While the DOJ’s and FBI’s raid on Mar-a-Lago is suspect, and currently seems to be more about protecting the Deep State than about benefitting the American people, we shouldn’t forget that, under ordinary circumstances, the American people benefit from gaining access to presidential records.

Since 1992, America has gone from sole superpower to bumbling fool and stupid-power, even more so in the still unfolding horror show that scares most everyone thinking clearly about Biden-Harris priorities and policies. The downward trajectory of America is undeniable and likely involves grifters in both political parties.

Adjusted for rampant inflation, we are poorer, we are already drowning in debt, and we are less safe at home and abroad. Along the way, we also seem to have surrendered our “inalienable rights” and constitutionally protected freedoms to unaccountable, unelected, and arrogant bureaucrats.

How did this happen?

Will we ever learn the truth?

Perhaps we were too quick to claim victory when the Soviet Union and Central Europe imploded in 1992.

Perhaps presidents from both parties long ago cooperated in implementing a “grand strategy” to subvert America’s national interests to those of power-mad monopolistic moguls who relish the prospect of hamstrung national governments and promote toothless, unaccountable globalist structures that they fund and steer.

No doubt, after at least three decades of failing on so many fronts, we cannot count upon brand-name influence-shapers, academics, consultants, or pundits to expose the trail of corrupt deceit. We must examine relevant evidence for ourselves.

One logical place to start is with papers from our past presidents’ time in office, particularly those concerning Bill Clinton and his successors. If these records are complete, they should help us trace links between presidential acts and the consequent benefits, if any, conferred upon donors, whether to campaigns or to charities associated with presidents and their families.

If, on the other hand, these records are not complete or if they contradict evidence stored elsewhere, then those of us who suspect that presidents from both parties have subverted American interests for personal gain may better understand who is trying to hide what from whom.

In all cases, we could come closer to linking donations to benefits and then, through looming elections, holding those responsible for the bargain sale of America and her rightful future to corrupt and malignant globalist interests.

Image: A handwritten letter from President John Adams (cropped) to Secretary of State Timothy Pickering. Public domain.

Presidential Records Should Contain Key Evidence

One hopes that presidents from Bill Clinton onward have not been “cooking the books”—hiding, misclassifying, or destroying records in the hope of evading history’s reckoning and, perhaps, the courtroom reckoning that they likely deserve.

Important clues as to central players’ motives and intent in this disturbing, ongoing drama—presidents and their allies—are likely contained in electronic communications, including attached files. None of those are actually missing, although partisans across the political spectrum have claimed that some of this key evidence may have “disappeared.”

Find most of these files, and you will likely get a closer glimpse of key truths.

The George W. Bush Administration claimed that it lost some 22 million emails; in her service to Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton admits to deleting many emails on the grounds that these deletions were personal in nature (a claim that the FBI investigated extensively); and no one knows how many emails and attachments may have disappeared concerning the Obama and Trump administrations.

Information that a president generates or that is contained in direct reports (all at US taxpayer expense) is precious, even (or, perhaps, especially) when it may implicate individuals who are negatively affecting American national interests or committing crimes. This is particularly true when key actors transact government business using personal devices and systems, in addition to using government devices and systems. It becomes a problem if political partisans are left alone in charge of guarding records for posterity. Yet, that may well prove the case as we see in the now unfolding drama over Trump records.

“Presidential Records“ have been thoughtfully defined for more than 40 years:

The term “Presidential records” means documentary materials, or any reasonably segregable portion thereof, created or received by the President, the President’s immediate staff, or a unit or individual of the Executive Office of the President whose function is to advise or assist the President, in the course of conducting activities which relate to or have an effect upon the carrying out of the constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President.

“Documentary Materials” are defined in a way that arguably includes emails, although email was not initially used much by the public:

The term “documentary material” means all books, correspondence, memoranda, documents, papers, pamphlets, works of art, models, pictures, photographs, plats, maps, films, and motion pictures, including, but not limited to, audio and visual records, or other electronic or mechanical recordations, whether in analog, digital, or any other form.

Unless you are the type of person who might debate what the meaning of the word “is” is, presidents and their key allies should be smart enough to understand what “Presidential Records” are, and why they must be assembled and preserved.

The Presidential Records Act of 1978, in theory, places requirements upon a sitting US President to keep custody of and preserve all such records in concert with the Archivist of the United States and his staff. Five years after a president’s final term in office, members of the public are supposed to get access to these records using the Freedom of Information Act process, though six categories of exceptions may be invoked to deny access until twelve years after the president leaves office, when exceptions may no longer be employed.

In January 1998, five years after George H.W. Bush left the White House, Bill Clinton became publicly engulfed in a crisis of his own making that already has received more than enough coverage. One issue that leaps to mind is how Clinton and others may have conspired to quash due inquiry into scandals implicating both parties, with Iran-Contra as one example.

Do we believe we know all relevant particulars concerning the pardons George H.W. Bush granted in December 1992 to a raft of senior Bush Administration officials, including Caspar Weinberger, who then were convicted felons?

Back in January 1998, email was novel and certainly not as widespread as it became early in the 1999/2000 election cycle and through the present day. But the likelihood is great that inner circles in both parties, along with minions, used personal emails, perhaps under aliases, to discuss raising campaign and presidential foundation contributions and to consider what donors hoped for in return.

Do we really believe that all Clinton-era Presidential Records survive or remain under the control of the National Archives?

What about communications between agents of Bill Clinton and agents of George H.W. Bush or agents of George W. Bush through January 2009?

And what about communications between agents of Bill Clinton, agents of Barack Obama, and agents of Joe Biden through the present day?

Too many powerful people have been trying to hide too much inconvenient truth for too long.

Has the IRS ever examined closely how the financial fortunes of First Families changed before entering and after leaving the White House?

Perhaps some of the new resources inexplicably added to the IRS as part of the “Inflation Reduction Act” will be used to perform real audits of all First Families, particularly concerning whether post-Presidential business arrangements were negotiated on an arms-length basis. Currently, it seems unlikely because too many people have too much to hide.