brand in his mind, to benefit Melania Trump and the family.
This was not going to even impact the election, and even if it did, it was a false allegation.
It was just a blatant extortion attempt by Stormy Daniels, her lawyers.
Michael Avenatti, her famous lawyer, is in federal prison for extortion, in particular, in New York.
And so consequently, under the election laws, it can only be an illegal contribution in excess of the limits if and only if its only purpose could be to influence the election.
If it had any other possible purpose, then it can't violate the campaign finance laws.
This is probably why the indictment doesn't even allege what crime he really committed.
Because they want to switch back and forth.
Maybe claim somehow it relates to taxes.
It can't.
Cohen paid his taxes on these amounts.
The taxes were overpaid, not underpaid.
Where is the intent to defraud that is a critical element of this criminal charge, whether misdemeanor or felony?
So it didn't violate the campaign finance laws.
It didn't violate the tax laws.
And the only person defrauded at all this is Donald Trump himself.
And yet he's the only one being indicted.
So it doesn't meet any of the constitutional statutory standards.
Last but not least, it's got the least credible witness in America, Michael Cohen, maybe the second least credible, Stormy Daniels.
And you're going to have to rely primarily and principally upon Michael Cohen, who has contradicted himself and is a self-confessed felon, fraudster, perjurer, and liar.
That's not someone that you can convict anybody of, even with a stacked liberal democratic New York Manhattan jury pool.
So this is a case that's factually baseless, legally baseless, and constitutionally baseless.
An excellent analysis.
Let's stop right there.
Frankie Stocks, what are your thoughts on that breakdown right there from Robert Barnes?
I think Robert Barnes' opinion on, well not really opinion, listing of facts on Michael Cohen and Stormy Daniels is completely damning for the prosecution and for the rest of the persecutors that have been jumping up and down talking about how Michael Cohen and Stormy Daniels are going to be the ones to throw President Trump in prison.
We know Michael Cohen's a convicted liar.
We know Stormy Daniels released a statement years ago saying nothing ever happened between the President and I. And we know that Michael Avenatti, Stormy Daniels' attorney, is locked up in federal prison.
This guy's doing like over a decade in federal prison.
I mean, these people are crooks, and they have just completely...
Because the uniparty, the globalist establishment, they control our institutions, they control our legal system, and many of these blue cities and states at this point, They have just flipped the script.
It's accused the other side of that which we are guilty of.
This is Joseph Goebbels.
This is Soviet Union 101.
You know, the two worst genocidal regimes of the 20th century, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, use these exact same tactics over and over and over again.
And that's what we're seeing in New York City.
I know.
It's really scary.
We really, truly have become, we're watching America become a banana republic in this hostile communist takeover of the country.
And, you know, taking out the political opponents is certainly a chief tenant of that.
Okay, back to this interview.
What else does he say?
They actually said that there should have been a preemptory motion even prior to the not guilty plea because the indictment proves no crime.
I'm not familiar with criminal procedure under New York state law, but would there be such a provision under which you could do that?
Yeah, there is.
And also, they're probably thinking that they don't want this judge to decide anything.
So that may be why there's some hesitation.
I don't have complete confidence in Trump's trial team.
I think they have capability, but not always delivery in the past.
So I hope the president continues to upgrade his team.
I know Alan, Professor Dershowitz, is giving him advice and has said that he's not going to be part of the formal team.
But one of the things Dershowitz pointed out is they should look at motions to transfer this case out of Manhattan to Staten Island ASAP. It's the only place he can get a truly impartial jury or judicial pool.
And then they should also look at motions to disqualify the judge.
We now know the judge was making it looks like unethical, maybe even illegal donations right under the limit to disguise the fact that he was donating to the Biden campaign and other Democrats from full public disclosure.
In other words, what they're falsely accusing Trump of, the judge presiding over Trump's case may be guilty of, according to some published report.
We know his family.
You know New York well, Roger.
It is a place in Manhattan where political corruption goes hand in hand with the legal system.
So I think probably the first thing they should do is try to do everything possible to get that case away from and out of this judge's hands, away from and out of Manhattan.
Before bringing any substantive motion on legal grounds, whether it's constitutional grounds, statutory grounds, or factual grounds, they really need to look to transfer the case to Staten Island, and if that doesn't work, move to disqualify these biased judges, move to disqualify Alvin Bragg and the entire prosecutor's office, because they campaigned on trying to put President Trump in prison before they knew of any allegations against him.
So on those grounds alone, ethically and professionally, they shouldn't have even been involved in this case.
But if the judge won't transfer the case to a different DA's office, a different judge, a different jury pool, then motions to disqualify should be the first procedural remedy sought before allowing these tainted judges to make decisions on the substantive merits of dismissal.
So, I mean, my question is, all right, great, motions to move venues and that sort of thing, but who decides that?
I mean, does the corrupt judge, who may be guilty of the very thing they're trying to accuse Trump of, does he decide whether or not to move it?
To me, this whole thing is going to wind up.
If it doesn't get thrown out, which I don't think it will, because, again, the judge is corrupt, This whole thing is going to be decided on appeal, in my opinion.
I think they're going to convict Trump as a kangaroo court, and then this whole thing will be decided on appeal.
That's what I think is going to happen.
What are your thoughts, Frankie?
I think so, too.
I could see this going all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court.
I don't see any other recourse here.
And you're right.
It's the judge, the corrupt leftist judge, is the one that's going to decide whether or not to move this trial.
But this is what happens when these outright communists dominate entire states, entire cities.
This is the biggest city in the United States.
This is one of the most...
Most critical legal systems in the United States, that of New York City and New York State, because of all the financial and political traffic that moves through there.
So when the radical left has complete and total control over such an important apparatus of the American legal system, the entire thing turns into a kangaroo court, as we're seeing here.
Yeah, it really does.
Alright, back to this interview.
We're watching this interview here on In the Trenches with Teddy Daniels.
I want to thank Teddy for letting us guest host.
More from Roger Stone and Robert Barnes.
Really good stuff.
Based on what you know, and obviously we can only go on the basis of what we know, do you think it is likely that Special Counsel Jack Smith will bring an action against President Donald Trump in connection with his handling and disposition of certain sensitive federal documents?
Now this is a really good question by Roger Stone because we have the New York indictment, we have these trumped up charges from a county prosecutor, But the deep state wants more indictments.
They want the indictment out of Georgia.
They really want a federal indictment because they think this is the only way to stop Trump.
It looks like he's gaining in popularity because of this indictment.
Anyway, this is a key.
Will this Mar-a-Lago raid and the documents that they found and all of the lies the media has been saying about that The Justice Department going after Trump even then, we know we've been prepared for the indictment for a very long time.
So the question is, will they now basically pile everything they can on to President-in-exile Donald Trump and indict him federally as well as this county prosecutor?
So let's take a watch of this.
Well, I think, you know, the deep state fix-it man Bill Barr, who snookered his way into the Trump cabinet and then sabotaged the president, probably more so than anyone else, is a guy that has family ties that go back to Jeffrey Epstein.
Probably not a coincidence Epstein dies while he's the attorney general.
Deep ties to the Bushes and kind of tricked his way into the White House.
Then he is the one who helped cover up everything concerning the Hunter Biden laptop and the Joe Biden corruption allegations.
Barr is the one who lied to everybody and covered up the election fraud that took place in 2020.
He's out there saying, begging Smith to indict Trump because he sees how weak the New York case is.
So clearly the message from some key deep state actors is they see New York is collapsing already.
Trump's base is rallying to him.
DeSantis, who was promised a easy nod to the presidential nomination based on these criminal indictments, is seeing his political fortunes collapse.
So I think there's massive pressure at the moment for Smith to bring an indictment.
And going back to your earlier point, probably not a coincidence we're suddenly seeing the grand jury out of D.C. leak like a sieve, even though that violates federal criminal law, much as the New York DA's office violated New York criminal law and leaking from the New York grand jury.
That they are escalating their efforts.
It's clear what Barr wants.
In order to get around the double standard problem of not prosecuting Biden, not prosecuting Pence, not prosecuting Obama concerning confidential, top-secret classified documents, which the president had the unilateral legal right of the Presidential Records Act to declassify, they're going to try to falsely accuse him of obstruction of justice instead.
And so it looks like there's massive political pressure mounting in the deep state because the problem in Georgia, if they prosecute him there, the governor through the board has the power of pardoning him and the grand jury.
The poor person there was a complete lunatic, a literal witch.
So their last-ditch effort to take out Trump would be for D.C. to federally prosecute, where they have a control and a lot of favorable courts, an extremely biased and prejudicial jury pool.
But it would put the Biden administration right in the middle of it, that the Biden administration is the one indicting their lead political opponent.
I think that's why Biden wanted to avoid that if they could.
But when you have Bill Barr begging for it, it means the deep state knows their New York case is up against it.
So there's an increased risk the president faces an indictment out of the District of Columbia before election season in 2024.
Alright, so we're going to take a quick break here.
We're up against a break here at In the Trenches with Teddy Daniels.
We're going to get Frankie Stock's reaction to that here in just a moment.
And in a minute, Roger Stone brings up a really interesting point about Bill Barr.
This is In the Trenches with Teddy Daniels.
Don't go anywhere.
We'll be back here in just a moment.
I have to thank our new sponsor for Patriots.
Folks, a food shortage could be coming even in the U.S. You know, Bill Gates is saying, we're all going to have to eat bugs and fake meat now.
Economic experts wrote at the end of the summer crop season about this food shortage.
Farmers sent it to John Boyd Jr., a fourth-generation farmer, told Fox News that we're going to see empty food shelves in the coming months.
Folks, you saw with this scandemic How everybody rushed to the grocery store, emptied the shelves, the whole nine yards.
Folks, create your own stockpile of the best-selling Four Patriots survival food kits.
It's not ordinary food, folks.
We're talking good-for-25-year super survival food.
Handpicked right in a family-owned facility in the USA and giving jobs to over 200 Americans.
These kits are compact, sturdy, water-resistant, and stack easily.
And folks, let me tell you, guys, I wouldn't call myself a survivalist.
I call myself a realist.
You know, I have a go-bag that is ready to go at any time with ammo.
Guys, I have more guns in my house than the...
Local National Guard Armory.
So I've got a few of those in my go bag.
I've got ammo.
I've got cases of water.
I've got guns.
I'm not going to tell you what kind.
I've got guns.
What else do I have in there?
I have a first aid kit.
I have gas masks.
I have extra socks, folks.
As an infantryman, you always take care of your feet.
Extra socks.
Boy, what else do I got?
It's one of these huge duffel bags, knives, batteries, a radio, and I have the survival food from Four Patriots.
So, they have different delicious breakfasts, lunches, dinners.
You can make these meals in less than 20 minutes.
Just add boiling water, simmer, and serve.
Folks, so right now, you can go to 4patriots.com.
That is the number 4patriots.com.
And use code TEDDY to get 10% off your first purchase on anything in the store.
Including this 3-month survival kit.
You'll get their famous guarantee for an entire year after you order, plus free shipping on orders over $97.
Folks, they're called 4Patriots because a portion of every sale is donated to charities who support our veterans and their families.
Just go to 4Patriots.com and use code TEDDY to get 10% off.
That's 4Patriots.com.
Use code TEDDY. Folks, start building your own stockpile today.
There's a lot of companies out there that offer this stuff.
I love 4Patriots.
A lot of their stuff, folks, I'm a big hunter.
I travel around the country.
I hunt.
Let me tell you, I throw a pack or two in my backpack when I'm out hunting because, folks, you never know.
Okay?
Preparation is key.
You see what's happening in this country.
You see the crazy stuff that's going on.
Having a stockpile of food ready to go is essential for everybody out there.
Go to 4Patriots.com and use code TEDDY. Save yourselves 10%.
Welcome back to In the Trenches with Teddy Daniels.
I'm your guest host, Paul Harrell, alongside NationalFile.com reporter Frankie Stocks.
Frankie, we've been going over this Roger Stone interview of Robert Barnes about President-in-Exile Donald Trump being indicted by this county prosecutor in New York.
It's pretty comprehensive, isn't it?
Oh, it absolutely is.
I love the way that Barnes has just gone through here and picked the entire thing apart.
All right, so we're going to get back to this interview because, again, I think this is the best way to really know just how bogus all of this is.
So we're picking up where we left off.
Listen to this.
This is interesting.
I had to laugh.
Former Governor Asa Hutchison announced that he'll be joining the list as a Republican candidate for president.
I can't wait till his first press conference because I wanted to ask him.
He knew fully about the cocaine trafficking operation in Demena, Arkansas.
Veteran reporter Helen Thomas actually asked Bill Clinton openly about this.
I believe she was with the Associated Press, one of the most celebrated and respected reporters of all time.
Asa Hutchison was well aware of the fact that in the wake of the Boland Amendment, which Banned the use of taxpayer dollars to fund the Nicaraguan freedom fighters that the Central Intelligence Agency was importing cocaine into the United States, liquidating it into cash, and then sending it to Central America.
Bill Barr was deeply involved in that operation while working for the Central Intelligence Agency.
I documented in my book, The Bush Crime Family, how this guy ever ended up in Donald Trump's cabinet really is a miracle.
I'm told that Trump Read a one-off law review article by Barr on the narrow question of the legality of the special counsel in the absence of the special counsel law, which had expired.
And on that basis, I guess he never looked at his Wikipedia page, hired him as attorney general.
You know, that goes to, Frankie Stocks, that goes to what really the only, one of the, there's legitimate criticisms of President Trump.
There is.
But one of the biggest ones, I should say, is the people he surrounded himself with.
Bill Barr was not who he claimed to be, was he?
No, he wasn't.
He was just another deep state actor.
That penetrated the Trump administration.
You know, we saw this over and over again because these people are in government.
They're in government their entire lives.
In a lot of these cases, the swamp is so deep.
Who else are you going to hire?
Who else is going to come in?
A lot of these guys just weaseled their way in there.
And as we saw multiple times through, backed the Trump administration and the MAGA agenda into a corner and tried to block it at all costs.
Yeah, no doubt.
Interestingly enough, he brings up former Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson and his knowledge of the drug running into Arkansas.
And then, of course, once it's distributed into the middle of the country, it was distributed throughout the rest of the nation.
What a lot of people don't realize is, while Bill Clinton got asked that question by a veteran Washington, D.C. reporter back in the day while he was president, It was Asa Hutchinson who was the attorney for the Western District of Arkansas during that time.
He was appointed in that position in the Ronald Reagan administration, sometime in the Reagan administration.
And so the idea is he was turning a blind eye to all of that.
The U.S. attorney for the Western District of Arkansas should probably do something about the smuggling of drugs into the country.
So that's certainly interesting.
But earlier I told you about the situation with U.S. politicians and their children getting rich.
You heard me.
Remember, I alluded to that, right, Frankie, earlier in this broadcast?
Yes, you did.
All right, so many of you out there in the trenches with Teddy Daniels' audience may or may not know this, but I spent eight years essentially covering...
Governor Asa Hutchinson in Little Rock and what he was doing, what his administration was doing.
And one of the things that I discovered, oh, I don't know, about, I guess maybe towards the beginning of his second term, was that he had a law firm that was essentially, he still has a law firm that brandishes his name and his son's name And there are Chinese companies that are listed on this website of his that he does business with.
Coincidentally, they're the same Chinese companies that he gave Sweetheart taxpayer deals to in an effort to get them to move into the state of Arkansas.
And I've got the receipts to back this up, and I want to show you this first of all.
This is the website.
Now, curiously, Frankie...
This is the website.
It's ahlawgroup.com.
The Asa Hutchinson Law Group is an international business and immigration law firm with offices in Arkansas, Washington, D.C., and Madrid, Spain.
I don't know if you can see that.
And then if we scroll down here, we eventually see, look, there's Asa Hutchinson.
He's the founder of the firm.
We have his son, Asa Hutchinson III. We're going to get to him in just a moment and these other individuals.
And then when we keep going, we can see that their clients are listed.
Representative corporate clients.
And so we go to the top of the list.
These are very interesting companies.
But we get to this specific one, Dragon Woodland.
That is a Chinese company based in Communist China.
Rise Ever, Chinese company.
And then this one over here, TY Garments.
As a matter of fact, there was a mainstream media outlet that covered this back in the day after I broke the story locally in Arkansas.
And we can see this is a local ABC affiliate writing, is the governor of Arkansas' son benefiting from his father's position?
This is a photo.
Of Asa Hutchinson.
You may not be able to see that.
And his son is in there with officials from the Chinese government.
And they write, As Governor Asa Hutchinson travels overseas on an economic development mission in China, there are questions here at home about his son in possible conflict of interest.
At least three Chinese companies that receive tax incentives from the state of Arkansas have business ties to Asa Hutchinson.
Okay?
You have...
Look at this.
In 2016, TY Garments, who is listed as a client on the governor's law firm's website, was offered an annual tax rebate worth nearly $1.6 million.
Then you have Rise Ever Machinery, another Chinese company, announced they were coming to Arkansas, and they got $1 million from the state of Arkansas.
Then you have, in April 2019, Dragon Woodland Corporation, In the sawmill business, they got $1 million.
So we're just supposed to say that, coincidentally, the same companies that get Arkansas taxpayer economic development crony capitalist deals are also listed as clients on the former governor's website.
And this was back in the day.
I mean, this has been there the whole time.
Well, you can see that.
There's TY Garments.
Again, there's Dragon Woodland, and then this Rise Ever.
I mean, you know, look at the Chinese writing there.
So this is not some, you know, one-off thing.
This has been going on for a long time.
Now, curiously, Frankie, and I want to get back to this interview with Barnes& Stone here in a minute, but I just thought I would break that news here.
A lot of you don't know that.
Interestingly enough, Governor Asa Hutchinson's son, who heads up the The law firm, reportedly, no longer has a law license.
Okay, so no longer has a law license.
I can show you this story right here.
Asa Hutchinson III loses law license.
This is after a long history of drug and alcohol abuse run-ins with the law.
The last time back in January, he got picked up.
I don't know how many.
It might have been his fourth or his fifth.
Driving under the influence, he was found with cocaine in his pocket.
So the Arkansas Bar Association said, hey, we're going to get rid of this guy's law license.
He can't practice.
So that got me thinking about two weeks ago, after Asa Hutchinson announced for president, I started thinking, I wonder how they're handling this.
So I went to the law firm's website, and my IP address was blocked.
The American IP addresses have been blocked from viewing that website up until, as far as I can report, a couple of days ago.
Now, that's fascinating to me.
American IP address.
The only way I got to see this website before it was unblocked, and there still are some sections on this website that are blocked, and I'll show it to you here in just a minute.
The only way I got to see this is I used a VPN and pretended like my IP address was from Spain.
I got a Spanish IP address because they have offices in Madrid, Spain.
And the website came up, and that's when I saw a de-barred attorney, the governor's son, is still listed on this website.
So it's all really fascinating stuff.
And I will prove this IP address thing.
If you go up here, let's see if I can get this to work here.
We go over here and if we hit clients, yeah, there we go, right there.
Forbidden.
Visitors from your country are not permitted to browse this site.
So there are sections of this website even now, Frankie, that are blocked to American IP addresses as far as I can tell.
Now, did you know any of this?
This is a mini Hunter Biden, Joe Biden situation.
It is a microcosm of what Hunter and Joe have done.
I didn't know it, Paul, until you just broke it to me right here, but I find it absolutely amazing.
The Biden comparison is spot on.
It's amazing how many of these deep state globalist unipartiers, how many of their roads lead through Arkansas?
I mean, the Clintons, obviously from Arkansas, but the Clintons, the Hutchinsons, and we have Hunter Biden out in Arkansas getting a girl pregnant and Disputing paternity?
Was Hunter Biden out there palling around with the Hutchinson's Chinese friends?
It would make sense.
I'd like to know.
I did have somebody ask me.
I had a congressman ask me that question rhetorically.
This was a few years ago.
A Washington, D.C. congressman basically said, have they ever met?
Has Asa Hutchinson III and Hunter Biden ever met?
And the implication of the question was that the answer is yes.
So, birds of a feather flock together.
And this is, again, this is happening not just with Hunter Biden, not just with the Hutchinsons, but all over.
There was all this talk back when Donald Trump was in office about the Biden family corruption, and there was all this talk that if President Trump were to actually go after some of these bad actors who have clearly committed crimes enriching themselves...
That you would get these allegations of a banana republic.
The same allegations we're making now because the Democrats take the gloves off.
They don't care.
They don't care.
But I was screaming.
Nobody was listening.
I was screaming at the top of my lungs.
I was like, hey, if you want to make it fair, I can point you to a Republican family and a Democrat family who have done the same exact thing.
And it needs to be looked at.
And curiously enough, if you will remember, Tucker Carlson.
So when Governor Asa Hutchinson was getting pushback while he was still in office about the same companies he was giving taxpayer money to being on his law firm's website where they were advertising him as the governor and basically making money on the side...
There was some pushback in state media, but not a lot.
And the answer that they finally got out of them was, we're doing immigration work.
This is separate, and my son is doing immigration work for these companies.
If you will remember, Tony Bobulinski.
In the Tucker Carlson interview, when he was asked by Tucker, what did Hunter say his legal work was for that communist Chinese company, CFC? I can't remember, but I think it's CFC. It's like an energy company.
He responded by saying that he was doing immigration and visa work for them.
That's what the cover story was.
And so you have the same playbook here, again, at a smaller level.
We'll do visa work for these foreign companies and then allow them to enrich American politicians' children.
So we have Hunter Biden and we have Asa Hutchinson's son both ferrying in state-affiliated Chinese nationals into the United States to enrich themselves while they starve the heartland of the country.
It's disgusting.
I know.
I know.
And you know, for the life of me, this guy has no chance of sniffing the White House, right?
So he is just a pawn on a chessboard.
He is bought and paid for.
Another one of his corporate clients on that website, if you want to go browse, is obviously Walmart.
There's other foreign companies.
I think there's a Mexican company.
There's also a company from Cambodia that's a client here.
And again, you know, this is all billed as, well, immigration work.
So to your point, Even if you take it at face value, it still is about ferrying foreign nationals into the United States and giving them more of a foothold here.
So certainly, if you're advertising that you've got an international law firm, I think the jury's in.
You are a globalist.
Congratulations, you're a globalist.
Anyway, let's get back to this interview with Robert Barnes.
Thank you for indulging me, Frankie, and the Teddy Daniels audience.
I had to get that off my chest.
All right, here we go.
Hey, that was some great information, Paul.
Thank you.
Thank you, sir.
Now to the other glaring question.
We saw, I think it was the Circuit Court approved White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, Vice President Mike Pence, National Security Advisor John Radcliffe, his Deputy National Security Advisor, I think it is Robert O'Neill, I think, all going to the grand jury regarding January 6th.
Again, I don't see, particularly given that we can now read his tweets, and we saw the video in which he asks people to react peacefully, We've seen the tweets in which he asks people to disperse.
I don't see that case either, but how likely do you think it is that there is some kind of charge by the special counsel relating to January 6th?
They're clearly trying to find something.
The problem is they couldn't get anybody to flip.
They couldn't get any of the January 6th defendants to somehow make up some allegations against the president as to January 6th.
We now know increasingly from the Proud Boys trial that informants and infiltrators and instigators that were working or on one way or another a federal or state government payroll were all over January 6th.
So I think there's major problems with them trying to pursue President Trump on anything associated or affiliated with January 6th.
There's the additional problem that on January 6th specifically, he's already been acquitted by the Senate.
So it raises the same constitutional issues as present in the New York indictment.
So I don't see how they can indict him on it.
Doesn't mean they won't try to make up some claims and do so anyway, because they've shown no limits.
But at least if we look at Barr, he's signaling that he thinks the most effective path against Trump for the deep state is to go with a limited obstruction charge.
That they basically try to Roger Stone Donald Trump, expect that to be the path they pursue because the other charges are so bad and so weak, they're left with that weak charge, but it's not as bad or as weak as their other one.
So Frankie, I guess I missed where Bill Barr has, I must have missed these headlines, where Bill Barr has come out and said, this is how you get Donald Trump.
Yeah, Bill Barr has just completely gone public turncoat against President Trump, against the American people, and he is.
He's actually out advising these uniparty prosecutors, these, I'll say it again, outright communist prosecutors, judges, legislators, the whole bit that's after President Trump and Bill Barr's out there throwing him his legal advice.
You know, this guy is deep state to his core.
It's absolutely disgusting.
You hear, I think it was Barnes that referenced Bill Barr has family ties to Jeffrey Epstein.
This is a story that really got very little play, certainly no play on the left, but even on the right, people kind of diminished it.
People were trying to hold out hope, some on the right.
Bill Barr was somehow a good guy.
Somehow this was all theater.
But when you look into, I think Bill Barr's dad gave Jeffrey Epstein one of his first teaching jobs, if I'm not mistaken.
Are you familiar with any of that?
Loosely so.
I know Jeffrey Epstein, you know, lied about his entire background and apparently the people that were hiring him and throwing him money, they either knew and didn't care or they just, you know, don't actually read the resumes that they're sent.
But this guy, you know, the Barr family is one of many prominent families affiliated with the U.S. government and affiliated with sort of the upper echelons, the lever of power society, if you want to call it that.
And they were all over Epstein.
You know, this guy was quite obviously linked at the hip with many of those people who are going after President Trump.
And we know President Trump said years ago, years and years ago, this guy Epstein's banned from Mar-a-Lago.
You know, he made a pass at a young daughter of one of my good friends.
He showed up to a party.
He made a pass at this young girl.
He's gone.
So, these people, they were joined at the hip with Epstein.
The whole thing, you know, I don't know if we'll ever know.
I don't think that we know for sure who all Epstein was with, what exactly he was doing.
We know he was trafficking young girls.
But I don't think that we'll ever know the exact reach of Jeffrey Epstein because it's probably all classified somewhere in the Israeli intelligence fire.
Well, I mean, you know, in 2002, to your point, Donald Trump also outed him in a joking way that Jeffrey Epstein likes young girls.
And this was, I think, in the New Yorker magazine in 2002.
He outed him then.
And, you know, you just have to wonder...
Well, I mean, it was obviously a blackmail operation.
It was essentially, look, we needed more dirt.
I mean, the more depraved we got, the Playboy Mansion videos, you know, that wasn't going to be as scandalous, right?
We needed something even more scandalous.
So, you know, here comes Epstein Island and all of the blackmail.
I mean, it's just documented at this point.
And so how many people in the deep state that are going after President-in-exile Donald Trump are, in fact, clients...
I think the fact that we don't have the client list, I think the fact that Ghislaine Maxwell has been convicted of sex trafficking to no one, shows us that many in our own government are implicated, and we will likely never know who these people are.
Yeah, I want to see that little black book.
You know, I want to see Epstein and Maxwell's black book because the names in there would rock the world, I'm sure of it.
Yeah, there's no question that it would.
Folks, we're going to take a break.
Be right back here with more In the Trenches with Teddy Daniels here on the Stu Peters Network.
Don't go anywhere back in just a moment.
Trump made a bold statement recently.
He said he could end the war in Ukraine in 24 hours without going after Russia.
He says Russia is not the enemy, but this is, and it's currently targeting the U.S. as we speak.
The enemy wants to control us, our bank accounts, our assets, and practically enslave every U.S. citizen.
It's part of their sick and twisted plan.
Folks, this goes way beyond the failing banks.
And the worse that the recession gets.
According to experts, this event is the closest thing to a rapture we have ever seen, yet no news stations are covering it.
A new video that's out there actually shines the light on a dangerous situation.
It exposes who the enemy is, their diabolical plan, and An effective strategy to hedge against this upcoming disaster.
Folks, visit darkagedefense.com backslash teddy to watch this controversial video.
It's currently streaming online for free.
It might get canceled soon.
Folks, watch it now before they take it down from everywhere.
The cancel culture is nuts.
Watch it while you can.
Folks, darkagedefense.com backslash teddy.
Link in the description.
Go watch.
Go see what's going on.
And welcome back to In the Trenches with Teddy Daniels.
I'm your guest host, Paul Harrell, alongside, once again, NationalFile.com reporter Frankie Stocks.
Frankie, how you doing?
You doing good still?
I'm doing great, Paul.
I love being in the trenches, so this is a good time of day for me.
Me too.
You've got some great headlines up at NationalFile.com, so I want to encourage everybody to go read all of your headlines up at NationalFile.com.
That's NationalFile.com.
We've been going through this comprehensive interview with Roger Stone, interviewing constitutional attorney Robert Barnes.
We're going to pick back up with it, and we're going to comment on it as we see fit.
You make an excellent point.
My sentencing, the judge pointed to me and said, you have been convicted of lying to cover up for Donald Trump.
To which I say, cover up what?
What underlying crime?
There is no underlying crime.
Robert Mueller said in his own finally redacted, unredacted final report, which he was forced to release only on the orders of a federal judge, they found no factual evidence of Russian collusion.
WikiLeaks collaboration or involvement in the phishing and publication of John Podesta's emails on my part.
So there was no underlying crime to lie about.
Believe me, the DC system is Kafkaesque and terrifying to say the absolute least.
When I was charged, once my lawyers Basically established that the FBI, in the pre-motion back and forth, admitted that they had never inspected the computer servers of the Democratic National Committee, and therefore this claim of a Russian online hack was not sustainable.
Shortly thereafter, I was gagged, no longer to defend myself.
This continues to be a great concern of mine.
As Trump has made great political hay by, I think, accurately attacking the political motives of the prosecutor, the bias of the judge.
The judge has already warned him once about his public commentary.
What are the chances that they gag Donald Trump either in a state action or ultimately gag him in some federal action?
He is, after all, a legal candidate for president of the United States.
And his right to free speech is of particular value in that context.
As I said at the time, I thought the gag orders issued against both you and Paul Manafort were patently unconstitutional.
There is clear law that there cannot be prior restraint of speech and that even in the criminal case or context, famous U.S. Supreme Court Gentile v.
State Bar of Nevada said that you can't be limited in your speech.
A lawyer can't be limited in speech.
An offender can't be limited in speech.
Unless they can show a direct, imminent impact on the jury itself that cannot be remedied by any other means.
They can't show that at all.
Either in the New York case, a Georgia case, a Florida case, or a D.C. case.
So they constitutionally can't gag them.
That doesn't mean somebody won't try.
As we saw in your case, as we saw in the Paul Manafort case, as we've seen in some other cases, there's been assertive efforts to misuse and abuse the power of bail, particularly.
Which is only supposed to be limited to securing a person's appearance at trial constitutionally under the Eighth Amendment, applicable to the states of the Fourteenth Amendment.
It's not supposed to have anything to do with speech, called the Unconstitutional Conditions Doctrine.
You can't condition one right on access to another right.
And so to me, there's no constitutional grounds for it, but these courts have shown little respect for these constitutional constraints.
I think if any court tries to gag the president, I think the Supreme Court of the United States will take up that case and will reverse and prohibit it.
I think it's why the New York Court Now that's an interesting point, Frankie.
What are your thoughts on that?
What would Donald Trump do if they tried to gag him?
Would he just ignore it and then say, hey, come and arrest me?
What would he do?
I would hope that he would.
I would love to see him ignore it and say, you know what?
You come down here, you bring all your men to Mar-a-Lago and drag me out of here.
Because it's very obvious the gag order, one, it's an unconstitutional measure, but two, it would be deliberately designed to impact the 2024 election.
President Trump wouldn't be able to speak in his own defense to the public, to the American people, so the only information that they'd be getting from this would be coming from procured sources.
In the corporate press, in the corporate media, they will be procuring all of this before they go through it, just giving you what they want you to see.
It'd be like basically state-sponsored media at that point.
The court system would, what, dribble out little bits of information.
Every now and then there might be a leak so they could make something seem damning.
And the entire time, President Trump would be silenced under the threat of going to jail.
The entire gag order measure would be unconstitutional, but it would also be a direct attack on Americans' First Amendment rights to not just free speech, but to free and fair elections.
I mean, it's a hyper-politicized attack.
Let me give you one example here that we've already seen play out in this case was the now infamous Slugger Trump article from National File, where we used a picture I made this picture myself, so I know pretty well what the picture stands for and what it means, of President Trump holding up a baseball bat because he's going to knock this phony case out of the park.
That's the gist of the picture.
We see the corporate press, we see they even brought this up, the prosecutors brought this up at the arraignment hearing, saying that a picture of President Trump holding a baseball bat used on a National File article constituted some sort of threat of violence.
They accused President Trump himself of somehow manufacturing the photograph.
And putting it out there as some kind of threat, a call to violence.
But in reality, it was a symbolic picture.
I guess a lot of these folks are total dweebs, so they wouldn't understand any kind of baseball reference of knocking anything out of the park.
But President Trump came out and explained this on Fox News.
He said National Files report was very exculpatory, very good.
They shared it.
He didn't make the picture.
The picture was part of the article.
Under a gag order, what this court wants, what this leftist media wants, is for the American people to be told over and over and over again.
You know, you tell a lie so many times and it's become true, that's what they love to say.
They say it over and over and over again, and pretty soon it just becomes part of the historical record that President Trump himself manufactured a threatening photograph talking about bashing Alvin Bragg over the head with a baseball bat when nothing could be further the truth.
They remove his right to go out and defend himself, to go out and give a dose of reality on this situation.
It's blatant election interference and the blatant stifling and suppression of free speech.
The point is made that they haven't gagged him yet because they don't want to immediately go to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court to likely side in Trump's favor, although I don't think you can just assume that.
You can't take that for granted.
What really strikes me as just unconscionable, but here we are, is that the left is doing this with no fear.
Of any repercussions on themselves.
I mean, they are weaponizing the justice system, and they have not once stopped to think, huh, if I start going down this path, will I be in the crosshairs one day?
Will the tables be turned and the left will be gone after in a way that they find objectionable?
But they don't have any fear of that.
They have no shame.
They have no fear.
I mean, you could say that they're desperate to keep this man.
I mean, I think that would be a right conclusion to draw.
These people are desperate that Donald Trump never have power again.
Because I have a suspicion that if he were to get power, he's never surrounding himself with the likes of Bill Barr's, the Bill Barr's of this world again.
I hope I'm right about that and not wrong, but you talk about a mandate to crush the deep state.
You talk about a mandate to go after those people who framed him for treason, chief among them, former FBI Director James Comey.
I think that's what's at stake here.
I could be wrong, but I really do think now that they've crossed the Rubicon, If Trump somehow survives this, and if he somehow gets in the White House, I don't see any olive branches going forward.
What do you think?
I can't see it either.
It's going to have to be a 100% America first administration.
You know, back in the 2016 campaign, there was briefly talk about bringing on Newt Gingrich as the VP. Obviously, we didn't do much better getting Mike Pence as the VP. But there was a comment made.
I think it was just a caller.
A caller called in to a show I was listening to while I was driving home from work.
And he said, you know, guys, this campaign is a pirate ship.
This is a political pirate ship.
We can't bring guys like Newt Gingrich in here to muddy it up, to establishment-fy the America First Trump campaign.
Sadly, that's what we saw once President Trump got into office and was immediately set upon and surrounded by these bad actors.
But going forward, 2024, there's going to have to be high scrutiny applied.
To anyone in these big visible positions and really people in behind the scenes positions that a lot of times have more sway over the direction that things are going than the people that you see on TV. But yeah, this is going to have to be a concerted effort by everyone around President Trump and even by Take a step back into sort of the America first media space,
a conservative effort to expose all of these anti-American, bad actors, deep staters, who we just can't let into the administration in 2024.
I love that analogy of a pirate ship.
No British regulars on the pirate ship unless they're prisoners.
And I really think that's a good analogy.
And I would also say, if we can, I know we can try to do this, but we can't truly understand what it was like in the 18th century.
We can't truly understand, put ourselves in the shoes of those who fought in the American Revolution.
But how many of our politicians and our leaders today would be crown loyalists today?
How many of them would be red coat sympathizers today?
And we know the answer.
Almost all of them.
Almost everybody in Washington, D.C. I would even say almost everybody in our Republican state legislatures.
Would be red coat sympathizers at this point, and they would just say, hey, we need to go along to get along.
The taxation with that representation isn't that bad.
The crushing of a religious freedom isn't that bad.
Sure, we'll go ahead and let King George put an Anglican bishop over the Presbyterian church, showing my bias of American history a little bit.
These things are what sparked the American Revolution, and there were people who said, no, we don't need to do this.
Slavery is better than freedom.
And I think that's what most of our politicians would say today.
Yeah, it is.
I actually love that you made that analogy, because I think of that...
All the time.
You know, how many of these politicians would be volunteering to fight for the patriots, volunteering to birth a new nation out of the British Empire, to take on the British Empire?
I don't think any of them, you know, hardly any of them.
There could be one or two guys in there, but these people would be crown loyalists in the modern day sense of the term.
You see that show, Turn, great show.
I'm in no way have any links to this show, but I would say everyone should watch it for the aspect of American history.
But the Queens Rangers, the loyalist militia who's just out marauding in the countryside, you know, killing patriots, Occupying their homes.
That was practically the BLM Antifa foot soldiers of the Revolutionary War.
They were working on behalf of the Crown, on behalf of the 18th century's version of the deep state to disrupt American sovereignty and to stop American sovereignty from ever happening.
And so we would see legions Of politicians out of the Uniparty siding with the Crown.
And I think the J6ers would have been the Patriots in this sense.
The J6ers would have risen up against the Crown while everyone else sided with the Crown, aka the deep state of the 18th century.
Let's take a look at the headlines over at NationalFile.com.
Top secret U.S. documents show corporate media is lying about Russia and Ukraine.
Frankie, this is your story.
Corporate media is blatantly lying about casualty figures and more as the war in Ukraine drags on.
Before we go, can you tell us a little bit about this story up right now at NationalFile.com?
You know, we've seen over and over again, even from the very start of Russia's special military operation, we have seen over and over again the Western media, the corporate media, just blatantly lying.
They completely twist the situation on the ground there.
And in this case, these classified documents have shown that they've lied Not just a little bit, a lot about specifically Russian deaths and Russian battlefield losses.
There have been time and time again reports from the corporate press talking about 200,000 Russian soldiers being killed in this war.
We find that in these documents it exposes none of that's true.
The figures that they've arrived around are closer to 40,000, so they've magnified this times five to make this ridiculous claim.
I think what's most troubling about this is that instead of doing any form of independent research and any independent observations, the United States government and NATO have taken Ukraine's word for the Ukrainian casualties.
So talk about selling a false bill of goods here.
Ukraine's claiming that they've lost 17,000 men.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
We've seen reports firsthand from Ukrainian soldiers revealing how they've been told not to recover the bodies of their comrades so that they are not included in the official death statistics.
Every now and then you'll see a report pop up about the Russians committing a war crime and burying Ukrainian soldiers in a mass grave.
That's not a Russian war crime.
That's the Russians...
Cleaning up the battlefield of the men that the Ukrainians have left behind.
The Russians have given them a semblance of a burial.
The Ukrainians leave them on the battlefield to rot so that they don't get thrown into the Ukrainian death statistics.
So this entire war has been built up on lies, and it continues to be fought on lies from the Ukrainian perspective.
That's incredible.
It's almost like a reverse COVID-19 inflated deaths.
You know, to make the pandemic seem worse than it was, this is the opposite.
We don't want to count the deaths now because we've got to support the narrative at all costs.
Frankie Stocks with NationalFile.com.
Thanks so much for guest hosting with me today on In the Trenches with Teddy Daniels.
Really appreciate it.
Thank you, Paul, and thanks to Teddy and the Stu Peters Network.
Yes, sir.
Folks, that's all the time that we have for today.
We'll be back tomorrow, though, in for Teddy as well.
So thank you so much for watching.
Thank you for everything that you guys out there do.
If it's not for the audience, then we can't even do a show.
And also thanks to Stu Peters for this great network.
This has been In the Trenches with Teddy Daniels.
I'm Paul Harrell.
▲
Export Selection