Special Counsel Jack Smith is accusing President Trump of “stochastic terrorism” in a new legal brief…


by Revolver:

Well, we regret to inform you that Mr. Jack Smith is back at it. This time, he’s employing a well-worn weapon against President Trump known as “stochastic terrorism.” If you haven’t heard of this term before, be prepared—you’ll likely be hearing it frequently in the future. Here’s what the renowned investigative reporter, Julie Kelly, had to say about Mr. Smith’s recent actions in a recent thread on X:

New: Jack Smith just filed a motion describing the evidence he plans to use in Trump’s J6 trial in DC.

It’s like reading the J6 Committee TV script:

* Historical Evidence of the Defendant’s Consistent Plan of Baselessly Claiming Election Fraud

* Historical Evidence of the Defendant’s Common Plan to Refuse to Commit to a Peaceful Transition of Power

* Evidence of the Defendant and Co-Conspirators’ Knowledge of the Unfavorable Election Results and Motive and Intent to Subvert Them

* Pre- and Post-Conspiracy Evidence That the Defendant and Co-Conspirators Suppressed Proof Their Fraud Claims Were False and Retaliated Against Officials Who Undermined Their Criminal Plans

* Pre- and Post-Conspiracy Evidence of the Defendant’s Public Attacks on Individuals, Encouragement of Violence, and Knowledge of the Foreseeable Consequences

* Post-Conspiracy Evidence of the Defendant’s Steadfast Support and Endorsement of Rioters

The motion is stunning in its level of sophistry, demagoguery, and hypocrisy. The same DOJ that concocted the Trump-Russia election collusion hoax in 2016 to derail his candidacy/presidency now claims Trump tried to undermine the transition of power that year.

The motion is stunning in its level of sophistry, demagoguery, and hypocrisy.

The same DOJ that concocted the Trump-Russia election collusion hoax in 2016 to derail his candidacy/presidency now claims Trump tried to undermine the transition of power that year.

Smith cites Trump’s recent comments about excessive sentences for Proud Boys and promises to pardon J6ers as evidence he supported the “riot.”

Smith will use proposed pardon to impeach credibility of defense witnesses, esp anyone tied to Jan 6.

Important to note: On Monday, Rudy Giuliani will stand trial by jury in DC under the glaring eye of Judge Beryl Howell in defamation lawsuit filed by Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss.

Certain conviction and awarded damages will help Smith’s case, which is why he included it here:

What Mr. Smith is outlining in his legal brief is commonly referred to as “stochastic terrorism,” and it’s not the first instance where Democrats have drawn from this source for their toxic agenda. As a matter of fact, a year ago, Revolver extensively covered this topic in a viral article that is both informative and eye-opening and sheds light on the “meat and potatoes” of the Democrats’ crusade against President Trump.


Liberals and the left have been stealthily and subversively designing a justification for sweeping speech crackdowns for the past decade, under the label of “stochastic terrorism.”


Basically, “stochastic terrorism” is the idea that, when somebody on the right criticizes somebody, they aren’t really just making a political argument. Instead, they are trying to “stoke hatred” in the expectation that some 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 the nefarious terrorist activities of, er, Sean Hannity:

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 murder by lone wolf.

This is what occurs when Bin Laden releases a video that stirs random extremists halfway around the globe 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 who is responsible for the incitement.  For example they go on radio or television and stir up hatred toward a particular person or group.

The random actor, or “lone wolf” as the term is used in law enforcement and intel, is the person who responds to the incitement by carrying out the violent or terrorist act against the target person or group.  For example they shoot someone or detonate a bomb.  While their action may have been statistically predictable (e.g. “given sufficient provocation, someone will probably do such-and-such”), the specific person and the specific act are not yet predictable.

But “stochastic terror” really took off as a favored term with the arrival of Donald Trump, and the concomitant conclusion on the left that America was becoming a fascist dystopian hate-hellscape.

There’s much more to explore in this article that will provide you with a deeper understanding of what the left aims to achieve with “stochastic terrorism.” So, we encourage you to read it in its entirety. We can’t fight back if we don’t understand the plot.

Many folks tend to dismiss this legal mumbo jumbo Jack is hurling against the wall as irrelevant or point out that it’s non-criminal, which might be helpful in a civilized nation. Sadly, that’s not the situation we’re currently facing in this polarized, dystopian country. This type of legal brief, with its accusations of “stochastic terror,” is precisely what an Obama-appointed judge needs to give her weak case some semblance of credibility, allowing it to be swiftly disseminated by the propaganda media.


0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

This most definitely makes Bernie Sanders guilty of inciting the attack on Scalise. Smith is going to collapse if he doesn’t stop grasping at straws. It’s pathetic.

In other words, “wrong speak.”
Big Brother defines what is allowed to be spoken.
And, if this stands in court, we are in for a scary time in America.
Free speech is OVER.

Is Extortionist Jack Smith Being Extorted to Pursue Trump?

comment image

It started off as a typical DeepCapture intrigue, this one set in Europe with whistleblowers whispering in the backs of airport hotel bars, stakeouts in obscure Swiss hamlets, and back-alley brush-passes in Eastern European capitals. It ended with proof that is a liver-punch to Garland’s politicized Department of Justice.
The superb 151-page whistleblower complaint (attached) speaks for itself. Three allegations to take from it:

  1. Jack Smith is the current Special Counsel prosecuting Donald Trump on two grounds, one related to J6 (for which I take full responsibility) and the other related to the “crime” of being an ex-President with an active Department of Energy clearance possessing classified materials. Before pursuing such novel legal theories as are expressed in those indictments, Jack Smith was the US prosecutor in the International Criminal Court in The Hague, where Jack Smith was a blackmailer.
  2. Jack was sending henchmen to Eastern European to convey the following message to various parties (both innocent and perhaps not-so-innocent): We know that during the Yugoslavian Civil War you murdered some people, Jack is going to indict you but if you will put $X in a suitcase for me to carry back to Jack your problems go away.
  3. $X = from $400,000 to $9 million (bribes of $7 million and $9 million were paid through Bitcoin, not suitcases).
  4. Jack sought a $100 million bribe from a head of state who refused payment and is now in prison.
  5. We learned of these allegations because of a passel of European whistleblowers who not only shared the stories, they wrote superbly detailed affidavits, provided texts and financial records, etc. Read the 151 pages with exhibits yourselves. From where I sit, Jack looks shtuped.
  6. In April 2022 (18 months ago) this information with supporting documentation was provided by these whistleblowers to the the DOJ in lengthy phone calls.
  7. One of the key whistleblowers contacted the DOJ in Washington DC to report it directly. Nothing happened. Then he called hte US Embassy in Spain. Then he received a phone call from a certain Alan Tieger of the DOJ. He then spoke to the Special Prosecutor’s Office (SPO) in The Hague, who did nothing. Then he received another phone call from the DOJ’s Alan Tieger. That main whistleblower then had a phone call with Alan Tieger, thinking it was someone at DOJ to whom he could safely bring this information. Initially he thought Tieger was with the DOJ -SDNY (Southern District of New York).
  8. Alan Tieger spent the first few minutes of the call trying to get the whistleblowers to recant, and when they refused, reluctantly walked through their allegations and evidence. We know this not only from the whistleblowers affidavits, but in addition, because they recorded the 90-minute Zoom call (which is dynamite to hear, and which, of course, we have).
  9. Alan Tieger then buried the matter. This is likely explained by the fact that Alan Tieger turns out not to have been from DOJ Internal Affairs, nor was he in the SDNY: he actually was in the Hague with Jack Sith. In fact, Alan Tieger is a man who spent his career carrying Jack Smith’s luggage around the DOJ (and he has since replaced Jack as the American prosecutor at the ICC). So while the whistleblowers thought they were blowing the whistle on Jack Smith, they were tricked into doing so to Jack Smith’s own DOJ-butt-boy.
  10. infer:
  11. Attorney General Merick Garland learned about this material 18 months ago, and he (or Lisa Monaco, the Littlefinger of Garland’s DOJ) summoned Jack Smith back to Washington, DC to tell him something along the following lines: Listen you SOB, we know that you have been blackmailing people over in Europe and we are going to put you away for 30 years…. or you are going to come home and prosecute Donald Trump. We don’t care how far-fetched the legal theories, you are going to indict him and hound him to thwart his return to office.
  12. This explains why Jack Smith has indicted for possessing classified materials a man with an active DoE clearance, and for whatever that man did on J6 that no one can really explain.

Is Extortionist Jack Smith Being Extorted to Pursue Trump? – Deep Capture

Do not take my word for this. Download the whistleblowers complaint for yourself. This has been known about smiths sordid background. Speculation is he was removed from his assignment at the ICC because this information was getting out in small circles but ignored by the legacy media.


Simply more proof Smith is a lying scumbag. Just the type this DoJ employs.

smith has his own problems having engaged in extortion while at the ICC.

Jack Smith Fights to Keep March 4 Trial Date For Trump in DC Case

Clearly a desperation move. The more time Trumps team has to prepare in spite of the judge not allowing exculpatory evidence to the team the worse it gets for the scumbag smith.

The Supreme Court wouldn’t dare to immunize Trump from prosecution. They know what would follow if they destroyed the rule of law.

He only needs immunization from PERsecution.