No products in the cart.


Napolitano: Trump First President to Confront Deep State

Shadow government desperate to destroy uncompromised ‘People’s President’.

| –
March 7, 2017

Judge Andrew Napolitano praised Donald Trump as the first president to challenge the mysterious, controlling ‘deep state’ in the modern American era.

“The deep state has a very wise and shrewd adversary – the man in the Oval Office,” he said. “[It is] the first time in the modern era that the man in the Oval Office has been an adversary of the deep state, rather than a tool of it.”

[ot-video type=”youtube” url=””]


In an appearance with Lou Dobbs, Napolitano laid out what the deep state is for the general public, and dropped bombshell after bombshell about its power to influence the behavior of presidents, obtain all manner of information about the general public and steer the direction of the country – regardless of which political group is supposedly in charge.

“Really, it’s been around since 1947: the deep state – the part of the government that never charges, regardless of which party controls Congress and which party is in the White House,” he explained. “There are many, many aspects of the deep state; we’re talking about the intelligence community deep state – people in the intelligence community that have access to so much information about everyone.”

“They can manipulate the President of the United States, and if they don’t like what he says, they can embarrass him, and if they want to control his thought patterns and decision making, they’ll keep information away from him.”

“Donald Trump has fallen victim to that, and he knows it, and he knows he has to stop it,” he concluded.

Napolitano asserted that Trump’s call for a congressional investigation into possible wiretapping and illegal surveillance of his campaign headquarters at Trump Tower is a nightmare for the deep state and their enablers in the federal government.

“[It is] the last thing his enemies in the intelligence community want, because if the American public learns that they have access to everything we type and everything we say, they will be repulsed by the power that this deep state group has that Congress gave them – they didn’t create this on their own,” he said. “Congress enacted three pieces of legislation, which, with perverse interpretations of this legislation before a secret court, let’s them gather everything we say in real-time.”

Napolitano referenced the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court as the “secret court” which reviews and approves virtually all requests by the federal government to spy on foreign individuals present in the United States and intercept all of their communications, but these same requests – which are rarely denied – are being used to spy on Americans in shocking fashion.

“One of the FISA court warrants that I saw was, ‘for every customer of Verizon in the United States,’” revealed Napolitano. “That’s 113 million people – including most of the federal government.”

Dobbs and Napolitano discussed the depth to which the inter-agency spying occurs, noting that even Congress, high-ranking military officers, and Supreme Court justices are intimately monitored.

“If they will surveil journalists, if they will spy on U.S. senators, why would they hesitate to spy on a presidential candidate?” concluded Dobbs.

Read more at INFOWARS

If you believe in the mission of Oath Keepers, to defend the Constitution
against all enemies,  foreign and domestic, please consider making a donation to support our work.   You can donate HERE.





  1. The more I think of Trump’s Presidency is the more I’m convinced of it’s Divine Providence. What the Conservatives never understood about him is that the character of the man is truly un-impeachable. He is literally the Deep State’s worst nightmare because they know two things if they know anything at all. 1) It will take a silver bullet. 2) If they do it, WE will take the Mall like Grant took Richmond!

    1. Chip,

      I’d venture to say there is only a small percentage of Leftists, mostly in top leadership positions (the ones who don’t risk their lives for the “cause,” and don’t get their hands dirty) who fully understand the hell that’s waiting for them should they continue their current efforts to their logical conclusion. Maybe “logical” is not the right word, as there’s nothing about their movement or ideology that’s logical, but I think you get my drift.

        1. I’ve read enough of your comments here to suspect that you’d also agree that what you and I have said is not a threat; it’s a promise — nothing more than the fulfillment of a sacred oath that we both took. That is something that is completely foreign to our adversaries.

          1. My 4th Great Grandfather Andrew Murray immigrated from Scotland and fought in the Continental Army on the NY Line. “Sacred” is the perfect word RNS…its in our DNA.

  2. So what is up with Judge Nap? Is he leaving President Kennedy out for a reason, because he took on the CIA/FBI, Military Industrial Congressional Complex and lost his life and WE did nothing.

    “Napolitano asserted that Trump’s call for a congressional investigation…’

    We already had a few of those just in my lifetime and they are corrupt as he–. It takes a REAL investigation, and we need to call up and arrange privately a knowledgeable group to perform a Grand Jury Investigation into this, and if enough is found out, for the PEOPLE to call forth a Grand Jury – and NO, we do not need the permission of those who serve in any branch of the government to do these things, they are OUR TOOLS to defend our US Constitution, ourselves from those who serve within our governments. That is one of the things it is going to take, but the people within the Investigation must be knowledgeable of our US Constitution, plus other ways to keep themselves safe while investigating.

    Grand Jury – “The grand jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the Constitution. It has not been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the branches described in the first three Articles. It is a constitutional fixture in its own right. In fact the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the Government and the people”.

    “Thus, citizens have the unbridled right to empanel their own grand juries and present “True Bills” of indictment to a court, which is then required to commence a criminal proceeding. Our Founding Fathers presciently thereby created a “buffer” the people may rely upon for justice, when public officials, including judges, criminally violate the law.” (Misbehavior, “Good Behaviour” requirement)
    “The grand jury is an institution separate from the courts, over whose functioning the courts do not preside, we think it clear that, as a general matter at least, no such “supervisory” judicial authority exists. The “common law” of the Fifth Amendment demands a traditional functioning grand jury.”

    “Although the grand jury normally operates, of course, in the courthouse and under judicial auspices, its institutional relationship with the judicial branch has traditionally been, so to speak, at arm’s length. Judges’ direct involvement in the functioning of the grand jury has generally been confined to the constitutive one of calling the grand jurors together and administering their oaths of office. The grand jury’s functional independence from the judicial branch is evident both in the scope of its power to investigate criminal wrongdoing, and in the manner in which that power is exercised.”

    “The grand jury ‘can investigate merely on suspicion that the law is being violated, or even because it wants assurance that it is not.’ It need not identify the offender it suspects, or even “the precise nature of the offense” it is investigating. The grand jury requires no authorization from its constituting court to initiate an investigation, nor does the prosecutor require leave of court to seek a grand jury indictment. And in its day-to-day functioning, the grand jury generally operates without the interference of a presiding judge. It swears in its own witnesses and deliberates in total secrecy.”

    “Recognizing this tradition of independence, we have said the 5th Amendment’s constitutional guarantee presupposes an investigative body ‘acting independently of either prosecuting attorney or judge”

    “Given the grand jury’s operational separateness from its constituting court, it should come as no surprise that we have been reluctant to invoke the judicial supervisory power as a basis for prescribing modes of grand jury procedure. Over the years, we have received many requests to exercise supervision over the grand jury’s evidence-taking process, but we have refused them all. “it would run counter to the whole history of the grand jury institution” to permit an indictment to be challenged “on the ground that there was incompetent or inadequate evidence before the grand jury.” (Nor would it be lawful of them to do so.) Justice Antonin Scalia writing for the majority said In the Supreme Court case of United States v. Williams, 112 S.Ct. 1735, 504 U.S. 36, 118 L.Ed.2d 352 (1992)

  3. 1947, isn’t that interesting? That’s the same year the Unconstitutional APA (Administrative Procedures Act) was passed. Totally bypassed the legislative procedure in lieu of Agency rule making…..Hmmmm.

Comments are closed.