The Case Against John Bolton & My Lawsuit Against the White House (LegalEagle's Law Review) 

More about my lawsuit against the White House, CIA, and DOJ (and others) here: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-0sazcZ8wwZc.html If you'd like to support my litigation enforcing FOIA requests and the National Security Counselors, we’d greatly appreciate it: donate.democracyengine.com/NationalSecurityCounselors/contribute

Not all heroes wear capes, but they do have briefs.

This is how screwed up 2020 is: that impeachment trial was THIS YEAR and I am pretty sure we all forgot about it already. It isn't even close to the biggest event of the year. I am so sick of living in interesting times.

LegalEagle's progression followed the main questline of any RPG. Level 1: how to learn basic law Final Boss: sue God

It's gonna be super weird if we start seeing presidential tweets raging at our pal LegalEagle

Legal Eagle channel evolution 2018: How to prepare for law school 2019: How realistic was My Cousin Vinny? 2020: wtf is happening we need sue the government

Point: If the world finds out that our leader is an incompetent moron, it could hurt foreign relations. Counter-point: That's common knowledge and therefore cannot be classified.

The United States v. literally the rest of The United States

Trumps probable response to a lawsuit: "I know the law the bestest. I have studied, possibly longer than anyone else. I know many lawyers, they are tremendous lawyers. I don't know this guy. I know he's on youtube. But I don't know him. He's probably not a very good lawyer. Sad!" All while wawing his hands over the podium likes he's playing an air-accordion.

I met Trump once, he told me "▇▇▇ ▇▇▇". And I said "▇▇▇" The whole thing was absolutely ▇▇▇

"Donald Trump's legal team... And by that I mean the US Justice Department" Damn 😏

This is the most lawyer looking lawyer I’ve ever seen.

Trump: Any Conversation with me is classified. Twitter: Define conversation.

"There are no heroes." Are you sure about that? Because you're really starting to make that list for me.

LegalEagle 2019: "I try to stay neutral in politics." LegalEagle 2020: "I'm suing the White House."

27:15 I love how you filed suit under the aegis of Legal Eagle, LLC 😂 That makes for an interesting case title. I hope eventually there's a Wikipedia article about it. I want very badly to live in a world where there's a Wikipedia article called _Legal Eagle v. National Security Council._

Why he didnt testify? I have a hunch, hear me out: you just dont get as much cash for a testomony as you do for a book deal.

OBJECTION! "There are no heroes in this story." You, sir, and your colleagues that are suing to pursue the FOIA request are the heroes.

I can't believe we're sitting watching the foundations of a trial that could reach the Supreme Court in the long run on RU-vid.

Trump: I'll order a salad. Waiter: Okay. Chef: What did he order? Waiter: Sorry, that's classified information.

@21:00 ish: "I will consider every conversation with me highly classified." Well, gee, Don, maybe you should *stop tweeting* about all your conversations, constantly. You're leaking classified information all over the carpet. Unbelievable.

Classified now means anything incriminating or embarrassing. No one in this administration gives squat about the country.

This channel is the embodiment of "well that escalated quickly"

20:58 "Hey, daughter, how was your day today?" "It was fine, I guess." CLASSIFIED.

“Sunlights the best disinfectant”. I’ve heard you can just inject that stuff

Not all heroes wear capes. Some of them wear badass suits from Indochino.

Legal Eagle last year: let's learn about lawsuit fundamentals. Legal Eagle this year: why I'm sueing the Whitehouse Literally a character arch and development better than any anime

How the hell do you keep doing this? You toe the line, maintain professionalism, talk about the topic in depth and topics RELATED to the topic at hand. On a regular basis. On top of what I assume is a very demanding regular job. I am impressed.

As a 30 plus year lawyer I find this stuff fascinating. As an American, I’m disgusted what this administration has done the last 3 plus years. It’s terrifying. Prior restraint issues are probably the most important decided by the courts. Justices Douglas and Black were both champions of the 1st Amendment.

Coming soon: The Room Where it Happened 2: The Court Room Where the Room Where it Happened Might Happen.

Do you ever see horrendous things happening and think "Someone should do something! *long pause* Wait, Im a lawyer, I can do that thing!"

"National security" usually just means "the security of my seat in office".

"There are no heroes here in this story." Reality summarized in 10 words or less.

Why am I feeling a try "We've investigated ourselves and found nothing wrong" moment from this administration coming up?

"Donald Trump's law firm, and by that I mean the US Justice Department..." Oooh, this is gonna be brutal

Wow I'm so happy there is a lawyer out there trying to be honest and impartial but won't hesitate to do and say what they believe to be right. You are challenging my personal perspective on law that I have from some civ/Crim law classes. Thanks!

I was expecting a boss-level sponsor segue with, "Now if you want to know more about the FOIA request and the suit that I'm wearing." _Indochino_

"John Bolton is trying to tell his story, and the government is trying to stop him." It's really weird to think that, just five months ago, John Bolton was trying to avoid telling his story, and the government was trying to make him do it.

Michael Scott: I DECLARE BANKRUPTCY Donald: I DECLARE CLASSIFIED

This man's doing the founding fathers work, focusing on the people!

OBJECTION: Yo. The only thing this video taught me is that those in power are experts on the law and engineer situations to be in borderline areas so that they can twist the facts of a case to be obtuse and open to interpretation. The catch is that the precedent set by such a case is to be upheld unless overturned. This means that the legal system gets defined in petty squabbles between the worst that society has to offer. See plessy vs ferguson, the dredd scott decision, the missouri compromise catastrophe, and just a whole dang plethora of others.

Honestly, your lawsuit is probably the most badass retaliation to the government. Also, I would really love to hear your breakdown of the CHAZ (capitol hill autonomous zone) in Seattle.

He should have published it on the Internet. Even if it got taken down, it would have at least partially circulated before then, therefore triggering the Streisand effect.

Thank you for doing this. All of the corruption in the United States is just sickening.

Hi, I know you probably won’t see this but can you please cover the “Got Talent” show contracts? Their unfair if not downright abusive. They legally get rid of your freedom and own all your creations (even before you enter the show the control some of your media.) It’s pretty bad but often ignored or unknown.

AS someone who has had a TS/SCI clearance, you nailed it. Even after 18 years of retirement I still have to stop talking when certain topics come up in casual conversations.

"There are no heroes in this story." Don't forget that YOU'RE in this story now. You will be the hero.

OBJECTION: I have a question regarding how he’s not allowed to talk with his lawyer about what’s in the book as from the perspective of contract law, which presumably he may not be as proficient in as a lawyer. especially if he believes the decision the government is making is based on false claims of classification since Knight already claimed it was fine, which could arguably support that conclusion. In that case what legal aid is presented for the person, since he has a right to a lawyer. The courts and government are separate entities for a reason, so based on that how can the government sensor what is said between a lawyer and their client. I understand the classification issue but in that case what systems are put in place for such a situation. Is there lawyers with the necessary clearance, can they be objective when they are beholden to the government for that clearance? What is the process for a lawyer gaining security clearance? And if there isn’t currently a system in place in your expert opinion (such that it is) what would you recommend?

I do appreciate that you're practicing law the way it should be in society. Good luck man.

"The horse has already bolted" I can't believe you missed this opportunity.

I teach English as a second language to adults and some of them are law students or already lawyers. I'm happy to say that your videos are used as teaching material not just to "think like a lawyer" but to learn English too :)

It never ceases to amaze how short people's memories are. Especially when searching for justification for a bias. John. Bolton. Perhaps the most singularly responsible man for the last decade of war in the M.E. The neocon of all neocons. THIS is the man you hitch your wagon to in going after Trump? Politics does make for strange bedfellows.

"There are no hero's in this story". Pretty much sums it up. Thank you for your efforts.

Filing suit this close to the election is going to be intense. Good luck out there, Mr. Eagle!

Legal Eagle 2019: haha bee movie court bad, Legal Eagle 2020: I’m suing the government

You have a rare talent for making the law accessible, clear, and engaging. I don't know if you've had the opportunity to teach yet, but I hope you seize on it someday. You'd be an outstanding professor of law. Thanks for your videos!

When Trump says, everything he says as a President is classified, the great: we will hear nothing from him in any media at all. Finally an end to his endless twitter-stream😁

I have loved watching you go from: "I always attempt to be impartial" to "WTF!!! How do I possibly spin this as not horrible?!" to "I'm suing the federal government" It's beautiful. I love your channel and you. Thank you for these videos, they are great.

Legal Eagle: Im starting RU-vid. Other Lawyers: Laugh!! Legal Eagle: Im suing the Government Other Layers: [Spits out Cereal]

"Donald Trump's law firm -- and by that I, of course, mean the US Justice Department" lmfaooo

BRAVO Legal Eagle! Your fight for information freedom is a fight for all of us. Do your court thing and you earn a great big THANK YOU from the rest of us.

There's going to be a documentary on this suit called: "The RU-vid channel where it all happened"

"How are you going to fund your lawsuit against the White House?" Legal Eagle: "RU-vid videos..."

You're doing more for our country than our own president, thank you!

19:29 Of course the horse has already left the barn, he’s been wreaking havoc in the hospital for a while now!

Regardless of the outcome, you're a hero. Also, you're one of the most reasonable people on the Internet. Thank you for doing what you do!

"And by that, I mean the Department of Justice..." Straight spitting fire right out the gate.

"These are unprecedented times" UNDERSTATEMENT OF THE CENTURY.

This is such a great channel. Thank you for making the legal technicalities of all these issues easier for non-attorneys to understand!

I've actually been wondering when you were going to roll up your sleeves and get into the fray. I'm genuinely grateful for your efforts and impressed. Thank you, on behalf of those who can't take more direct action against...well, The Trump Administration.

"Posted 1 Minute ago" .... Front row seats baby!

Great thing you're doing, kudos, applause applause, fireworks, parade, etc etc. There's never enough sunshine for all the BS going on in the government, including the military, and it's often bogus classification claims behind the opaqueness. I will donate, good luck.

I am from Britain, but I find your video on American law, really fascinating, I find your video insightful. Taken on Government to get the truth out there, is just awesome, keep up great work.

That eagle that tried attacking Trump during that photoshoot was apparently prescient.

" 'A matter of internal security.' - the age-old cry of the oppressor. " - Jean-Luc Picard

Imagine seeing this on the news: "RU-vid star and attorney (more know for being a youtuber) decides to sue the Whitehouse."

Not strictly related, but I just thought of it. I “love” how it’s always “freedom of speech” and “I can say what I want” but then when someone says something they don’t agree with it’s “you aren’t allowed to say that!”

I said it earlier, and I will say it again. The government fears citizens who stand up for themselves, and attorneys with a lot of free time. And from the sounds of it, what you're doing should make them tremble in their boots.

When you're so early that only legaleagle has commented.

I sincerely appreciate and applaud this. Excellent work for the people. I will be donating. Thank you.

God speed my good man. Wishing you well and hope you help the American people and true patriots through it.

I would like to quote LE here "Like all american, he took it to court".

Better watch your back man. Just don't turn up missing.

Weird people spend the time to give thumbs down when just given the details of how the law is suposed to work.. wow..

I'm loving this channel since all this started. I wish you 100% success LegalEagle. :D

"Once again proving that the lawyers are the real American heroes." - LegalEagle It's sad when quote like this turn from having a slightly sarcastic and self-deprecating edge to bitter truth.

"Donald trump's law firm... the US justice department" what a start!

So, I forgot this happened.... This is so funny in hindsight.

A few key points related to the review process: 4:20 Classification of information is determined by an "original classification authority" that will then specify exactly what is classified in something called a "Security Classification Guide" which articulates very clearly what is classified, at what level, and for how long. It's like a cook book, with a matrix to consult that gives lets you find the classification level of anything you might write. For example, if you wrote a book about your time as a "Special Warfare" planner in the DoD, a classification guide pertaining to your work might say the information pertaining to "Special Operations in Denied Areas" as being "Secret to Top Secret" and the declassification date as being 25 years from the conclusion of the operation. So you'd know that anything you wrote that was about a REAL "special operation in denied areas" would fall under that criteria... This process is the same for information classified under SCI, ACCM, SAP, and STO "stuff" - all of it is governed by (potentially) dozens of SCGs, with each pertaining to specific information, programs and operations. For a review, what should happen is: the reviewer takes the SCGs pertaining to the work performed by the employee and then the reviewer compares the submission to those SCGs. What should NOT happen is: the reviewer takes ALL the SCGs they can find and then tries to find anyplace in the publication where an argument could be made that any SCG applies; even if the employee never worked with classified government information pertaining to that program or information classified under those SCGs. The issues with Clinton's e-mail come to mind as an example of what happens when all SCGs that can be found are used as a justification (after the fact) to retroactively classify previously unclassified material OR to apply classification to information the writer was not aware of being classified at the time they were writing. Going back to the example above; if you wrote a book about "special forces" conducting a "behind the lines" operation in Afghanistan and you were a former operator, is your book automatically based on classified information you actually had knowledge of OR did you invent a plausible story that is similar to real world events that you witnessed? Does changing a few of the specifics make a difference? In Bolton's case, revealing the President asked the President of China for help with his reelection is probably not specifically covered in any classification guide - especially considering soliciting the support of a foreign national to win an election is a criminal offense and crimes can not be "classified" to prevent disclosure... But... What does "soliciting" really mean in this case? What if what was asked for is overtly legitimate and only indirectly "helps" with an election? In this case, Chinese purchases of US farm exports is overtly a legitimate concern of the president even if the motive might suggest otherwise... So... Plausible as legitimate but maybe not if it's solicited with the express purpose of winning reelection... So does that mean the conversation SHOULD be classified OR does the motive here make it necessary to allow the public to know? Those considerations are why this kind of review process is more art than science; but the NSC is an original classification authority (OCA), so they would have their OWN classification guide to work from, so there should be fewer surprises. It's also worth noting that Bolton was an OCA when he was the NSA, so in theory he should be knowledgeable of what is and isn't classified. All that said, if you want to classify something you can probably find a justification to do that... That's against the spirit of the system which is to "write for release" and use the minimum (but correct) classification necessary. But... Again, we've seen already the result of over-classification when it suited the reviewer.

I’m so proud that we have someone like you using your platform to educate and spread awareness. I’ve been gaslit by America for thinking that all of this is just so so so corrupt. It really puts my mind at ease knowing that you’re speaking for the people. Thank you!!

As an italian i'm amazed by the level of immunity the POTUS has, with Berlusconi the prosecutors just went ahead and put him on trial.

I am so grateful for your videos, Legal Eagle, thank you. They are really helpful.

Fantastic work, I will be watching to see how this all shakes out, I wish you and your team all the best

NDA's have too many consequences. My dad was Army Cryptography in the 60's and 70's, Kodak service technician after that. Before he died from cancer he spent an evening talking to a "kid" I grew up with who had a certain standing in the Marine corps. What he told me and my brothers after my father passed was upsetting, vague, and curious. No honest details beyond one incident, but a lot of trips during certain times that made us scratch our chins as we picked over what we could in our memories. All I really know is I didn't know everything my dad was, but I remember him as a good man who had secrets. We cannot get his service uniform, most of what we can get is redacted. The government my father served knows how well he served them, but the same logic behind NDA's wipes away all good or bad evidence of that governments history. I guess my dad just worked on equipment, but he also saw the photos of countless people just fixing a central printer for photography development centers at Kodak around the world in the 70's through the 90's. The only way someone like me could learn more is to find a living witness who would talk to me, but they seem to die off over time...

"This is absolutely not the way that any of this works..." is generally a fairly accurate response to pretty much anything that comes out of Trump's mouth or from his Tweets.

What I generally don't like about this is that the government can more or less impede Boltons right to free press by classifying that which they would like censored. I don't like this one bit. That he didn't just testify at this point... i wonder if he regrets it.

I wish you and your team the best during this case. This is going to be an uphill battle. Stay strong, Legal Eagle!

2 videos 1 day. The sound of justice. (my notification bell)

Bolton _really_ wants people to know he has a moustache, he references it so often in the book it is really weird.

You got this man the truth is important, honesty and open trust are both required for a government to run fairly and properly.