We need your help! Join our growing army and click here to subscribe to Revolver without ads. Or give a single or recurring one donation during this critical moment.
Jack Smith seems to be in panic mode right now, deploying all his tactics and all his weapons to take on the resilient Trump, who seems to be slipping out of his grasp in the court of public opinion. However, Jack is well aware that he does not need public support to undermine President Trump; all he needs is a judge appointed by Obama in a strategic position to help him carry out his agenda. Jack tried to use one of the left's most powerful weapons against President Trump: “stochastic terror.” However, his plan backfired when appeal court judges shut him down and told him to put on his “big boy” pants.
Investigative reporter Julie Kelly shared the bombshell information in a thread on X. Here's some of what she had to say:
Now reading the ruling from the DC appeals court that mostly upholds the Trump gag order.
One thing is very clear: this panel strongly refuted the media's description of the order as “narrow”.
“The district court's order, however, includes more protected speech than necessary.”
All in all, while the Dem judges undoubtedly take out Trump, the decision is a defeat for Judge Chutkan and Jack Smith in particular.
Regarding public statements about potential witnesses, Chutkan barred all comments about those people, including former WH officials.
“The district court's prohibition against speech “addressed'' to witnesses and trial personnel goes too far. The ordinary meaning of statements “directed'' to a person are statements addressed to or addressed to a person or entity”.
That ruling narrows the scope to include statements “about your possible participation in the investigation or in this criminal proceeding.”
Given that potential witnesses, including people who speak critically of Trump (Bill Barr, Mark Milley, Mike Pence), the justices argue that Trump has the right to fight as long as it does not refer to the trial.
“Mr. Trump has a First Amendment interest in publicly debating the comments of these individuals in a manner independent and detached from any role they may play in the trial. However, the Order would prohibit such speech because it would speak to someone who is a reasonably foreseeable witness, even if Mr. Trump had nothing to do with his role as a witness or the possible content of any testimony.”
OMG LOL this is so embarrassing for Jack Smith.Recall–Smith is the one who sought a gag order barring Trump from posting bad things about him.
3 judges dem basically said put your big boy pants on.
Order of chutkan gag above.
DC Court of Appeals version below.
You can read the rest of Julie's thread here.
We predicted the weaponization of “stochastic terror” a year ago. Revolver published a compelling piece on the topic that is both informative and revealing.
For the past decade, liberals and the left have been stealthily and subversively crafting a justification for widespread suppression of speech, under the label of “stochastic terrorism.”
[…]
Basically, “stochastic terrorism” is the idea that when someone on the right criticizes someone, they're not actually just making a political argument. Instead, they try to “feed the hate” in the hope that a random third party will be “radicalized” and then commit political violence on their behalf.
In the modern sense of the phrase, “stochastic terrorism” was first coined by a left-wing blogger in 2011, who used it to describe Sean Hannity's nefarious terrorist activities:
Stochastic terrorism is the use of mass communications to incite random actors to carry out violent or terrorist acts that are statistically predictable but individually unpredictable. In short, remote control assassination by a lone wolf.
That's what happens when bin Laden releases a video inciting random extremists halfway around the world to commit a bombing or shooting.
This is also the term for what Beck, O'Reilly, Hannity and others do.
…The stochastic terrorist is the person responsible for the incitement. For example, they go on radio or television and incite hatred towards a particular person or group.
The random actor, or “lone wolf” as the term is used in law enforcement and intelligence, is the person who responds to incitement by carrying out the violent or terrorist act against the person or target group For example, they shoot someone or detonate a bomb. Although their action may have been statistically predictable (eg, “given enough provocation, someone will probably do such and such”), the particular person and the particular act are still not predictable.
But “stochastic terror” really became a term of choice with the arrival of Donald Trump and the concomitant conclusion on the left that America was turning into a fascist dystopian hellscape of hate.
We have loaded this article with valuable knowledge and essential information, so that you can get a complete understanding of this attack method. After all, if you are not aware of what you are really up against, how can you expect to win the war?
TO READ: Behold, the regime presents its new slogan for all political dissent: “stochastic terrorism”
Revolver sees the writing on the wall when it comes to “stochastic terrorism.”
This is big: The DOJ is trying to codify “stochastic terror” into the federal legal system. A DC appeals court just screwed them over. We've exposed the “stochastic terror” scam here:https://t.co/ctuznZqYti https://t.co/CbJlo2AzLz
— Revolver News (@RevolverNewsUSA) December 9, 2023
Unfortunately for President Trump and the American people, shenanigans like this will continue. Trump, along with any conservative, cannot expect a fair trial in liberal government cities where “justice” has been discarded in favor of gun politics, like what we see in hellholes like North Korea.
SUPPORT REVOLVER — TO GIVE — SUBSCRIBE — NEWS SERVICE — GAB — GETTR — SOCIAL TRUTH — TWITTER
English 
Español de Venezuela 