I & I Editorial BoardNOTE TO READERS: If you see ads constantly popping up on the left side of this page, it is not our doing! We are working with WordPress to figure out who is forcing them onto our site. In the meantime, please accept our apologies.
What tens of millions have suspected, and for good reason, is that Barack Obama was deeply involved in the Russia collusion hoax that was intended to derail Donald Trump’s first presidency, a plot that Trump bluntly called “treason.” Obama of course refuted the claim through a flack. OK, then, let’s have him voice his denial under oath. If he did nothing wrong, he should be eager set the record straight.
We’re advocating neither a fishing expedition nor a witch hunt because we find Obama to be an odious fellow. There are plenty of those out there on the left, and to take lawful action against them all would consume more time and resources than are available.
What we want is the truth, and it’s looking as if the facts show that both Hillary Clinton and Obama were part of the cabal that tried to set up Trump. If true, it is, as some have suggested, the most appalling political scandal in our nation’s history.
Our Investor’s Business Daily colleague and first-rate investigative reporter Paul Sperry last week introduced to the public “a secret 200-page congressional audit that reveals details about how an intelligence community assessment on Russia ordered by President Obama after the 2016 election was framed in a way that portrayed Trump as being beholden to the Kremlin.”
The Trump administration, he reported, is considering building “a criminal conspiracy case against Obama and Biden administration political appointees who allegedly weaponized the government against Trump.”
Sperry quotes an anonymous senior official who told him that “Obama ordered the ICA (Intelligence Community Assessment) to set Trump up and knock him off balance before he could even get started.” It “was an influence operation far more consequential than anything [Russian President Vladimir] Putin cooked up. Obama and Hillary [Clinton] schemed the op, and the CIA and FBI ran it.”
Earlier this week, it was confirmed that the Justice Department has received a criminal referral for a number of Obama-era officials from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who says they “manufactured and politicized intelligence” to “usurp President Trump and subvert the will of the American people.”
In an official statement, Obama called the assertions “constant nonsense and misinformation,” and “outrageous.”
“These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction.”
In response, Gabbard released Wednesday a declassified report which she says shows “Obama ordered the intelligence community to create an Intelligence Community Assessment they knew was false, promoting a contrived narrative, with the intent of undermining the legitimacy and power of a duly elected president of the United States, Donald Trump.” She also said Wednesday that all relevant documents have been referred to the Justice Department and FBI for a criminal investigation and confirmed that Obama’s role will be looked at.
“The evidence we have found and we have released directly points to President Obama leading the manufacturing of this intelligence assessment,” she said.
Readers can find the report here and decide for themselves if Gabbard is embellishing, Obama is lying, or there is still too much gray area needing to be filled in.
When the “walls were closing in” and the “bombshells” were being dropped on Trump, Obama and members of his party, as well as their media sentries, declared over and again that no one is above the law. In case you doubt this, here’s a supercut of them saying just that over and over. Obama even made of point of saying that no one, “especially the president, is above the law.” If no one is above the law, then no one should be afraid to testify under oath in open court, a congressional hearing or a deposition.
Should Obama ever be required to testify about his role in the malicious scheme, he by all means could choose to invoke his Fifth Amendment right to keep quiet. He might even ask his questioners “what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”
We know that presidents can testify. Abraham Lincoln, Woodrow Wilson and Gerald Ford all testified before Congress while in office. Former presidents have appeared before various committees and subcommittees more than a dozen times. Bill Clinton testified before a grand jury during his second term, and two of the articles of impeachment against him were perjury charges in connection with his grand jury testimony.
Obama is just one several alleged co-conspirators who should be compelled to testify. The public deserves to hear sworn testimony from Biden, Clinton, who was secretary of state under Obama and Trump’s Democratic Party opponent in the 2016 election, and Obama officials such as Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, CIA Director John Brennan, National Security Adviser Susan Rice, Secretary of State John Kerry, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, FBI Director James Comey and Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe.
The Democrats and their media lackeys will argue that investigating a previous president is a hallmark of banana republics and is beneath the dignity of our country. No, requiring Obama and others to testify is a legitimate pursuit of justice. It has been Trump’s opponents who have adopted banana republic tactics to try to bury him any way they could.
— Written by the I&I Editorial Board
Obama is an expert prevaricator. He’s been a liar all of his life. He can fool a lie detector so putting him on the stand under oath will be another exercise in deception. He does not believe in God so any oath he takes will not be binding on him. Best to bring all the witnesses to the stand and when he is convicted of treason sentenced to a traitor’s fate.
The trick is to ask him questions under oath for which he wants to lie but where the questioner knows the answer and has proof of it. In such case Obama can answer the question honestly, invoke the 5th, or risk going to jail.
Good point. Now let’s see if the Republicans have the spine to call him to testify. I suspect not.
This is another reason to make sure one votes Republican in the mid-term elections. If the Democrats get the House (and Senate) we shall never see justice done-or even approached.
Obama (Clinton and the rest-although the “intelligence” community-who should really be called the Statsi-might see some justice done) for all he has done to us should at the very least receive an ulcer.
It is a shame that the very first Benedict Arnold of a President (and as a Caucasian I nearly voted for him because of his color) had to be an African-American.
For that he should be condemned and ridiculed forever by any and all of our future history books.
Who knows what the truth is about so many of these controversies?
The political left’s irrational and compulsive “need” for the US to elect a black person, sort of, president made them and their co-conspirators in the press, suppress many of the facts and qualifications, or lack of qualifications about Obama, that we all deserve to learn the truth, at last.
They also smoothed over egregious things Obama did, the Russian hoax probably being but one, thereby protecting him from his follies due to his clear lack of wisdom and experience, because he was their first “black” president, a mark that will hang over him forever; the same mark that will hang over Biden’s similarly DEI selected Justice Jackson, too.
Too bad; both are fine enough individuals, who allowed themselves to be pawns of the unctuous Uriah Heaps of the misdirected and corrupt political operatives who lurk out there!
Getting these possible witnesses before a Congressional Committee will not prove worthwhile.
Politicians, even if lawyers, ask lousy questions, and if the Committee hires good lawyers, they are on time limitations, the witnesses answer with speeches, and there is no judge to cajole or intimidate the witnesses actually to answer the questions. It always proves a waste of time.
No he can not plead the 5th as he already has immunity.
If he were to refuse to testify even with this blanket immunity he can be held in contempt because that is not an offical presidential act when he has pure immunity.
Like the other fella, holder.
I can’t believe I didn’t bookmark this I&I column. Thanks for giving me a 2nd chance!
I don’t know if what Obama has done comes under the immunity act that is given to the President for his official acts.
However, I sure would like to seem him in the dock, humiliated and shamed for life.
A President doing what he strongly appears to have done (commit treason and a real (not like Jan 6th one) insurrection against our democracy and our country) deserves at the very least to be shamed and pointed at as a traitor.
It is ironic that the Constitution that he tried to destroy will be what saves him (viz with Presidential Immunity).
I am not a Democrat nor a Republican nor a Trump Party member. But it does strike me as odd that people who seem to be really intelligent have become so obsessed with generating propaganda that it is getting harder and harder to find any media objectively accurate. Like this article does not mention the bi-partisan Senate Report on Russia’s involvement in the election. The report concludes, signed by members of both parties, that the Russians played a major role in attempting to turn the election toward Mr. Trump and that Russia was, in fact, a national security threat in its web activities. Where is that story in I & I or in Tipping Insights?