Obama: His Coup Or Theirs?

**vector7** · February 17th, 2017, 23:41

Will Obama's CIA Operatives Attempt To Take Down Trump? Ron Paul Warns Of "More Powerful, Shadow Government"

by Tyler Durden
Jan 14, 2017 11:20 PM

itte ubmitted by Mac Slavo via SHTFPlan.com,

[CENTER]

[/COLOR]
It isn’t just that Donald Trump routinely thumbs his nose at the establishment, insults media figures he sees as unfair and bucks conventional wisdom.

It is that President-elect Trump is defying the will of the deep state, military industrial complex base of ultimate power in the United States. That is why he is treading dangerous waters, and risks the fate of JFK.

Trump publicly dissed the intelligence community assessments on Russian hacking; they retaliated with a made up dossier about the alleged Trump-Putin ‘golden shower’ episode.

Follow

Loco Goose  @CrazyGoose[/COLOR]

Russians have compromising footage of Donald Trump paying prostitutes to piss on a bed

#GoldenShowerGate https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3259984-Trump-Intelligence-Allegations.html …
6:06 PM - 10 Jan 2017

Trump Intelligence Allegations

Source document contributed to DocumentCloud by Mark Schoofs (BuzzFeed).
documentcloud.org

While it may be a silly falsehood, it may also be serving as a final warning that they get to script reality, not him.

Perhaps they want Trump to feel blackmailed and controlled by alluding to fake dirt, while reminding him of the real dirt they hold on his activities (whatever it may be).

Insulting the credibility of the intelligence community in a public way – as the man elected to the highest office in the land – is liable to ruffle a few feathers, and it could provoke a serious response.

Trump knows the power of the people he is taunting, but he may not be aware of where the line is between play in political rhetoric and actually irritating and setting off those who control policy.

There is plenty of Trump misbehavior that can be simply written off, or trivialized, but cutting into the war and statecraft narrative of the shadow government steering this deep state is a deviation too far.

It is one thing to play captain, but another to imagine that you steer the ship. They are happy for Trump to take all the prestige and privileges of the office; but not for him to cut into the big business of foreign conflict, the undercurrent of all American affairs, the dealings in death, drugs, oil and weapons, and the control of people through a manipulation of these affairs.

If President Trump takes his rogue populism too far, he will suffer the wrath of the same people who took out Kennedy… there are some things that are not tolerated by those who are really in charge.

And now leaders in the Senate are warning President-elect Trump about the stupidity of going against the national-security establishment.

As Jacob G. Hornberger warns:

In a truly remarkable bit of honesty and candor regarding the U.S. national-security establishment, new Senate minority leader Charles Schumer has accused President-elect Trump of “being really dumb.”… for taking on the CIA and questioning its conclusions regarding Russia.

“Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you…. He’s being really dumb to do this.”

[…]

No president since John F. Kennedy has dared to take on the CIA or the rest of the national security establishment […] They knew that if they opposed the national-security establishment at a fundamental level, they would be subjected to retaliatory measures.

Kennedy… After the Bay of Pigs, he vowed to tear the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter them to the winds. He also fired CIA Director Allen Dulles, who, in a rather unusual twist of fate, would later be appointed to the Warren Commission to investigate Kennedy’s murder.

Kennedy’s antipathy toward the CIA gradually extended to what President Eisenhower had termed the military-industrial complex, especially when it proposed Operation Northwoods, which called for fraudulent terrorist attacks to serve as a pretext for invading Cuba, and when it suggested that Kennedy initiate a surprise nuclear attack on the Soviet Union.

[…]

Worst of all, from the standpoint of the national-security establishment, [Kennedy] initiated secret personal negotiations with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev and Cuban leader Fidel Castro, both of whom, by this time, were on the same page as Kennedy.

[…]

Kennedy was fully aware of the danger he faced by taking on such a formidable enemy.

And to the extent that President Kennedy consciously stood up to the system, he paid the price for his attempt at independent wielding of power from the Oval Office.

It is a shuddering thought. A sharp lesson in history that must not be misinterpreted.

The implications for Trump are quite clear. If his refusal to take intelligence briefings, or follow CIA advice is serious, then serious consequences will follow. If Trump is serious about peace with Putin when they insist on war, there will be a problem.

There are several powers behind the throne that have wanted to ensure that presidents don’t let the power go to their head, or try to change course from the carefully arranged crisis-reaction-solution paradigm.

True peace is not good for military industrial complex business; true peace, without the persistence of grave threats, and plenty of sparks of chaos to back it up, cannot be tolerated.

As things have progressed today, making friendly with Putin, and calling off the war with Russia may simply be impermissible. If Trump is attempting to negotiate his own peace – and sing along with Frank Sinatra’s “My Way” at the inauguration, then he is in for a very rude awakening.

If, on the other hand, he is the Trump card being played by this very same establishment, then things may develop according to the same ultimate objectives, albeit through a ‘wild card’ path styled after the ego of President Trump.

With Goldman Sachs and neocon advisors filling up his administration, Trump may be simply nudged in the right direction. But the intelligence community is not willing to take many chances – and there are clearly contingencies in place.

As SHTF has previously reported, the continuity of government “Doomsday” command-and-control planes were brought out after the election as a public show of power to Trump and the American people. The shadow government is real, and for now, maintains dominance.

Follow

The Aviationist @TheAviationist

"Mysterious" plane circling over Denver was "just" an E-6B Mercury "doomsday” plane https://wp.me/p2TYIs-awT
12:37 PM - 17 Nov 2016

Former congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul warned of the shadow government taking control of President Trump’s administration before it was even formed:

You know, we look at the president, we look at what he said, we look at what he might do, and we look at his advisors, but quite frankly, there is an outside source, which we refer to as a deep state or a shadow government. There is a lot of influence by people that are actually more powerful than our government itself, our president and on up. I mean, you take for instance how our government gets involved in elections around the world, whether it’s in the Middle East or Ukraine.

Trump is reportedly retaining his own private security, bucking the protocol of Secret Service detail… and this clearly a sign that he and his team have thought through security issues and the possibility of an inside job.

This is prudent, but these deep state guys have access throughout the system at every level. They are anywhere, and everywhere. Probably someone that Trump trusts. There are certainly many threats.

For the sake of the stability of this country, and President-elect Trump’s own life, let us hope that they stay several steps ahead of anyone who might want to do him harm.

This is eerie, but real.

* * *

On a personal level, it seems wise to prepare for the possibility of widespread unrest due to political instability.

Tread carefully at the scene of the inauguration, and any high profile political gatherings or demonstrations.

Riots at the inauguration, or in cities throughout the country are possible, maybe even likely, as is an attempted assassination.

Even if this scenario is a long shot, and taboo to even discuss, the role of the CIA in past coups, revolutions and uprisings is enough to warrant taking precautions.

There is an element of chaos present during this unprecedented transfer of power to the 45th president, and a wounded animal in the defensive-attack posture.

If you are at a protest, either as a participant, or as an observer, remain aware of the larger actions of the crowd, identify potential provocateurs and stay away from points of potential violence.

Police could use anti-riot gear and spray the crowd, fire rubber bullet, use microwave heating or auditory devices, make mass arrests, or block off large portions of the city.

If anything significant happens, use any available phone or camera to film it, but be prepared for confiscation or technologies to wipe phones. An EMF shielded bag could block this; live stream or upload instantly to as many video platforms as possible, but they have been known to jam cell phone signals at mass gatherings and demonstrations. Make copies and store a physical copy, and several back-ups.

If you are at home, do not wait for the all clear signal from the authorities, shelter in place and prepare to ride out a storm, if something sensational or deadly takes place and panic spreads.

Do not trust the media; and try to take notice if a coup has taken place, and constitutional authority subverted.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-14/will-cia-assassinate-trump-ron-paul-warns-more-powerful-shadow-government

**vector7** · March 4th, 2017, 05:38

Mark Levin to Congress: Investigate Obama’s ‘Silent Coup’ vs. Trump

Breitbart News
by Joel B. Pollak3 Mar 2017

Radio host Mark Levin used his Thursday evening show to outline the known steps taken by President Barack Obama’s administration in its last months to undermine Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and, later, his new administration.

Levin called Obama’s effort “police state” tactics, and suggested that Obama’s actions, rather than conspiracy theories about alleged Russian interference in the presidential election to help Trump, should be the target of congressional investigation.

Drawing on sources including the New York Times and the Washington Post, Levin described the case against Obama so far, based on what is already publicly known. The following is an expanded version of that case, including events that Levin did not mention specifically but are important to the overall timeline.

1. June 2016: FISA request. The Obama administration files a request with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) to monitor communications involving Donald Trump and several advisers. The request, uncharacteristically, is denied.

2. July: Russia joke. Wikileaks releases emails from the Democratic National Committee that show an effort to prevent Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) from winning the presidential nomination. In a press conference, Donald Trump refers to Hillary Clinton’s own missing emails, joking: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 e-mails that are missing.” That remark becomes the basis for accusations by Clinton and the media that Trump invited further hacking.

3. October: Podesta emails. In October, Wikileaks releases the emails of Clinton campaign chair John Podesta, rolling out batches every day until the election, creating new mini-scandals. The Clinton campaign blames Trump and the Russians.

4. October: FISA request. The Obama administration submits a new, narrow request to the FISA court, now focused on a computer server in Trump Tower suspected of links to Russian banks. No evidence is found — but the wiretaps continue, ostensibly for national security reasons, Andrew McCarthy at National Review later notes. The Obama administration is now monitoring an opposing presidential campaign using the high-tech surveillance powers of the federal intelligence services.

5. January 2017: Buzzfeed/CNN dossier. Buzzfeed releases, and CNN reports, a supposed intelligence “dossier” compiled by a foreign former spy. It purports to show continuous contact between Russia and the Trump campaign, and says that the Russians have compromising information about Trump. None of the allegations can be verified and some are proven false. Several media outlets claim that they had ben aware of the dossier for months and that it had been circulating in Washington.

6. January: Obama expands NSA sharing. As Michael Walsh later notes, and as the New York Times reports, the outgoing Obama administration “expanded the power of the National Security Agency to share globally intercepted personal communications with the government’s 16 other intelligence agencies before applying privacy protections.” The new powers, and reduced protections, could make it easier for intelligence on private citizens to be circulated improperly or leaked.

7. January: Times report. The New York Times reports, on the eve of Inauguration Day, that several agencies — the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Treasury Department are monitoring several associates of the Trump campaign suspected of Russian ties. Other news outlets also report the exisentence of “a multiagency working group to coordinate investigations across the government,” though it is unclear how they found out, since the investigations would have been secret and involved classified information.

8. February: Mike Flynn scandal. Reports emerge that the FBI intercepted a conversation in 2016 between future National Security Adviser Michael Flynn — then a private citizen — and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. The intercept supposedly was part of routine spying on the ambassador, not monitoring of the Trump campaign. The FBI transcripts reportedly show the two discussing Obama’s newly-imposed sanctions on Russia, though Flynn earlier denied discussing them. Sally Yates, whom Trump would later fire as acting Attorney General for insubordination, is involved in the investigation. In the end, Flynn resigns over having misled Vice President Mike Pence (perhaps inadvertently) about the content of the conversation.

9. February: Times claims extensive Russian contacts. The New York Times cites “four current and former American officials” in reporting that the Trump campaign had “repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials. The Trump campaign denies the claims — and the Times admits that there is “no evidence” of coordination between the campaign and the Russians. The White House and some congressional Republicans begin to raise questions about illegal intelligence leaks.

10. March: the Washington Post targets Jeff Sessions. The Washington Post reports that Attorney General Jeff Sessions had contact twice with the Russian ambassador during the campaign — once at a Heritage Foundation event and once at a meeting in Sessions’s Senate office. The Post suggests that the two meetings contradict Sessions’s testimony at his confirmation hearings that he had no contacts with the Russians, though in context (not presented by the Post) it was clear he meant in his capacity as a campaign surrogate, and that he was responding to claims in the “dossier” of ongoing contacts. The New York Times, in covering the story, adds that the Obama White House “rushed to preserve” intelligence related to alleged Russian links with the Trump campaign. By “preserve” it really means “disseminate”: officials spread evidence throughout other government agencies “to leave a clear trail of intelligence for government investigators” and perhaps the media as well.

In summary: the Obama administration sought, and eventually obtained, authorization to eavesdrop on the Trump campaign; continued monitoring the Trump team even when no evidence of wrongdoing was found; then relaxed the NSA rules to allow evidence to be shared widely within the government, virtually ensuring that the information, including the conversations of private citizens, would be leaked to the media.

Levin called the effort a “silent coup” by the Obama administration and demanded that it be investigated.

In addition, Levin castigated Republicans in Congress for focusing their attention on Trump and Attorney General Sessions rather than Obama.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News. He was named one of the “most influential” people in news media in 2016. His new book, How Trump Won: The Inside Story of a Revolution, is available from Regnery. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...dermine-trump/

**Ryan Ruck** · March 4th, 2017, 16:36

I heard most of that show and he's absolutely right. The FISA court abuse is especially appalling. Dan Bongino (who is a former NYPD cop and USSS agent) filled in for Levin last night and brought up what a big deal a successfully obtained wiretap is on a regular criminal, let alone a sitting member of the government.

This administration ran on a tough guy image and it's time they start standing up to the Dems instead of kowtowing to them, first having Flynn resign and now having Sessions recuse himself on any Russia investigations.

Did anyone in the Obama Justice Department recuse themselves during the Fast And Furious investigation? How about anyone in Treasury recusing themselves over the IRS scandal? Or any of the other myriad scandals during the Obama admin? No. No one in the Obama admin recused themselves.

**Ryan Ruck** · March 5th, 2017, 19:24

Mark Levin on Fox And Friends this morning...

**Ryan Ruck** · October 16th, 2017, 03:49

Originally Posted by vector7

Attorney General Loretta Lynch is SUED to come clean on secret airport meeting with Bill Clinton days before she was to decide on charging his wife over server scandal

*Attorney General Loretta Lynch is facing a federal lawsuit to give details of a secret meeting she had with Bill Clinton on a plane on June 27.

* The American Center for Law and Justice is demanding more information about the meeting and is suing the Obama administration

*The rendezvous took place on the tarmac of the Phoenix Sky Harbor International airport, Arizona

*Lynch heads the Department of Justice, which just days later closed its investigation into Hillary Clinton's private email server

* The ACLJ , which has previously mounted lawsuits against the Obama administration, slammed it for its 'arrogance and inappropriate actions'

By Freya Berry For Dailymail.com

Attorney General Loretta Lynch is facing a federal lawsuit to give details of a meeting she had with Bill Clinton days before she was to decide on his wife's fate.

The meeting in June was barely a week before the Justice Department which she heads dropped its probe into Hillary Clinton's private email server.

The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) filed the lawsuit against the Department of Justice in Washington on Wednesday demanding more information about the meeting, which led to Lynch stepping aside from the server investigation.

As head of the Department of Justice, Lynch was supposed to be deciding whether to proceed with charging Hillary Clinton over her unauthorized server arrangements while she was secretary of state.

But she met with the Democrat's husband on June 27 on the tarmac of the Phoenix Sky Harbor International airport, Arizona. Bill Clinton delayed his flight's departure in order to grab face time with Lynch.

'Don't take off!' the former president shouted after a Secret Service agent told him Lynch was about to land, according to Ed Klein in his book Guilty as Sin, who writes that Clinton wanted to 'bushwhack' Lynch in order to discredit the server investigation.

Lynch was subsequently spotted leaving her jet and local media, who knew Clinton was at the airport, put two and two together. Despite Lynch's insistence that the half-hour meeting was a social call, a political firestorm ensued in which the DOJ's independence was questioned.

'Our conversation was a great deal about grandchildren, it was primarily social about our travels and he mentioned golf he played in Phoenix,' she told CNN affiliate KNXV/ABC15 shortly afterwards.

But the ACLJ is demanding more information about the meeting and is suing the Obama administration, which it slammed for its 'arrogance and inappropriate actions'.

'This Administration has gone out of its way to hide information from the American public – information that is extremely troubling,' said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ in a statement.

'The stakes are high. The American people deserve a Justice Department with integrity.'

It is the conservative group's fourth major federal lawsuit against the Obama administration.

Back in the summer Lynch said she 'would not do it again' because the tete-a-tete 'cast this shadow' over the investigation - and four days after the meeting she finally said she would accept whatever recommendations the FBI made about the case.

The effective recusal came only after pressure mounted when the meeting was disclosed.

The following week, on July 5, FBI director James Comey said the agency recommended no charges against Clinton for her actions - despite her and her team's 'extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information'.

That was until last Friday when Comey sent an explosive letter to Congress saying the agency had discovered new emails that might be relevant to the investigation.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...r-scandal.html

FBI Finds 30 Pages of Clinton-Lynch Tarmac Meeting Documents – Wants Six Weeks to Turn Over Docs

October 13, 2017

Judicial Watch was informed yesterday by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) that the FBI has located 30 pages of documents related to the June 27, 2016, tarmac meeting between former Attorney General Loretta Lynch and former President Bill Clinton, and proposes non-exempt material be produced no later than November 30, 2017 (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:16-cv-02046)).

The new documents are being sent to Judicial Watch in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed after the Justice Department failed to comply with a July 7, 2016, FOIA request seeking the following:

All FD-302 forms prepared pursuant to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s use of a private e-mail server during her tenure.
All records of communications between any agent, employee, or representative of the Federal Bureau of Investigation regarding, concerning, or related to the aforementioned investigation. This request includes, but is not limited to, any related communications with any official, employee, or representative of the Department of Justice, the Executive Office of the President, the Democratic National Committee, and/or the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton.
All records related to the meeting between Attorney General Lynch and former President Bill Clinton on June 27, 2016.

The FBI originally informed Judicial Watch they did not locate any records related to the tarmac meeting. However, in a related case, the Justice Department located emails in which Justice Department officials communicated with the FBI and wrote that they had communicated with the FBI. As a result, by letter dated August 10, 2017, from the FBI stated, “Upon further review, we subsequently determined potentially responsive documents may exist. As a result, your [FOIA] request has been reopened…”

(Surprisingly, the Trump Justice Department refuses to disclose the talking points developed by the Obama Justice Department to help it respond to press inquiries about the controversial June 27, 2016, tarmac meeting between Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport.)

On June 27, 2016, Attorney General Loretta Lynch met privately with former President Bill Clinton on board a parked private plane at Sky Harbor International Airport in Phoenix, Arizona. The meeting occurred during the then-ongoing investigation of Mrs. Clinton’s email server, and mere hours before the Benghazi report was released publicly involving both Mrs. Clinton and the Obama administration. Judicial Watch filed a request on June 30 that the U.S. Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General investigate that meeting.

“The FBI is out of control. It is stunning that the FBI ‘found’ these Clinton-Lynch tarmac records only after we caught the agency hiding them in another lawsuit,” stated Judicial Watch Tom Fitton. “Judicial Watch will continue to press for answers about the FBI’s document games in court. In the meantime, the FBI should stop the stonewall and release these new records immediately.”

This case has also forced the FBI to release to the public the FBI’s Clinton investigative file, although more than half of the records remain withheld. The FBI has also told Judicial Watch that it anticipates completing the processing of these materials by July 2018.

There is significant controversy about whether the FBI and Obama Justice Department investigation gave Clinton and other witnesses and potential targets preferential treatment.

The Obama administration extended numerous immunity agreements, including: Clinton’s former Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills; John Bentel, former director of the State Department’s Office of Information Resources Management; Heather Samuelson, Clinton’s executive assistant; Brian Pagliano, an IT employee at the State Department who serviced the Clinton non-government server; and an employee at Platt River Networks, the company that maintained it. It is not clear whether Hillary Clinton received some type of immunity.

In 2015, a political action committee run by McAuliffe, a close friend and political supporter of Bill and Hillary Clinton, donated nearly $500,000 to Jill McCabe, wife of McCabe, who was then running for the Virginia State Senate. Also, the Virginia Democratic Party, over which McAuliffe had significant influence, donated an additional $207,788 to the Jill McCabe campaign. In July 2015, Andrew McCabe was in charge of the FBI’s Washington, DC, field office, which provided personnel resources to the Clinton email probe. Judicial Watch has several lawsuits about this McCabe/FBI/Clinton scandal.

**vector7** · December 13th, 2019, 01:43

25 'impeachable' Obama scandals far more serious than Comey firing

Ex-president racked up BIG LIST of outrageous abuses of executive power

By WND Staff
Published May 17, 2017 at 8:48pm

President Trump on Inauguration Day

"Impeach!" It's been more than eight years since Democrats uttered that word – long enough for anyone to wonder if it was still in their vocabulary, considering the deafening silence through the dozens of serious scandals during President Obama's administration – but now that President Trump is the man in the White House, it's back with a vengeance.

Democrats everywhere are wildly slinging the "I" word, hoping to nail Trump for high crimes and misdemeanors after the New York Times claimed a memo written by former FBI Director James Comey said the president urged him to end the federal investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn.

Some members of Congress are getting in on the action. They include Reps. Maxine Water, D-Calif., and Al Green, D-Texas. Even a Republican, Rep. Justin Amash, claimed Wednesday there are grounds to impeach President Trump. House Oversign Committee Chair Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, asked for the alleged Comey memo and other documents. Chaffetz tweeted that he is prepared to subpoena the information. And Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., invoked "Watergate."

Now the Democratic Party is reportedly poll testing impeachment as a 2018 election issue. More than 1 million people signed a petition calling on Congress to impeach Trump.

On Twitter, one anti-Trump tweeter with the handle "IMPEACH TRUMP" shared this Photoshopped image repeatedly throughout the week and tweeted incessantly about impeaching and jailing President Trump

Wasting no time Wednesday, the mainstream media sprang into action, enthusiastically echoing the left's impeachment calls. MSNBC launched a Watergate ad implying Trump is America's new Richard Nixon.

"Watergate. We know its name because there were reporters who never stopped asking questions," says MSNBC host Chris Hayes, who hinted that Trump is next on the impeachment chopping block. "Now, who knows where the questions will take us. But I know this: I'm not going to stop asking them."

Meanwhile, some overzealous members of the left plastered fliers around Washington, D.C., demanding all White House staffers resign Wednesday.

The posters read: "If you work for this White House you are complicit in hate-mongering, lies, corrupt taking of Americans' tax money via self-dealing and emoluments, and quite possibly federal crimes and treason. Also, any wars will be on your soul. ... Resign now."

(Photo: Twitter)

Constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley

But constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley, who voted for President Obama, warned "impeachment" enthusiasts not to get ahead of themselves with President Trump. Why?
At this time, there's no evidence Trump actually committed a crime.

"The criminal code demands more than what Comey reportedly describes in his memo," Turley wrote in a May 17 opinion piece posted at the Hill. Turley explained:
Advertisement - story continues below

For the first time, the Comey memo pushes the litany of controversies surrounding Trump into the scope of the United States criminal code.

However, if this is food for obstruction of justice, it is still an awfully thin soup. Some commentators seem to be alleging criminal conduct in office or calling for impeachment before Trump completed the words of his inaugural oath of office. Not surprising, within minutes of the New York Times report, the response was a chorus of breathless "gotcha" announcements. But this memo is neither the Pentagon Papers nor the Watergate tapes. Indeed, it raises as many questions for Comey as it does Trump in terms of the alleged underlying conduct.

A good place to start would be with the federal law, specifically 18 U.S.C. 1503. The criminal code demands more than what Comey reportedly describes in his memo. There are dozens of different variations of obstruction charges ranging from threatening witnesses to influencing jurors. None would fit this case. That leaves the omnibus provision on attempts to interfere with the “due administration of justice.”

However, that still leaves the need to show that the effort was to influence “corruptly” when Trump could say that he did little but express concern for a longtime associate. The term “corruptly” is actually defined differently under the various obstruction provisions, but it often involves a showing that someone acted “with the intent to secure an unlawful benefit for oneself or another." Encouraging leniency or advocating for an associate is improper but not necessarily seeking an unlawful benefit for him.

While Turley said a request from Trump to the FBI director to end such an investigation would be "wildly inappropriate," he cautioned: "[W]e need to move beyond the hyperventilated pronouncements of criminal conduct or impeachable offenses based on this memo. This conversation in the Oval Office is a valid matter of concern and worthy of further investigation. It is not proof of an impeachable offense any more than it is proof of a crime."

Former Chief Assistant U.S. Attorney in New York Andrew C. McCarthy

Andrew C. McCarthy led the prosecution of Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman and others for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and plots to blow up other New York City landmarks. He told WND and Radio America Wednesday the Comey memo and alleged Trump statements about Flynn are a far cry from constituting obstruction of justice.

"I don't think we're close to being there yet because, even though I am sure that then-Director Comey must have found the conversation with President Trump to be awkward and inappropriate, I don't think there's anything corrupt about it," McCarthy said.

McCarthy said it's hard to draw any sweeping conclusions from a few scraps of a conversation.
"The most important thing about obstruction of justice is context. We don't really have context here. We have one statement that's mined out of what must be a larger memo," he said.

He said there needs to be concrete evidence of corruption to pursue obstruction of justice allegations.
"Corruption is the heart of obstruction of justice," McCarthy explained. "The person has to act intentionally, knowing that what he's doing is wrong, and intend to subvert the truth-seeking process."

Talk-show host Mark Levin said the latest attacks on Trump reveal a glaring double standard.

"Remember, the whole point here is to take out Trump," Levin said on his show Tuesday. "The whole point is to destroy the man's character and his reputation. 'He must be an incompetent boob.' 'He shoots from the hip.' 'Maybe he's even working with the Russians, giving them information – it's just so absurd.

Mark Levin

"Did Barack Obama ever have a situation like this?" Levin asked, noting how the mainstream media go wild almost every day with reports of some Trump misstep. "The media frenzy never existed. It never occurred. It just didn't happen."

What do YOU think? Who is most deserving of impeachment? Sound off in today's WND poll!

WND has assembled the following list of 25 egregious scandals and violations committed under President Obama's administration – and few ever sparked widespread calls for the nation's 44th president to be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Obama's Iran nuke deal

On July 14, 2015, the Obama administration negotiated and signed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA, a nuclear deal between Iran, the United States and the “P5+1,” which included France, the United Kingdom, Germany, China, Russia, and the European Union. The Obama administration pushed the deal through and agreed to major terms without consulting with the U.S. Senate. The White House championed the plan as “the historic deal that will prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.”

Obama later conceded that the deal he sought with Iran would not prevent the jihadist theocracy from obtaining nuclear weapons, but said it would delay that by 10 to 15 years.
As part of the deal, Iran made commitments with regard to its nuclear program, including reduction of low-enriched uranium stockpiles to 300 kilograms, limits on future enrichment of uranium to 3.67 percent, storage of centrifuges for 10 years, restrictions on research and development and monitoring and inspections. Iran also agreed to rebuild its Arak nuclear reactor so its core cannot produce weapons-grade plutonium and transform its Fordow facility into a research center. In exchange, Iran was promised sanctions relief and the unfreezing of up to $150 billion in assets. The agreement allowed Iran to continue its uranium enrichment – a major sticking point for opponents who cite Iran’s status as a state sponsor of terrorism and its repeated threats against the U.S. and her ally, Israel.

But the Obama administration has kept secret many unclassified documents related to the deal. Members of the public and even some congressional staffers cannot access the files held in secure areas on Capitol Hill known as Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities, or SCIF. Even some top Democratic Party lawmakers called on President Trump to release the documents in January.

“Unless there’s a damn good reason to keep them out of the public eye, turn them over,” said Jon Tester, D-Mont., the Weekly Standard reported. “I’m more on the side of transparency than not, that is for sure. … But that’s a first blush, not really knowing what’s in them.”

President Obama announces Iran nuclear deal (Photo: Screenshot)

In September 2016, the Institute for Science and International Security reported that the Obama administration allowed Iran to exceed limits imposed by the deal so as to claim Tehran was still in compliance with the terms. The Obama administration dismissed the institute’s report.

“The administration was really nasty after we released these documents,” David Albright, founder and president of the institute, told the Weekly Standard. “It was very tough for us to get the information. … I think that is we hadn’t released, they had every intention to keep it secret. They may have given lip service to openness, but I think their intention was to keep it secret.”

Albright continued: “You have to ask the question of, what else is being hidden? The administration did it to try to minimize the chance that people would know what was in these decisions, and certainly keep these people from talking to people like me in the technical community that can actually interpret what’s in those decisions.”
The Obama administration reportedly allowed Iran to keep low-enriched uranium disallowed under the 2015 deal, including uranium “deemed unrecoverable” for use in making nuclear weapons. In exchange, Iran promised to not try to recover the uranium. However, that language is not in the actual Iran deal. Other revelations indicated Obama made a secret side deal with Iran, allowing it to decide which nuclear sites to inspect and letting Iran do its own inspections at the Parchin site, where experts suspect Iran has been developing nuclear arms. The side deal also reportedly let Iran provide its own photos and videos of suspect locations, while "taking into account military concerns."

Obama knew about Hillary's private email server

As WND reported, five days after the New York Times disclosed the existence of Hillary Clinton’s private email server, Obama told CBS News on March 7, 2015, that he learned about it at “the same time everybody else learned it, through news reports.”

That was not true, because Obama himself had exchanged emails with Clinton on the server. And he even used a fake name, for reasons never explained.

The White House later claimed Obama meant to say he did know of the server, just not the details.

One of the nation's top legal minds, former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy, told WND the FBI cleared Clinton not because she was innocent, but because the president was also guilty.

“Hillary couldn’t be proven guilty without proving the president guilty as well,” he wrote, adding, “Any possibility of prosecuting Hillary Clinton was tanked by President Obama’s conflict of interest.”

A March 4, 2015, bombshell email released by WikiLeaks confirmed that assessment. The email was sent by Clinton's eventual campaign manager, John Podesta, to her attorney Cheryl Mills, asking if they should decline to turn over emails between Clinton and Obama sent over her private server.

Podesta suggested invoking “executive privilege” to withhold the emails just one day after the House Benghazi Committee had told Clinton to provide all her emails.

Podesta’s email read: “Think we should hold emails to and from potus [president of the United States]? That’s the heart of his exec privilege. We could get them to ask for that. They may not care, but I(t) seems like they will.”

Mills did not answer Podesta’s email, but the emails between Obama and Clinton were never turned over to the Benghazi committee. Eighteen such emails were turned over the State Department, which refused to release them.

McCarthy told WND, “This confirms what I have said all along: President Obama was engaged in the same reckless conduct as then-Secretary Clinton: engaging in exchanges of highly sensitive information – information that is presumptively classified under the president’s own executive order – over a non-secure, non-government system.”

He added, "That is why Huma Abedin was so stunned when she learned about it, asking as anyone with a security clearance would ask: ‘How is that not classified?'"

In an interview with WND and Radio America on May 17, McCarthy said Obama arguably took more egregious actions with respect to Clinton than Trump did with the Flynn investigation.

"In a few ways, the Obama situation with Hillary Clinton is worse than what we've heard about here [with the Flynn investigation]," McCarthy said. "What Obama did was make a very public statement, which is obviously a statement to his subordinates as well as everyone else, that he didn't want Mrs. Clinton prosecuted and didn't think she should be prosecuted.

"He articulated a legal theory for why she shouldn't be prosecuted, this claim that she wasn't trying to harm the United States and that her classified emails, while they exhibited carelessness on her part, were really a small part of a much larger overall picture and had been exaggerated out of proportion," McCarthy said.

He said that same logic was used again a few months later.

"Lo and behold three months later, when Director Comey announced his view that Mrs. Clinton shouldn't be prosecuted, he adopted precisely the legal reasoning Obama had announced three months before."

Obama IRS targets conservatives

In 2010, the Internal Revenue Service began subjecting tea-party and conservative groups to intrusive scrutiny when they applied for nonprofit status. The IRS later issued an apology and blamed mistakes on low-level employees. But it fought for more than five years demands for full disclosure and documents sought by tea-party groups.

In March of 2016, a federal appeals court accused the IRS of stonewalling the release of lists of tax-exempt organizations targeted for political scrutiny and scolded the tax agency for compounding an offense by continuing to fight disclosure.

The judges ordered the IRS to quickly turn over the full list of groups it targeted so that a class-action lawsuit, filed by the NorCal Tea Party Patriots, could proceed. The judges also accused the Justice Department lawyers, who represented the IRS in the case, of acting in bad faith and compounding its violation of the law

"Among the most serious allegations a federal court can address are that an executive agency has targeted citizens for mistreatment based on their political views,” wrote Judge Raymond M. Kethledge in a unanimous decision. “No citizen – Republican or Democrat, socialist or libertarian – should be targeted or even have to fear being targeted on those grounds.

Yet those are the grounds on which the plaintiffs allege they were mistreated by the IRS here. The allegations are substantial: most are drawn from findings made by the Treasury Department’s own inspector general for tax administration. Those findings include that the IRS used political criteria to round up applications for tax-exempt status filed by so-called tea-party groups; that the IRS often took four times as long to process tea-party applications as other applications; and that the IRS served tea-party applicants with crushing demands for what the Inspector General called 'unnecessary information.'"

Kethledge wrote in his opinion that the IRS’ conduct since the original offense has “only compounded the conduct” that gave rise to complaint in the first place.

“The lawsuit has progressed as slowly as the underlying applications themselves: at every turn the IRS has resisted the plaintiffs’ requests for information regarding the IRS’s treatment of the plaintiff class, eventually to the open frustration of the district court,” wrote Kethledge. “At issue here are IRS ‘Be On the Lookout’ lists of organizations allegedly targeted for unfavorable treatment because of their political beliefs. Those organizations in turn make up the plaintiff class. The district court ordered production of those lists, and did so again over an IRS motion to reconsider. Yet, almost a year later, the IRS still has not complied with the court’s orders. Instead the IRS now seeks from this court a writ of mandamus, an extraordinary remedy reserved to correct only the clearest abuses of power by a district court. We deny the petition.”

“In 2010, the IRS began to pay unusual attention to 501(c) applications from groups with certain political affiliations,” Kethledge wrote. “As found by the inspector general, the IRS ‘developed and used inappropriate criteria to identify applications from organizations with ‘Tea Party’ in their names. … As to the policy positions, the IRS gave heightened scrutiny to organizations concerned with ‘government spending, government debt or taxes,’ lobbying to ‘make America a better place to live or ‘criticiz[ing] how the country is being run.'”

WND reported in November 2016 that the IRS is accused of continuing to shoot down advocates of conservative causes, especially if they have the words "tea party" in their names, even to this day. In April 2017, the government watchdog Judicial Watch released 695 pages of documents with admissions from IRS officials that the agency used "inappropriate political labels" to screen the applications. The records were just the first batch of about 7,000 documents that Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said were "hidden from JW (Judicial Watch), Congress and the American people."

After detailing some of the most explosive revelations in the documents, Fitton wrote: "No wonder the Obama IRS hid these records. These new smoking-gun documents contain admissions by the Obama IRS that it inappropriately targeted conservative groups. But the records also show that the abuse continued – as the Obama IRS tried to force conservative applicants to give up their First Amendment rights in order to finally get their applications granted."

Obama's DOJ spies on AP reporters

Just months before the 2012 presidential election, the Obama administration reportedly spied on Associated Press reporters.

WND reported when the AP said the Justice Department secretly seized two months of reporters’ and editors’ telephone records without explanation in April and May 2012. In the AP’s report on the scandal, President and CEO Gary Pruitt called the Justice Department’s move “a massive and unprecedented intrusion” into how news organizations gather the news.

Pruitt wrote a letter to former Attorney General Eric Holder demanding the records and all copies be returned. According to the AP: “News organizations normally are notified ahead of time that the government wants phone records and enter into negotiations over the requested information. In this case, however, the government, in its letter to the AP, cited an exemption to those rules that holds that prior notification can be waived if such notice, in the exemption’s wording, might ‘pose a substantial threat to the integrity of the investigation.'”

More than 100 journalists who reported on government and other matters worked in offices the administration targeted. While Justice Department rules call for subpoenas of news records to be approved by Holder, it’s unclear whether he ordered the action.

“There can be no possible justification for such an overbroad collection of the telephone communications of The Associated Press and its reporters,” Pruitt told Holder at the time. “These records potentially reveal communications with confidential sources across all of the newsgathering activities undertaken by the AP during a two-month period, provide a road map to AP’s newsgathering operations and disclose information about AP’s activities and operations that the government has no conceivable right to know.”

According to reports, the Obama administration didn't provide a reason for the seizure or reveal whether a judge or a grand jury signed off on the subpoenas.

“Officials have previously said in public testimony that the U.S. attorney in Washington is conducting a criminal investigation into who may have provided information contained in a May 7, 2012, AP story about a foiled terror plot,” the AP reported. “The story disclosed details of a CIA operation in Yemen that stopped an al-Qaida plot in the spring of 2012 to detonate a bomb on an airplane bound for the United States.

“In testimony in February [2013], CIA Director John Brennan noted that the FBI had questioned him about whether he was AP’s source, which he denied. He called the release of the information to the media about the terror plot an ‘unauthorized and dangerous disclosure of classified information.'”

The AP said the 2012 terror plot was “significant both because of its seriousness and also because the White House previously had told the public it had ‘no credible information that terrorist organizations, including al-Qaida, are plotting attacks in the U.S. to coincide with the (May 2) anniversary of bin Laden’s death.'”

According to the news organization, the story was written by reporters Matt Apuzzo and Adam Goldman with contributions from reporters Kimberly Dozier, Eileen Sullivan and Alan Fram. Those reporters, along with editor Ted Bridis, had their phone records seized.

Obamacare & Obama's false promises

Politifact rated President Obama's promise, "If you like your health plan, you can keep it," as its "Lie of the Year" in 2013. Obama repeated the claim dozens of times, as well as promising, "If you like your doctor, you can keep him," which also turned out to be untrue.

Obamacare was supposed to cut costs and insure more people. Instead, premiums skyrocketed and more than five million people lost their heath insurance coverage.

While the uninsured were forced to sign up for Obamacare or face a tax penalty, House Speaker John Boehner has said he believes there are actually fewer people insured than before Obamacare took effect, despite the fact the Congressional Budget Office estimates the law will cost taxpayers $1.207 trillion by 2025.

The roll-out of the Obamacare website was a legendary disaster. Only a handful of people were even able to access the website after its debut. And now even supporters of Obamacare admit the individual health insurance market is unsustainable and failing.

Obama repeatedly vowed to reduce Americans' health insurance premiums by up to $2,500 a year:

However, according to a 2016 survey, most Americans haven't seen that financial benefit. Most respondents said their benefits, premiums, co-pays and deductibles "stayed about the same." A full 45 percent saw increased premiums; 35 percent reported increased co-pays and deductibles; and just 16 percent said their benefits increased.

Advertisement

On May 9, Bloomberg reported states such as Connecticut, Maryland and Virginia are seeing exploding premiums – at rates of 24 percent, 45 percent and 31 percent, respectively.

Illegal-alien amnesty by executive order

In June 2012, Obama issued an executive order declaring that illegal immigrants who were brought to the U.S. before they turned 16 and who are younger than 30 would not be deported. They are eligible for a two-year work permit that can be renewed indefinitely under the program called Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals.

Arguing that children of illegal aliens "study in our schools, play in our neighborhoods, befriend our kids, pledge allegiance to our flag," Obama said, "it makes no sense to expel talented young people who are, for all intents and purposes, Americans."

Obama's executive order mimics some of the provisions in the DREAM Act, which failed to pass in Congress.

"I definitely think it's a very troublesome precedent because the president basically said, 'Listen, even though the statute doesn't just carve out an automatic exemption from deportation for this category of individuals, I'm just going to decide unilaterally that I will not deport them.' Really?" legal scholar Bruce Fein told WND in 2013. "Could you decide you don't want to enforce the homicide statute for a certain category of people as well?

"That seems to me to fall into a serious category of failure to 'take care that the laws be faithfully executed.' It's one thing, given limited resources and the number of illegals, to just say, 'We've got limited resources, and as a matter of practical discussion, we've got to look at 1, 2, 3, 4.' But you still have an individualized determination. That happens in the U.S. Attorney's office all the time when crimes are committed. But just as a wholesale statement: 'We just don't want to enforce the law'?"

"Could the president stand up and say, 'You know what? I just don't want to enforce the Voting Rights Act anymore. It's just too much of a hassle'?"

Benghazi-gate

On Sept. 11, 2012, a U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other Americans were brutally murdered at a U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi.

Just three days after the attack, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney accused an anti-Muslim video on YouTube of inciting the attack. On Sept. 16, U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice made five television appearances in which she claimed the attacks were spontaneous reactions to the obscure film. Obama mentioned the YouTube video six more times at the U.N. on Sept. 25.

However, there was never any kind of protest at the Benghazi compound that night.

During congressional hearings in January in which Secretary of State Hillary Clinton finally was questioned about the calamity on her watch, Clinton claimed she didn't see a classified State Department cable sent Aug. 16 that said the Benghazi mission could not defend against a "coordinated attack."

However, the State Department's Charlene Lamb reportedly observed the attack in near real time.

Lt. Col. Tony Schaefer told Fox News that Obama watched the attack from the situation room: "I hate to say this, according to my sources, yes, (the president) was one of those in the White House situation room in real-time watching this. And the question becomes, 'What did the president do or not do in the moments he saw this unveiling?' He – only he – could issue a directive to Secretary of Defense Panetta to do something."

However, in their testimonies before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey said they only spoke with Obama once during the attack in a phone call. Obama spent the following day fundraising in Las Vegas.

In response to questions from Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., Panetta said Obama didn't ask about military options or deploying assets.

"He just left that up to us," Panetta said.

The New York Post confirmed that a U.S. military drone had been relaying real-time data to Washington, D.C.

After the administration had blamed the YouTube video for sparking the assault, columnist and pundit Pat Buchanan wrote: "[I]if there was no protest, who sent Carney out to blame the attack on the protest? And if there was no protest, who programmed Rice and put her on five separate Sunday talk shows to attribute the massacre to a protest that never happened?

"If real-time intelligence and U.S. agents at the scene knew it was premeditated, preplanned terrorism by Sept. 12, who told Rice to deny specifically on Sept. 16 that the attack was premeditated or preplanned?"

As WND reported, Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., charged that the Obama administration appeared to be covering up a gun-running scheme that fell apart when jihadists attacked the U.S. mission in Benghazi.

Andrew McCarthy is a former assistant U.S. attorney who served as the lead prosecutor of the terrorists behind the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.

In 2012, he wrote: "I do think Benghazi could be an impeachable scandal, and I don't think this is an extreme position.

"We do not yet have the answers about what happened on September 11 – most significantly, when did the commander-in-chief learn of the terrorist attack on the compound and what action did he take to defend Americans who were besieged for over seven hours under circumstances where there were U.S. military assets an hour away? We also do not know how the Mohammed movie cover-up was orchestrated, although the evidence and common sense point to the White House. With four Americans killed and the nation appallingly misled in the stretch-run of a presidential campaign, this is a far more consequential matter than those that led to the Watergate and Lewinsky investigations. A commander-in-chief's dereliction of duty and his administration’s intentional lying to the American people – to say nothing of its overbearing prosecution of the filmmaker in a transparent effort to shift responsibility to him – would be impeachable offenses if they are proved."

Operation Fast & Furious

In June 2012, the Obama administration invoked executive privilege to stop disclosure of documentation to Congress following Operation Fast and Furious, a gun-walking scheme that resulted in the deaths of as many as 100 people, including U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.

During the botched operation, the Justice Department's subdivision of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms lost approximately 2,000 weapons, allowing many of them to flow freely across the U.S.-Mexico border and into the hands of members of Mexican drug cartels.

The U.S. House of Representatives voted to hold then-Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress, but U.S. Attorney Ronald Machen chose to ignore the criminal resolution and not bring charges against Holder.

The Obama administration filed a motion to block a lawsuit by Judicial Watch demanding enforcement of a June 22, 2012, Freedom of Information Act request seeking all documents relating to Operation Fast and Furious, and "specifically all records subject to the claim of executive privilege invoked by President Obama on or about June 20, 2012." In April 2016, Obama backed off his claims of executive privilege.

5 Taliban leaders for Bergdahl

In May 2014, the Obama administration swapped five Taliban commanders previously detained in Guantanamo Bay for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, who has since been charged with desertion and misbehavior before the enemy.

The deal triggered a deep level of disgust by Americans for Obama. A WND/Wenzel Poll at the time showed 54 percent of Americans said Obama’s swap for Bergdahl amounted to providing aid to terrorists.

Bowe Bergdahl

Jury selection in Bergdahl's case begins in October, and he could face a life sentence.

As WND reported in September 2015, retired Col. David Hunt said Bergdahl actually joined the Taliban, and recordings prove it.

Further, he said, the government failed to make use of that evidence against Bergdahl.

"June 30, 2009, Bergdahl deserts his post in southeast Afghanistan,” Hunt said in an appearance on Bill O'Reilly's Fox News show. “July 1st and 2nd, in a standard briefing to a commander of his unit, Fourth Brigade of the 25th Infantry Division, we have tapes of Taliban talking on Bergdahl’s phone saying that Bergdahl wanted to join them. And we have the Taliban on their own phones talking about Bergdahl trying to join them.”

Hunt said the information was known July 2.

Asked by O’Reilly how the tapes were obtained, Hunt didn’t elaborate, except to say there are government programs that provide such information.

Hunt explained, “There are programs, we’ve been doing it since World War II, in which we listen to the enemy, and people who are speaking Pashtun and … whatever language the Taliban in that section are using, were listening because they were told to and they were also listening to Bergdahl’s phone.

“What they heard was the Taliban on Bergdahl’s phone because he had joined them by then. And then the Taliban on separate phones talking about him. So it’s a military program.”

Extortion 17

Extortion 17 was the call sign for a helicopter shot down by the Taliban in eastern Afghanistan on Aug. 6, 2011.

Thirty U.S. Special Forces soldiers were among those killed, including members of SEAL Team 6, the unit that killed Osama bin Laden.

Family members of the deceased believe the Obama administration put a target on the back of SEAL Team 6, and the deaths were payback for the killing of bin Laden.

They blamed the Obama administration for recklessly identifying who killed the famous terrorist leader.

“American warrior blood is pooling in the Oval Office,” said Billy Vaughn, whose son Aaron was killed in the crash.

In the greatest single loss of life since the war in Afghanistan began in 2001, 30 U.S. military servicemen were killed when their CH-47 Chinook helicopter was shot down in Afghanistan.

'Recess ' appointments – when Senate was in session

The Constitution allows the president to nominate judges and executive branch officials, but the Senate must confirm his nominees. Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution authorizes the president to "fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate."

But while the Senate was in session in January 2012, Obama made recess appointments of Richard Cordray to head the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and three members of the National Labor Relations Board.

Obama argued that because the Senate had been convening every three days, the pro forma sessions didn't allow any business to take place, so the Senate should be considered in recess.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that Obama's three NLRB recess appointments violated the Constitution because they weren't made when the Senate was in recess. Now the Supreme Court has received a petition asking the justices to consider the decision.

The NLRB said it "respectfully disagrees" with the D.C. Circuit's ruling and would proceed with business as usual because it trusted "the president's position in the matter will ultimately be upheld."

Appointment of 'czars' without Senate approval

Obama also appointed more than 30 unelected "czars" to positions in federal agencies while the Constitution requires that such appointments be vetted by Congress. Article II, Section 2, allows the president to appoint ambassadors, judges and other officers "with the Advice and Consent of the Senate."

"Congress clearly has the authority to say, 'No money shall go to pay the salaries of X, Y, Z unless they're subject to Senate confirmation,'" legal scholar Bruce Fein told WND in 2013. "That's really one where Congress, by its negligence, is not insisting on accountability."

Constitutional expert Louis Fisher told WND: "That is a big deal. A lot of people say, 'Well, that's been going on a long time.' In our form of government, citizens vote for representatives, and representatives pass laws. You have people heading departments, and they're confirmed. There's an understanding that we will call you up whenever we need to. So there's accountability through that process.

"Congress passed legislation saying there'd be no funds for three czars, and they were named in the bill. Obama signed it into the law, but in the signing statement, he said that's unconstitutional because he has the 'prerogative' to get the advice he needs to implement statutes. Well, c'mon Obama. You don't have a prerogative to bring into the White House anybody you want at any salary. It's all done by law. It goes back to 1978 where Congress passed legislation saying you have this number of people and these are their salaries and Congress can increase or decrease that at any time.

"I think Obama had no idea what he was doing when he was using the word 'prerogative.' He can get all the advice he wants in the private sector, but Congress decides how many aides the president will have and what salaries they get."

Suing Arizona for enforcing federal law

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer confronts Obama

In April 2010, Arizona adopted an immigration law designed to discourage illegal aliens from entering the state. The law, known as S.B. 1070, authorized state police officers to verify a person's immigration status with federal authorities and detain individuals suspected of being in the country illegally.

When the state senate passed the bill, President Obama's administration immediately sued and enjoined the state from enforcing portions of the state's legislation.

The Constitution does not prohibit states from supporting enforcement of federal laws. The 10^th Amendment states, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Just one week after it sued Arizona, Obama's Justice Department said it would not pursue "sanctuary cities" that openly violate federal law by protecting illegal aliens.

"There is a big difference between a state or locality saying they are not going to use their resources to enforce a federal law, as so-called sanctuary cities have done, and a state passing its own immigration policy that actively interferes with federal law," Tracy Schmaler, spokeswoman for Attorney General Eric Holder, told the Washington Times. "That's what Arizona did in this case."

The Supreme Court weighed in on the matter in June 2012, rejecting key portions of the Arizona law but upholding the provision allowing police officers to check immigration status.

Refusal to defend Defense of Marriage Act

President Obama announced in 2011 that his administration believed the Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, to be unconstitutional and instructed the Justice Department to no longer defend it in court.

DOMA, which was passed in 1996 under President Bill Clinton, says states will not be forced to recognize homosexual marriages performed in other states, and the federal government doesn't recognize such unions. The Supreme Court is expected to determine whether Section 3 of DOMA violates the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal protection this spring.

The law had been on Obama's radar for several years; he promised to repeal DOMA during his 2008 campaign for president.

In February 2011, Attorney General Eric Holder released the following statement:

"After careful consideration, including a review of my recommendation, the president has concluded that given a number of factors, including a documented history of discrimination, classifications based on sexual orientation should be subject to a more heightened standard of scrutiny. The president has also concluded that Section 3 of DOMA, as applied to legally married same-sex couples, fails to meet that standard and is therefore unconstitutional. Given that conclusion, the president has instructed the Department not to defend the statute in such cases. I fully concur with the president's determination."

After the Obama administration refused to defend the law, House leaders instructed the House general counsel to take up the case.

Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz. even raised the possibility of impeaching Obama over his refusal to defend DOMA. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said Congress should "confront" Obama, "threatening to zero out" the budget at the Attorney General's office until the president decided to defend DOMA.

Illegally conducting war against Libya

Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war.

The U.S. launched combat operations in Libya on March 19, 2011. For several weeks before the U.S. combat operation in Libya, CIA operatives had been deployed to the area to gather intelligence for military airstrikes and support Libyan rebels in the overthrow of Moammar Gadhafi. The New York Times reported in March 2011 that Obama had "signed a secret finding authorizing the C.I.A. to provide arms and other support to Libyan rebels."

The U.S. military had been reportedly monitoring Libyan troops with U-2 spy planes, a high-altitude Global Hawk drone and a JSTARS aircraft to track troop movements.

Fox News' Mike Huckabee raised the issue of impeachment over Obama's order to bomb Libya, stating: "I think frankly, if this issue really gets traction that it deserves, and let it say it deserves, go back. Richard Nixon was forced out of office because he lied. And because he covered some stuff up. I will be blunt and tell you this. Nobody died in Watergate. We have people who are dead because of this. There are questions to be answered and Americans ought to demand to get answers."

As WND reported in March 2012, Rep. Walter Jones, R-N.C., introduced House Concurrent Resolution 107, which stated: "[I]t is the sense of Congress that, except in response to an actual or imminent attack against the territory of the United States, the use of offensive military force by a President without prior and clear authorization of an Act of Congress violates Congress's exclusive power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the Constitution and therefore constitutes an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor under article II, section 4 of the Constitution."

Jones' bill had 12 co-sponsors, but it never made it past the House Committee on the Judiciary.

"In the case of Libya, the president had no congressional authority whatsoever," legal scholar Bruce Fein told WND in 2013. "The whole thing is insane. And the executive doesn't care because all the time that conflict ensues, that just means more executive power. That's exactly what the Founding Fathers feared.

"President Obama just totally flouted the whole thing and basically said through his various memos, 'I don't need congressional authority to go to war.' That was clearly an impeachable offense. It's clearly gross usurpation of the war power. Both the Republicans and Democrats have acquiesced in that."

Constitutional expert Louis Fisher told WND he found Obama's actions in Libya "constitutionally offensive."

"I think it's completely unconstitutional," he said. "It's extremely offensive for a president to claim he can use military force against another country, like Libya, that didn't threaten us. I find that appalling.

"Of course, the Office of Legal Counsel sent out a memo. It claimed there's no war because there were no legal casualties. If that's your legal reasoning, you could absolutely pulverize another nation. If anyone did anything to us like what we did to Libya, we'd obviously call it war. That was a complete and total outrage."

Also in 2013, Herbert Titus, counsel to the law firm William J. Olson and former instructor of constitutional law, said the scandal is one of Obama's worst: "I think Libya is the strongest argument for impeachment. That's the one that stands out. It's unprecedented. It doesn't even fit within any of the precedents that have been set since Korea.
Advertisement - story continues below

"If you're going to talk impeachment, you have to find something that Obama has done that is so distinctly different than what other presidents have done before him that people can resonate with it. The difficult, of course, is that people have forgotten about Libya."

NSA: Spying on Americans

Edward Snowden

In June 2013, former NSA contractor Edward Snowden revealed the U.S. government was collecting an enormous amount of data on millions of Americans with the cooperation of telecommunication companies and European governments.

The director of national intelligence, James Clapper, had testified to Congress just the opposite, the year before. When Snowden's revelations became public, Clapper said he had misspoken, not lied.

Obama claimed laws and safeguards prevent the NSA from collecting information without a warrant, but WND has reported many sources, including a Democrat congressman, said that is not true.

While the administration claimed the data collected is limited to phone calls and email records, so-called metadata, and not the content of those transmissions, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said he was "startled" to learn in a secret congressional briefing how NSA analysts can decide for themselves whether to access the content of a domestic phone call.

The Washington Post, the Guardian and CNET all reported the NSA collected content of phone calls and emails without obtaining warrants.

Muslim Brotherhood ties

Andrew McCarthy reported extensively on the Muslim Brotherhood ties to Huma Abedin, Hillary Clinton's top adviser and trusted confidant when she was at the State Department.

Huma Abedin and HIllary Clinton

Aside from extensive family ties to the Brotherhood, including strong support by her parents, "Ms. Abedin was a member of the executive board of the Muslim Students Association (MSA) at George Washington University, heading its 'Social Committee.' The MSA, which has a vast network of chapters at universities across North America, is the foundation of the Muslim Brotherhood’s infrastructure in the United States."

"When a handful of House conservatives tried to draw the attention of the State Department’s inspector general to some of these matters – wondering how on earth someone with Ms. Abdein’s background could have qualified for a top-secret security clearance – they were castigated by the Obama White House and the Beltway Republican establishment."

In February 2015, Obama hosted Muslim leaders in the White House including a number with close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.
As a Customs and Border Protection officer, Philip Haney knew the Obama administration was growing close to leaders of several Muslim Brotherhood front groups in the U.S., WND reported.

In January 2010, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano met with several American Muslim leaders, including leaders of two Muslim Brotherhood front groups and another known Muslim Brotherhood affiliate. The meeting was even hosted by the DHS Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, which allowed attendees to help develop the nation’s counter-terrorism policy.

“My simple question to the Obama administration is, why would you form an overt political alliance with a group that has stated plainly that they intend to overthrow our form of government and alter or abolish it?” Haney asked. “Why would you do that?”

Miriam Carey

Miriam Carey

WND has reported in depth the stonewall by the Department of Justice, which refuses to release the report containing reasons it chose not prosecute federal officers in the shooting death of an unarmed suburban mother.

Miriam Carey, 34, did little more than apparently make a mistaken turn into a White House security post and immediately try to leave, but she was chased by Secret Service and Capitol Police officers, and shot dead in broad daylight, two blocks from the Capitol, on Oct. 3, 2013.

Birth certificatePresident Obama finally released a birth certificate image after years of questions, but no one was allowed to test its authenticity, other than NBC's Savannah Guthrie, who claimed she "felt the raised seal" on the actual document.

But questions persisted and Lord Christopher Monckton, a former policy adviser to British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, called it "plainly a forgery."

“It appears in layers on the screen in such a way you can remove quite separately each of the individual dates,” Monckton said. “You use Adobe Illustrator and each of the individual dates is in its own separate layer. This thing has been fabricated."

At a news conference in December 2016, Maricopa County, Arizona, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, the only law enforcement officer to formally investigate the allegations of fraud, presented evidence that he said proves the image of the birth document posted by the White House was fraudulent.

Executive orders

Constitutional expert and self-described liberal professor Jonathan Turley of George Washington University said Obama's penchant for using executive orders to circumvent the will of Congress caused a constitutional crisis.

"This is, I think, the most important … moment … in the last I don’t even know how many years. This is the American crisis. ... This is beyond the constitutional crisis. This is a constitutional tipping point," said Turley.

"And the most serious violations, in my view, are various cases when he went to Congress, as in the immigration field, as in the healthcare field, as for very specific things, and was rejected, and then decided just to order those on his own."

Obama issued orders on a wide range of major issues, from labor and climate to immigration and restrooms. Sometimes they were imposed, sometimes courts blocked him, sometimes Congress blocked him. He also addressed guns, the Iran nuclear deal, even federal pay and overtime compensation.

These actions all from a president who, according to Reason.com, moved into the White House on the statement of rolling back the executive power that President George W. Bush had exercised.

“The president is not above the law,” he had insisted way back then.

While many who defended Obama's executive actions claimed the president has issued fewer orders than his predecessors, George Mason University's Mercatus Center released a 2014 study that showed Obama used far more restrictive executive orders than the previous six presidents – all in just his first term.

Solyndra and the lost $535 million

In 2009, solar panel manufacturer Solyndra received a $535 million loan guaranteed by the Department of Energy.

In 2010, Obama claimed Solyndra was “leading the way toward a brighter and more prosperous future.”

Solyndra shut down in August 2011, leaving 1,100 people out of work and taxpayers on the hook for the $535 million.

ABC News reported, "The deal later came under scrutiny from independent government watch dogs and members of Congress, which said the administration had bypassed key taxpayer protections in a rush to approve the funds – claims the administration has denied."

Egypt

After the Obama administration backed the Arab Spring uprising that deposed Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, the radical jihadist organization the Muslim Brotherhood promised it would not participate in presidential elections.

When the Muslim Brotherhood candidate Mohamed Morsi won the Egyptian presidency, he was fully supported by the Obama administration.

When Morsi was deposed by Egyptian defense minister Abdel Fattah el-Sisi for human-rights violations, including the killing of protesters, the Obama administration demanded a return to "civilian" government.

President Obama speaks at the COP 21 climate summit in Paris on Nov. 30, 2015 (Photo: Twitter, White House)

Cap & Trade: When in doubt, bypass Congress

In April 2010, the U.S. Senate rejected the "cap-and-trade" bill, which created a carbon-tax system and amplified federal power over the energy industry.

Nonetheless, Obama's EPA administrator, Lisa Jackson, declared carbon dioxide a pollutant. Before Congress had voted on the matter, on Dec. 7, 2009, Jackson signed an "endangerment finding" labeling CO2 and five other gases – methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs) and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6 ) – threats to human health.

That step provided the EPA with the authority to regulate the gases in the absence of congressional approval, and the federal agency rolled out new rules.

Refusal to prosecute New Black Panthers

After Obama took office, the Department of Justice dismissed voter intimidation charges against two leaders of the New Black Panther Party, or NBPP, related to the 2008 presidential election.

The 14^th Amendment to the Constitution guarantees "due process" and "equal protection of the laws" while the 15^th Amendment guarantees that "the right of citizens to vote shall not be denied or abridged … on account of race …"

As WND reported in 2008, two NBPP members were filmed standing in front of the entrance to a Philadelphia polling station in black uniforms, with one member wielding a billy club.
According to complaints, both men standing in front of the polling station pointed at voters and shouted racial slurs, using such phrases as "white devil" and, "You're about to be ruled by the black man, Cracker!"

At the time, Attorney General Eric Holder's office was accused by Justice Department insiders of racial favoritism in dropping the charges against the NBPP.

In May 2010, J. Christian Adams resigned as a Justice voting department trial attorney, citing preferences related to trying civil rights cases only when minorities were the victims.
"I was told by voting section management that cases are not going to be brought against black defendants on [behalf] of white victims," Adams said in testimony before the Civil Rights commission.

Adams was backed up by Christopher Coates, the former head of the voting section for the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division. Coates had led the original investigation of the New Black Panther Party.

Coates stated in testimony, "I had people who told me point-blank that [they] didn’t come to the voting rights section to sue African-American people."

Obama's U.S. citizen 'hit list'

In 2010, Obama ordered the assassination of a radical American-born Muslim cleric who became an avowed member of al-Qaida's affiliate in Yemen. Anwar al-Awlaki was killed in a drone strike in September 2011, along with naturalized U.S. citizen and al-Qaida propagandist Samir Khan. Awlaki's 16-year-old American-born son, Abdulrahman, was killed in a similar strike two weeks earlier.

While there is little argument that Awlaki was involved in terrorist activity, the Obama administration failed to provide due process to the U.S. citizens targeted for the use of deadly force. Awlaki had reportedly communicated by email with Maj. Nadal Hasan, the U.S. Army psychiatrist who murdered 13 soldiers at Fort Hood, Texas. He had also been tied to the so-called "underwear bomber" who attempted to blow up a Detroit-bound plane with plastic explosives sewn into his undergarments on Dec. 25, 2009. The FBI suspected Awlaki had purchased airplane tickets for three of the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers before the terrorist attacks.

Anwar al-Awlaki

However, Awlaki was born in New Mexico, and his son was born in Denver, Colorado. There has been no reported evidence that Awlaki ever renounced his U.S. citizenship. In fact, Rep. Charles Dent, R-Penn., introduced a 2010 resolution in the U.S. House to strip Awlaki of his citizenship, but the legislation never made it out of the Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship, Refugees, Border Security, and International Law.
Awlaki spent years in the U.S. as an imam and a Muslim chaplain at George Washington University before moving to Yemen. He had been in U.S. custody twice and released before he was killed by the drone strike. Awlaki was detained in 2002 at the John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York City for passport fraud. A Judicial Watch investigation revealed that he had been released by the FBI. He was also held for at least eight months in 2006 and 2007 and subsequently released.

In 2002, Awlaki reportedly led Muslim prayers on Capitol Hill.

Anwar al-Alwlaki's son, 16

He also reportedly dined at the Pentagon as part of the U.S. military's outreach to the Muslim community just months after the Sept. 11 terror attacks.

In 2010, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Constitutional Rights sued the U.S. government on behalf of Awlaki's father, challenging the federal government's authority to conduct "targeted killings" of U.S. citizens who are not in an armed conflict zone. A federal district court dismissed the case in 2011.

In January of 2013, U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon in Manhattan ruled that the Obama administration was not required to provide legal justification for its targeting killings to the public.

So how did the Obama administration determine who's a terrorist for the purpose of compiling its hit list?

Samir Kahn

A confidential Justice Department "white paper," which is not an official legal memo, was released in 2013 to NBC News. It stated that the U.S. government can order targeted killing of American citizens if they are believed to be "senior operational leaders" of al-Qaida or "an associated force."

In response to the memo, a bipartisan letter from 11 top-ranking senators to President Obama stated, "It's vitally important for Congress and the American public to have a full understanding of how the executive interprets the limits and boundaries of this particular authority." The senators asked Obama for "any and all legal opinions" that clarify the basis of his perceived power to "deliberately kill American citizens."

Judge Andrew Napolitano warned, "This 16-page white paper was written so vaguely that the logic from it could actually be extrapolated to permit the president to kill Americans here in the United States."

Napolitano noted that Obama also violated another federal statute: "When the president ramps up the war on terror or decides to move into another area or use the CIA to engage people, whether to arrest them or to kill them, he's required to tell the Senate and House intelligence committees ahead of time and get their consent. He apparently didn't do that, and so [Congress is] burned by this."

Barack Obama's 10 most impeachable offenses

Jack Cashill puts the 'lower the bar' probe against Trump in perspective

By Jack Cashill
Published November 13, 2019 at 6:48pm

The phrase "lower the bar" does not quite do justice to the trivialization of the impeachment process that we are now witnessing.

Even if we kept the proverbial bar at Bill Clinton levels, here are 10 offenses that merit the historical impeachment of America's famously "scandal free" president. Scarier still, I could easily name 10 more.

10. Campus sex Gestapo
Obama circumvented congressional oversight and public comment by sending a "letter" to colleges threatening their federal funding if they did not set up something of a superagency overseeing student-on-student sexual altercations. Even the New York Times called the result a "campus witch hunt."
Said Christina Hoff Sommers: "These are not enlightened new procedures for protecting students from crime. They are a declaration of martial law against men, justified by an imaginary emergency, and a betrayal of the Title IX equity law."

9. The imprisonment of Nakoula Bassely Nakoula
Much has been written about the various blunders that led to the attack on the American consulate in Benghazi on Sept. 11, 2012. Not enough has been written about the imprisonment of the video maker whose video allegedly triggered the attack.

Author Ken Timmerman describes the White House response to Nakoula's video as "disgraceful, un-American, illegal, and a clear violation of Nakoula’s constitutional rights." He does not overstate the case.

8. The Pigford Settlement
Pigford v. Glickman was a multi-tiered lawsuit that Obama championed. It would end up costing taxpayers about $4 billion, most of it pure scam. The New York Times called the case "a runaway train, driven by racial politics, pressure from influential members of Congress and law firms that stand to gain more than $130 million in fees."

The money was originally earmarked as compensation for black farmers allegedly denied USDA loans, but before the Pigford gravy train had left the station, thousands of random blacks and other minorities, many of whom who had not seen a farm since CBS cancelled "Green Acres," hopped on board.

7. The DOJ provocation in Ferguson and Sanford
Attorney General Eric Holder sent the Justice Department's Community Relations Service (CRS) to Sanford, Florida, to help the locals orchestrate protests, the desired "solution" being the arrest and prosecution of an innocent man, George Zimmerman.

Having helped Obama carry Florida in 2012, the CRS headed to Ferguson, Missouri, in August 2014 to get the base excited about the midterms. The resulting "Ferguson effect" caused an explosion in homicide throughout black America.

6. Fast and Furious
Congress cited AG Eric Holder for contempt, the first attorney general ever to suffer that fate. Obama invoked executive privilege for the first and only time in his presidency. The ATF head resigned as did a U.S. attorney, and any number of lesser figures were reassigned.

These minor setbacks did not achieve anything like justice for the hundreds who were killed as a result of what one dissenting official called a "perfect storm of idiocy." Obama supporters, including the media, still don’t consider Fast and Furious a scandal.

5. The IRS assault on the tea party movement
In the run-up to the 2012 election, The IRS stalled or rejected the applications of hundreds, if not thousands, of tea party groups. Texas organizer Catherine Engelbrecht alone endured 23 distinct audits or inquiries before suing the IRS.

Political appointee Lois Lerner apologized to the tea parties, pled the Fifth Amendment lest she incriminate herself, and was declared in contempt of Congress. Today, she receives in excess of $100,000 as government pension. Obama would not have been re-elected without her efforts.

4. The Affordable Care Act
Where to begin? The Obama White House deceived the American public at every turn to create a monstrously confusing program, rife with fraud, that did not work and whose rollout was an admitted fiasco. None of this moved the New York Times to use the word “scandal.”

"Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage," ACA architect Jonathan Gruber told a receptive audience. "And basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical for the thing to pass."

3. DACA
In 2011, Obama said, "With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that's just not the case, because there are laws on the books that Congress has passed."

In 2012, with reelection pending, Obama issued an executive order giving as many as a million people relief from deportation proceedings as well as the right to apply for work authorization.

2. Uranium One
The Russians took control of the Canadian firm Uranium One in three discrete transactions from 2009 to 2013, during which time veritable pallets of cash made their way to the Clinton Foundation. The chairman of Uranium One alone donated $2.35 million.

For Russian President Vladimir Putin, securing Uranium One was like finding a pony under his tree on Christmas morning. As Rosatom CEO Sergei Kiriyenko told Putin in a staged interview, "Few could have imagined in the past that we would own 20 percent of U.S. reserves."

1. The Russia Hoax
Like England's Henry II, who reportedly said of Thomas Becket, "Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest," Obama led by way of suggestion. When all the facts are known, this scandal will be the most enduring part of his legacy.

List Of Obama’s Impeachable Offenses That Democrats And Media Covered Up

November 19, 2017 Michelle M.

Obama broke over 30 laws and not one person said impeach. I guess Obama the traitor can break laws, but our President Trump cannot tweet a message without The Corrupt Democrats wanting him impeached.

Unfortunately, since President Trump is the man in the White House it looks like “impeach!” is Democrat’s favorite world! After the New York Times claimed a memo written by former FBI Director James Comey said the president urged him to end the federal investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn, Democrats became, even more, louder in their demands for impeachment for our President.

That is why some members of Congress including Reps. Maxine Water, D-Calif., and Al Green, D-Texas are getting in on the action.

Via WND: Even a Republican, Rep. Justin Amash, claimed Wednesday there are grounds to impeach President Trump. House Oversight Committee Chair Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, asked for the alleged Comey memo and other documents. Chaffetz tweeted that he is prepared to subpoena the information. And Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., invoked “Watergate.”

Now the Democratic Party is reportedly poll testing impeachment as a 2018 election issue. More than 1 million people signed a petition calling on Congress to impeach Trump.

The mainstream media wasted no time, so they sprang into action, enthusiastically echoing the left’s impeachment calls. MSNBC launched a Watergate ad implying Trump is America’s new Richard Nixon.

“Watergate. We know its name because there were reporters who never stopped asking questions,” says MSNBC host Chris Hayes, who hinted that Trump is next on the impeachment chopping block. “Now, who knows where the questions will take us. But I know this: I’m not going to stop asking them.”

However, constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley, who voted for President Obama, warned “impeachment” enthusiasts not to get ahead of themselves with President Trump. Why?

At this time, there’s no evidence Trump actually committed a crime.

“The criminal code demands more than what Comey reportedly describes in his memo,” Turley wrote in a May 17 opinion piece posted at the Hill. Turley explained:

For the first time, the Comey memo pushes the litany of controversies surrounding Trump into the scope of the
United States criminal code.

However, that still leaves the need to show that the effort was to influence “corruptly” when Trump could say that he did little but express concern for a longtime associate. The term “corruptly” is actually defined differently under the various obstruction provisions, but it often involves a showing that someone acted “with the intent to secure an unlawful benefit for oneself or another.” Encouraging leniency or advocating for an associate is improper but not necessarily seeking an unlawful benefit for him.

Let’s fight back reminding them Every Single Time Obama Committed An Impeachable Offense!

1.Obama’s Iran nuke deal
2.Obama knew about Hillary’s private email server
3.Obama IRS targets conservatives
4.Obama’s DOJ spied on AP reporters
5.Obamacare & Obama’s false promises
6.Illegal-alien amnesty by executive order
7.Benghazi-gate
8.Operation Fast & Furious
9.5 Taliban leaders for Bergdahl
10.Extortion 17
11.‘Recess ‘ appointments – when Senate was in session
12.Appointment of ‘czars’ without Senate approval
13.Suing Arizona for enforcing federal law
14.Refusal to defend Defense of Marriage Act
15.Illegally conducting war against Libya
16.NSA: Spying on Americans
17.Muslim Brotherhood ties
18.Miriam Carey
19.Birth certificate
20.Executive orders
21.Solyndra and the lost $535 million
22.Egypt
23.Cap & Trade: When in doubt, bypass Congress
24.Refusal to prosecute New Black Panthers
25.Obama’s U.S. citizen ‘hit list’

The press and Democrats covered up Obama’s impeachable offenses and the weak GOP did nothing to push for an impeachment. All they ever came up with was to threaten to impeach him IF he committed the same offense a second time. The Reps (RINOs) and federal law enforcement agencies were just as complicit as the Democrats and the press. The Deep State is enormous.

However, now, both the corrupt democrats and corrupt Republicans will do anything to get Trump out of office so they don’t lose their lifetime cushy corrupt jobs or end up in jail!!!

https://archive.org/stream/The64Impe...Obama_djvu.txt

https://townhall.com/columnists/john...ached-n1848801

**vector7** · May 17th, 2020, 16:01

Obama's Coup Attempt

May 12, 2020

By Daniel John Sobieski

President Barack Hussein Obama says the DoJ’s decision to drop all charges against Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn upends the rule of law, something members of his administration, presumably under his instructions, routinely violated, in particularly by illegally unmasking and disseminating Flynn’s name to the press and the world, setting him up in the first place for persecution and prosecution. What they did is a felony that must be punished. And they did it with Obama's knowledge and consent.

We know Obama was calling the shots. We knew it from the text messages between disgraced FBI agents and lovers Peter Strzok and Lisa Page saying that POTUS wanted to know everything they were doing. This matter began as a supposed counterintelligence investigation and such investigations are always conducted for the benefit of and with the approval of the President of the United States.

We know Obama was calling shots from the Jan. 5, 2017 White House meeting between former FBI Director James Comey, himself a serial leaker and liar, former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates and Obama:

Newly released documents indicate former FBI Director James Comey kept his superior at the Justice Department in the dark about the bureau's investigation into retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn.

Former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates told special counsel Robert Mueller’s team that she first learned the FBI possessed and was investigating recordings of Flynn’s late 2016 conversations with a Russian envoy following a Jan. 5, 2017, national security meeting at the White House. It wasn't Comey who told her, but former President Barack Obama.

Yates, who was briefly the acting attorney general during the early days of the Trump administration before getting fired, also laid out how in the ensuing days, Comey kept the FBI's actions cloaked in secrecy and repeatedly rebuffed her suggestions that the incoming Trump team be made aware of the Flynn recordings…

"It was not clear... where the President first received the information," Yates said, adding that she “did not recall Comey’s response to the President’s question about how to treat Flynn.”

Yates was surprised Obama knew that the call between incoming National Security Adviser Flynn and the Russian ambassador, a totally appropriate contact, had been monitored and taped. She shouldn’t have been. Again, counter-intelligence investigations are launched only for and with the approval of the President. And, as we now know, Obama was leading the anti-Trump coup in which then-CIA Director John Brennan and then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper were key participants. Also attending the meeting was then-Vice President Joe Biden, who has much to answer for.

Despite multiple investigations of alleged Russian collusion dating back to Trump’s election, the only crimes we know of have been committed by Team Obama, including the leaking of classified information starting with the illegal unmasking of Michael Flynn.

Flynn was an outspoken critic of President Obama’s Middle East policy, which included the betrayal of Iraq and the American lives lost there, precipitating the rise of ISIS, which Obama willfully ignored. Now we are learning the unprecedented scope of the illegal unmasking in intelligence reports of Team Trump members by unqualified members of the Obama administration for the political purpose of first derailing the election of President Trump and then undermining his administration.

As Catherine Herridge, then with Fox News, reported on July 27, 2017:

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., has questioned whether Obama officials improperly sought the names of Trump transition members in this way -- and, in the letter obtained by Fox News, Nunes provided new details about what his investigators have found.

“[T]his Committee has learned that one official, whose position has no apparent intelligence-related function, made hundreds of unmasking requests during the final year of the Obama Administration,” he wrote to Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats.

Only one request, Nunes wrote, “offered a justification that was not boilerplate and articulated why” the identity was needed for official duties.

This was nothing less than an attempted coup under Obama’s auspices, sedition against the government of the United States by officials and a President sworn to uphold the Constitution. The sheer volume of unmasking requests by people such as Samantha Power who have no legitimate reason to make such requests speaks volumes about their political purpose.

As much as Flynn has taken fire as being an architect of unspecified collusion with the Russians, Susan Rice had been like the iceberg that sank the Titanic -- barely visible above water but dangerous enough maybe to sink the Trump administration’s ship of state.

As reported by Circa News, Rice, while serving as Obama’s National Security Adviser, requested the unmasking of the names of Team Trump officials mentioned in the so-called “incidental” surveillance of the Trump transition team:

Computer logs that former President Obama’s team left behind in the White House indicate his national security adviser Susan Rice accessed numerous intelligence reports during Obama's last seven months in office that contained National Security Agency intercepts involving Donald Trump and his associates, Circa has learned.

Intelligence sources said the logs discovered by National Security Council staff suggested Rice’s interest in the NSA materials, some of which included unmasked Americans' identities, appeared to begin last July around the time Trump secured the GOP nomination and accelerated after Trump’s election in November launched a transition that continued through January.

The intelligence reports included some intercepts of Americans talking to foreigners and many more involving foreign leaders talking about the future president, his campaign associates or his transition... Most if not all had nothing to do with the Russian election interference scandal, the sources said, speaking only on condition of anonymity given the sensitive nature of the materials.

How do we know Obama called the shots on the whole Russian collusion/Steele Dossier hoax and Flynn’s entrapment was also on his orders. James Clapper said so? In the search for the answer as to how the whole Mueller collusion probe and spying on Team Trump originated, one does not have to look far. One need only to revisit the interview deep state conspirator and perjurer James Clapper gave with CNN’s Anderson Cooper. He points his finger directly at Obama as leader of the coup against Donald Trump:

Former Obama administration director of national intelligence James Clapper admitted that former president Barack Obama gave the order to Peter Strzok to kick off his Operation Crossfire Hurricane targeting of President Donald Trump.

Obama -- who also gave a stand-down order on stopping alleged Russian hacking -- was personally implicated in the plot according to Peter Strzok and Lisa Page’s texts. Clapper confirms the obvious…

“If it weren’t for President Obama we might not have done the intelligence community assessment that we did that set up a whole sequence of events which are still unfolding today, notably Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation. President Obama is responsible for that. It was he who tasked us to do that intelligence community assessment in the first place,” Clapper said in his Anderson Cooper interview.

In any criminal investigation where the suspect is not immediately known, the first question usually asked is who would have the most to gain? As we follow the bread crumbs of the text messages of Peter Strzok and Lisa Page and await release of the House Intelligence Committee’s memo regarding the collusion between the DNC, the Hillary Clinton campaign, the DoJ and FBI to ensure the election of Hillary and the defeat or impeachment of Donald Trump, the answer to that question is clear: Barack Obama.

Can it be believed that as key players in the Obama administration like Strzok and Page, as well as FBI Director James Comey, Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, number four at Justice Bruce Ohr, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, and many others were liked in a vast criminal conspiracy to keep Hillary Clinton out of prison and Donald Trump out of the White House, Obama was blissfully unaware of all this? Rather, it can be plausibly argued that he was orchestrating it.

Perhaps not directly or by explicit orders, but rather by discussing the threat to his legacy Trump represented with his progressive minions and then simply saying, as crime bosses throughout history have done, “You know what needs to be done. Do it.”

This scandal did not occur in a vacuum, no more than did the weaponizing of the IRS to target the Tea Party and other conservative groups before Obama’s 2012 reelection campaign occur in a vacuum. The agencies under Obama’s control have been politicized before and used to intimidate and destroy his political opponents.

Obama gave the marching orders to James Comey et. al. to keep Hillary out of prison and Trump out of the White House. He was so sure both would happen he once joked about it on late night television:

Appearing on ABC's 'Jimmy Kimmel Live' in late 2016, Obama read out some tweets from Trump, including one that read:"President Obama will go down as perhaps the worst president in the history of the United States!" Obama offered a potential response: “Dear @realDonaldTrump. At least I will go down in history as a President.” Ha ha.

I argued that Comey, under Obama’s orders, had the fix in for Hillary, and we now know that he began writing his exoneration memo significantly before interviewing Hillary and other key witnesses. That memo underwent key edits in which Strzok, who interviewed Hillary and those witnesses, was involved. But now, as the layers of this rotting onion are peeled away, it has become clearer that Comey did not act on his own initiative. He was doing what Obama told him to do.

The same is true of the persecution and prosecution off Michael Flynn. Obama pulled the strings. Obama gave the marching orders. This fish is rotting from the head.

Obama Panics – President Obama Gives Political Operatives and Media Talking Points to Protect Him…

Posted on May 8, 2020 by sundance

The good news is former President Obama is panicked by recent sunlight; the slight possibility of a U.S. DOJ that may soon have him in the cross-hairs; and the more obvious possibility the American people will discover the scale of his corrupt weaponization of intelligence to target his political opposition.

The better news is former President Obama is so heavily concerned about the looming possibilities; rather than relying on intermediary instructions through Media Matters; he is giving political operatives and national media his instructions directly. LISTEN:

View: https://youtu.be/tbQ8P3GhD-c

“President Obama’s Hands are Dirty. They Are Beyond Dirty. He Has Judicial Blood On His Hands.” – Former US Attorney Joe diGenova

Former US Attorney Joe diGenova was again on the Monday morning radio show – Mornings on the Mall and he dropped some shocking statements about former President Obama and his Administration.

This week he was interviewed by Mary Walter and Tony Schaffer, who appeared as a guest host.

Right after the 3:10 mark, diGenova says the following:

TRENDING: Breaking Update: DNI Richard Grenell Declassifies List of Obama Officials Involved in "Unmasking" Flynn in His Conversations with Kislyak

When you put together the last 24 hours, the comments by former President Obama, that ‘this is a threat to the rule of law’, which is an utter joke coming out of his mouth. When you put together Mary McCord’s op-ed, and then some of the statements from people associated with Mueller, you realize that the Mueller probe was at the beginning, nothing more than a pretext to get the President impeached. And you realize than anybody in the senior FBI and DOJ levels were in on it, and what’s really fascinating, is when you go back and you look at January 5th, 2017, in the Oval Office, all Intelligence Community leaders, the Vice President [Joe Biden], Sally Yates, Comey, Brennan and Susan Rice – the President of the United States in that meeting, Barack Obama, is discussing the ongoing investigation into the Trump campaign, the inter transition and the Trump Presidency.

And, [Obama] says in that meeting, according to Susan Rice, he wants to be kept informed so he can decide whether or not they are going to withhold classified information from the incoming administration involving Russia. That is sedition. That is beyond anything we ever heard about a President leaving office, doing this to his successor. What Obama did in that office was sedition on that day.

Click to expand...

Next at the 7:00 mark, diGenova says:

President Obama’s hands are dirty. They are beyond dirty. He has judicial blood on his hands. He is responsible for this injustice. He could have stopped it. He could have said, ‘what are you idiots doing. This is against the duly elected President of the United States, Donald Trump. Why are you doing this?’

He didn’t he encouraged it. And he had the brazen, talk about a brazen plot. How brazen they are sitting in the Oval Office on January 5th and saying they might not share intelligence with the incoming administration. And you know what that means? That means they didn’t want to give it to General Flynn…

At the 10:00 mark diGenova then says: People forget, because the MSM will not cover the FISA Court decision that two Chief Justices of the FISA Court, Collyer and Boasberg, have written multiple opinions, scathing opinions, accusing the Obama FBI and Justice Department of violating the constitutional privacy of American citizens by unmasking and leaking that information to the press.

Obama and his gang were the most corrupt group in US history.

OBAMAGATE! pic.twitter.com/pFbb6hgDhF — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 12, 2020“The Obama people got caught this week - and it looks like it goes straight to the top.” #WattersWords pic.twitter.com/hGOfBHYdv9 — Watters' World (@WattersWorld) May 10, 2020
It looks like President Obama ordered up phony RussiaGate scandal

By Post Editorial Board

May 11, 2020 | 7:52pm | Updated

Enlarge Image

Then-FBI Director Robert Mueller (from left) joined President Barack Obama in the Rose Garden of the White House when he announced James Comey as his nominee to succeed Mueller in June 2013. The White House

RussiaGate is now a complete dead letter — but ObamaGate is taking its place. Just how far did the then-president go to cripple his successor?

It’s now clear the Obama-Comey FBI and Justice Department never had anything more substantial than the laughable fiction of the Steele dossier to justify the “counterintelligence” investigation of the Trump campaign. Yet incessant leaks/ from that supposedly confidential probe wound up consuming the Trump administration’s first months in office — followed by the Bob Mueller-led special counsel investigation that proved nearly the “total witch hunt” that President Trump dubbed it.

nformation released as the Justice Department dropped its charges against Gen. Mike Flynn shows that President Barack Obama, in his final days in office, played a key role in fanning the flames of phony scandal. Fully briefed on the “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation, he knew the FBI had come up with nothing despite months of work starting in July 2016.
Yet on Jan. 5, 2017, Obama told top officials who’d be staying on in the new administration to keep the crucial facts from Team Trump.

It happened at an Oval Office meeting with Vice President Joe Biden, intel chiefs John Brennan and Jim Clapper and national security adviser Susan Rice, as well as FBI Director Jim Comey and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates.

“From a national-security perspective,” Rice’s memo afterward put it, “President Obama said he wants to be sure that, as we engage with the incoming team, we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia.”

This even as then-President Obama also directed that as many people as possible across his administration be briefed on the (utterly unsubstantiated) allegations against Team Trump — and as Rice and others took unprecedented steps to “unmask” US citizens like Flynn whose conversations had been caught on federal wiretaps of foreigners.

Indeed, the Obama administration went on a full-scale leak offensive — handing the Washington Post, New York Times and others a nonstop torrent of “anonymous” allegations of Trumpite ties to Moscow. It suggested that the investigations were finding a ton of treasonous dirt on Team Trump — when in fact the investigators had come up dry.

Sadly, Comey’s FBI played along — sandbagging Flynn with the “friendly” interview that later became the pretext for the bogus charges dropped last week, as well as triggering the White House chaos that led to his ouster. This when the FBI had already gone over the general with a fine-tooth comb, and concluded that, no, he’d done nothing like collude with the Russians.

Meanwhile, Comey himself gave Trump an intentionally misleading briefing on the Steele dossier. That was followed by leaks that suggested the dossier was the tip of an iceberg, rather than a pack of innuendo that hadn’t at all checked out under FBI scrutiny.

Pulitzer Prizes were won for blaring utter fiction; the Trump administration was kneecapped out of the gate. Innocents like Flynn were bankrupted along the way.

Say this about Obama: He knows how to play dirty.

================================================== ===============

2,436 views

REXXURECTION

@rexxurection

2 days ago, 15 tweets, 5 min read

1. Holyrap.

Did Obama and his thugs frame and remove CIA Director General Davis Petraeus, to replace him with John Brennan?

Check this extract from an article from 10 November 2012:

Spy chief Gen David Petraeus, his 'embedded' biographer and the FBI email trawl that exposed their affair General David Petraeus resigned as CIA director after an FBI hunt for a suspicious emailer revealed his affair with biographer Paula Broadwell. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9669532/Spy-chief-Gen-David-Petraeus-his-embedded-biographer-and-the-FBI-email-trawl-that-exposed-their-affair.html

2. 'In a remarkable twist, it was agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation who discovered that the head of the CIA was conducting an affair during an inquiry into possible email security breaches.'

Yeah, a 'remarkable twist'.

SURE.

3. Check out this timeline, knowing what we now today.

Nov 6 2012 - Obama wins POTUS election.
Nov 7 - 'FBI officials' brief DNI Clapper.
Nov 8 - Clapper tells Petraeus to resign.
Nov 9 - CIA Director Petraeus resigns.

NOW - what was CIA Director Petraeus schedule for Nov 14?

4. 'Petraeus was to testify before a congressional panel..on what the CIA knew about the September 11 attack on US installments in the Libyan city of Benghazi, which resulted in the death of US Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other American personnel.'

The David Petraeus Scandal, Explained Who knew what and when? Jill Kelley asked for diplomatic protection? And dined at the White House? Plus: Shirtless FBI agent…exposed! (UPDATED) https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/11/david-petraeus-scandal-explained/#classified

5. Did Petraeus testify?

NO. That fell to his #2, Michael Morrell, who COVERED UP the CIA's involvement.

BTW the Mother Jones piece above is deliberately linked, because it now exposes the rats they were trying to defend at the time.

Former deputy CIA director defends editing Benghazi talking points Mike Morell dismisses allegation that CIA 'cooked the books' due to political pressure to protect President Obama https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/02/cia-mike-morell-defends-benghazi-talking-points

6. Back to Petraeus.

The 'evidence' used to take him out were emails between him and his lover that were 'accidentally' discovered by 'FBI agents' conducting a 'cyber stalking investigation'.

Have you ever heard such utter bullshit?

The 'FBI officials' briefed DNI Clapper.

7. Director of the FBI?

Robert Mueller.

Any bets that one of the other officials heavily involved was none other than Andy McCabe.

Also, McCabe was one of the lead FBI agents 'investigating' Benghazi.

They wanted Petraeus OUT, didn't they?

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_Abu…

8. So we have

- classified information (Gen Petraeus comms), that
- the FBI magically 'discover', after
- rumors of an affair leak to #FakeNews

Causing the FBI to brief Clapper.

Nixing Petraeus as an Obama threat.

That MO is TERRIBLY familiar, isn't it.

9. Petraeus was not the only victim of these sick scum.

They also used the framing of Peyreaus to frame and take out a loyal and dedicated patriot, FBI agent Frederick W Humphries.

Humphries had been a decurated agent.

BUT.

10. Humphries was also a critic of Obama and was perceived as a troublemaker.

So they DESTROYED him, as well.

Read this. Even ISIS found out about this guys address. Keep in mind that this was likely being done by Obama's thugs, to an INNOCENT citizen.

In aftermath of Petraeus scandal, outed FBI agent's family still feels sting of betrayal https://www.tampabay.com/news/in-aftermath-of-petraeus-scandal-outed-fbi-agents-family-still-feels-sting/2302380/

11. And check this out - the original leak of photos smearing Humphries was to none other than hack Michael Schmidt @nytmike at the NYT

Well, well, well.

Seems the crooks has their #FakeNews laundering op well in place by 2012.

Veteran F.B.I. Agent Helped Start Petraeus E-Mail Inquiry Frederick W. Humphries II, a counterterrorism agent, took the initial complaint from Jill Kelley about e-mails accusing her of inappropriate behavior toward David H. Petraeus. https://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/15/us/frederick-humphries-fbi-agent-in-petraeus-case.html?_r=1&

12. The rest, as they say, is history.

Obama appointed this monster as CIA Director on March 8, 2013.

'In this photo I am trying to look human.'

Remember, Brennan has been Obama's Homeland Security Director since 2009.

13. Obama's capture of the Republic's key institutions was complete.

And so began 4 years of crime, corruption & carnage,that America is still trying to recover from.

These traitors almost destroyed America.

Nov 8, 2016 was proof that they failed.

But the fight's not over.

14. The punishment for all these people must be so severe, that their kind will never rise again.

The damage they have done is incalculable.

I include Obama, in particular. He's the spider at the center of it all.

15. As President Trump says so well:

'These were crooked people. You know what they are, though, they're scum, they're human scum.'

'This must never happen to a President again.'

He MEANS IT.

No wonder the rats are so terrified.

They SHOULD BE.

Spy chief Gen David Petraeus, his 'embedded' biographer and the FBI email trawl that exposed their affair

General David Petraeus resigned as CIA director after an FBI hunt for a suspicious emailer revealed his affair with biographer Paula Broadwell.

Image 1 of 2
Paula Broadwell and General David Petraeus

By Philip Sherwell, New York

7:43PM GMT 10 Nov 2012

He was lauded as the greatest soldier-scholar of his generation, a highly decorated general who was equally at home negotiating the intrigues of Washington or in the trenches of Iraq and Afghanistan.

She was a fellow West Point graduate, a counter-terrorism expert, a fitness champion and a tall, striking brunette two decades his junior who had modelled for a machine gun manufacturer.

Now the career of General David Petraeus has ended in the tawdry disgrace of a sex scandal after he stunned the US military, intelligence and political establishments with his resignation as America's spy chief because of an extramarital affair.

His reported mistress, Paula Broadwell, was the co-author of a fawning recent biography of the general, who resigned as director of the Central Intelligence Agency on Friday. Both are married with children.

Related Articles

Petraeus: Paula Broadwell 'had classified documents'
12 Nov 2012
How Paula Broadwall prepared to celebrate birthday as news broke of David Petraeus affair
11 Nov 2012
Michael Morell, 'career spook' replacing Petraeus
11 Nov 2012
Probe into FBI failure to report Petraeus affair until after election
11 Nov 2012
Petraeus: the downfall of a man and myth
16 Nov 2012
The 'Warrior Monk' who helped to fix Iraq
10 Nov 2012

In a remarkable twist, it was agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation who discovered that the head of the CIA was conducting an affair. The investigation was launched when an unidentified woman described as close to the general contacted the FBI after she received threatening emails, according to an account in The Washington Post.

The FBI traced the emails to Mrs Broadwell and in the process uncovered explicit messages between her and Gen Petraeus, law enforcement officials told the newspaper.

It is reported that investigators initially thought that the CIA director's personal email account might have been hacked, but concluded that the two were indeed having an affair and that Mrs Broadwell perceived the other woman as a threat to that relationship.

Other US media also reported that the investigation involved two women, indicating that Gen Petraeus' career may have collapsed amid an acrimonious love triangle. Suspicions of infidelities had followed him for years, current and former US military officials told The Washington Post.

"It was portrayed to us that the FBI was investigating something else and came upon him," a congressional official briefed on the inquiry told The New York Times.

The dates of the affair are unclear. An unnamed official told The Wall Street Journal that the relationship started after Gen Petraeus left the army in August 2011 and that he broke it off several months ago. But the two were reported to have been close in Afghanistan when Mrs Broadwell was, in military parlance, an "embedded" journalist with him between 2010 and 2011.

Ronald Kessler, a veteran Washington journalist who has written a book on the FBI and has close contacts at the bureau, said that the investigators found emails from the general's time in Afghanistan apparently detailing sexual encounters, including a tryst under his desk.

Gen Petraeus is not under investigation for any crime, US officials said. But as head of the CIA, he would have known that an affair would jeopardise his career. The military mastermind who rewrote US doctrines of counter-insurgency and was proud of savvy in media and politics has been brought down by human weakness and a shocking lack of judgment.

He was a model and mentor for many up-and-coming officers. Among his fellow top brass, however, there were those who viewed him as a vaunting careerist who crafted his portrayal in the media for his own personal ambitions.

So it is a sad irony that an affair apparently with an adulatory biographer sabotaged his ambitions. "Gen Petraeus is a man obsessed by his own image," a senior officer who knows him well told The Sunday Telegraph in the US. "Sadly this has been his downfall."

His fall from grace leaves Barack Obama searching for a new spy chief just days after his re-election. The timing also prompted conspiracy theories: the CIA director had been due to testify Congress this week to be grilled about how his agency and the White House handled intelligence on the US consulate attack in Benghazi that claimed the lives of four Americans, including the ambassador to Libya. Some congressmen demanded that he still appear, despite his resignation.

Gen Petraeus, 60, led the 101st Airborne Division in the 2003 Iraq invasion and later commanded the military "surges" in Iraq and Afghanistan, operations based on his counter-insurgency strategy that focused on protecting civilians as well as killing enemies.

The "surge" in Iraq, under George W Bush, is widely credited with turning around a failed war; the second, under Mr Obama, delivered a major blow to the Taliban.

The general, who has been married for 37 years and has two adult children, retired from the army when appointed by Mr Obama last September to head the CIA. At the time some Republicans hoped that the war veteran could be persuaded to run for president. There was speculation this year that Mitt Romney might pick him as a running mate.

Mrs Broadwell, 40, a high achiever in her own right, lives in a large brick home valued at nearly $1 million in an upmarket district of Charlotte, North Carolina, with her husband Scott, a radiologist, and their two young sons, Landon and Lucien.

She is a research associate at Harvard's Centre for Public Leadership and is working on a doctorate in the war studies department at King's College London.

She has several other qualifications from leading institutions and previously worked for US Special Operations Command and an FBI joint terrorism task force. According to the biography on her personal website, which was taken down after the scandal broke, she has completed half-triathlons and was a "female model/demonstrator" for a manufacturer of .45-calibre machine guns.

Mrs Broadwell and Gen Petraeus met in 2006 at Harvard when she was studying for a master's degree at the Kennedy School of Government and he gave a lecture there. She introduced herself and the visiting officer answered her follow-up questions on counter-insurgency and counter-terrorism.

With his help, she moved on to a PhD dissertation entitled "A case study of General Petraeus's leadership".

Two years later, Mr Obama was appointed him to run the war in Afghanistan after his predecessor, Gen Stanley McChrystal, quit following disparaging comments that he and his senior staff made to a Rolling Stone magazine journalist about Obama administration officials. Gen Petraeus noted at the time that there would have been no such naive slips by his team.

Mrs Broadwell spotted an opportunity to turn her dissertation into a book and negotiated a deal with Penguin Press, bringing in Vernon Loeb, a Washington Post editor, to help. She boasted of her access to her subject in a hagiographical work that some reviewers said amounted to a gushing love letter.

"I took full advantage of his open-door policy to seek insight and share perspectives," she wrote in All In: The Education of General David Petraeus, published in January. In the book blurb, she describes her "passion for leadership and security policy".

In an interview with Jon Stewart, the US television show host, Mrs Broadwell told how from summer 2010 to summer 2011 she spent several months "embedded" - the military term for journalists given official access to the armed forces in a war zone - with Gen Petraeus in Afghanistan.

During the show, she made clear her starry-eyed fondness for her subject. "He can turn water into bottled water," she joked. She has also said that she viewed him as a mentor and in the book she notes that he saw her as an "aspiring soldier-scholar" - a high accolade from a man who regarded himself as the master exponent of that combination.

Both were also fitness fanatics. Indeed, she conducted much of her research work during the five-mile morning runs to which Gen Petraeus would invite honoured guests in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"I thought I'd test him, but he was going to test me - it ended up being a test for both of us since we both ran pretty quickly," she told Stewart. "That was the foundation of our relationship." When he didn't want to answer questions, she said, "he would pick up the pace so neither of us could talk".

The revelation of the affair came as little surprise to some who worked with the two in Afghanistan. "As soon as the announcement was made, I knew in an instant who it was," a senior US military source who has worked closely with Gen Petraeus and knew Mrs Broadwell told the Business Insider website.

"Everything made sense. Who had exclusive access to him? Who wrote the hagiography on his life? Who framed their entire existence around his persona?"

The unnamed source added: "She went from someone very likeable to a shameless, self-promoting prom queen. A very disturbing shift in how she carried herself. If she knew [Gen Petraeus] was going to make an appearance at an event, she'd crash it without an invitation."

Gen Petraeus graduated top of the class in 1974 from West Point military academy. It was not only the start of a glittering career, he also met his future wife there: Holly Knowlton was the daughter of the general who ran the academy.

Mrs Petraeus heads the wing of the US Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that assists military families financially. The couple's son, Stephen, has followed his father into the military, and their daughter, Anne, is a food writer who was married last month.

In a short statement after his resignation, Gen Petraeus said: "After being married for over 37 years, I showed extremely poor judgment by engaging in an extramarital affair. Such behaviour is unacceptable, both as a husband and as the leader of an organisation such as ours."

Obama administration officials said that the White House was only informed of the FBI investigation on Wednesday, although former intelligence officials have expressed surprise that the president's team was not alerted earlier.

Gen Petraeus met Mr Obama in the White House on Thursday to offer his resignation. Fresh back from his gruelling election campaign, the president did not initially want to accept it, but said he would think about it overnight. The next day, he called his CIA director to tell him that he would not pressurise him to stay.

"By any measure through his lifetime of service, David Petraeus has made our country safer and stronger," the president said in a statement that did not mention the affair.

Mrs Broadwell has made no public comment, but her identity was disclosed to media outlets by several US officials.

Gen Petraeus's success with the military surges earned him rock-star status among his own troops. Earlier, as a commander during the 2003 invasion of Iraq, he was known for asking embedded reporters, "Tell me how this ends?"

Many interpreted that as a catchphrase that foresaw the chaos that he would later be called back to Iraq to fix. Few could ever have imagined it having such resonance in his own career.

He regularly shared his wisdom with younger officers to whom he preached a mantra of individual leadership and personal character, reminding them of the need to do the right thing, even when nobody was watching.

Last week Mrs Broadwell shared 12 lessons on leadership from Gen Petraeus in an article for Newsweek. Several take on an added resonance in light of the scandal that erupted a few days later.

Most notable is number five: "We all will make mistakes. The key is to recognise them and admit them, to learn from them." It is a moral that Gen Petraeus and Mrs Broadwell will doubtless both be considering now as they try to put their lives back together.

Additional reporting by Colin Freeman

**vector7** · May 17th, 2020, 16:15

Flynn: Obama was part of the coverup. Gregg Jarrett with Sebastian Gorka on AMERICA First

Sen Grassley Has Questions For Obama, Sends Letter To Barr

Was Judge Sullivan Taking Orders from Obama in Extending Flynn Case by Taking Amicus Briefs?

By Jim Hoft
Published May 12, 2020 at 10:38pm
8 Comments
Share Tweet Email

Disgraced former President Barack Obama appears to be in a panic. General Flynn is now in the clear and the Durham investigation is ongoing. More documents are about to drop.

There are rumblings that former members of his FBI (e.g. FBI General Counsel James Baker) have flipped and are working with Durham.
Obama’s Deep State henchmen who set up General Flynn and the crooked politicians and media hacks who supported them are terrified.
More information on Obamagate is expected to drop in the coming days.
TRENDING: Tucker Carlson Confronts Former Rep. Trey Gowdy for Actions He and Former Speaker Paul Ryan Took that Allowed Mueller and Obamagate to Flourish (VIDEO)
An audio of former President Barack Obama, whose Administration spied on the Trump team and Administration, was released by deep state reporter Michael Isikoff at Yahoo News on Friday night.
In the “call” which appears totally set up, Obama says he is concerned about “the rule of law.”

“The news over the last 24 hours I think has been somewhat downplayed — about the Justice Department dropping charges against Michael Flynn,” Obama said during a virtual discussion with members of the Obama Alumni Association. “The fact that there is no precedent that anybody can find for someone who has been charged with perjury just getting off scot-free. That’s the kind of stuff where you begin to get worried that basic — not just institutional norms — but our basic understanding of rule of law is at risk. And when you start moving in those directions, it can accelerate pretty quickly as we’ve seen in other places.”

Apparently, Judge Emmet G. Sullivan took this call to heart.
On Tuesday the Clinton-appointed judge made a dirty, political move to delay justice for General Mike Flynn.
The Justice Department dropped its case against General Mike Flynn last Thursday after bombshell documents released proved he was framed by Comey’s FBI.
But Judge Sullivan extended the case by soliciting amicus briefs to allow for public comment on Flynn’s criminal case.
This is something he has refused to do numerous times in the past.

Judge Sullivan, who denied leave to file amicus briefs when he knew third parties would have spoken favorably of Flynn, now solicits briefs critical of Flynn. This is a violation of the judicial oath and applicable ethical rules. We will be filing a complaint against Sullivan.
— Cernovich (@Cernovich) May 13, 2020

Apparently, Barack Obama’s leaked call was a dog whistle for Judge Sullivan to act.
Or, maybe the two communicated by other means since last Thursday?

His actions are corrupt as hell.

Flynn Attorney: Obama ‘Absolutely’ Knew Of Plot To ‘Set Him Up & Frame Him’ READ MORE: https://t.co/WkWhzzyGAV — Neon Nettle (@NeonNettle) May 11, 2020
Fox News: John Brennan Suppressed Intel Saying Russia Wanted Hillary Clinton to Win
2,512

Joe Raedle/Getty Images
Joel B. Pollak12 May 20201,401

3:17

Fox News’ Ed Henry reported Tuesday evening that Acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell has declassified information calling into question the conclusion that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump.
Henry told Tucker Carlson on Tucker Carlson Tonight that the new information would suggest that John Brennan, who headed the Central Intelligence Agency under President Barack Obama, “also had intel saying, actually, Russia wanted Hillary Clinton to win because she was a known quantity, she had been secretary of state, and Vladimir Putin’s team thought she was more malleable, while candidate Donald Trump was unpredictable.”
Former National Security Council chief of staff Fred Fleitz made a similar claim in an article on FoxNews.com April 22:

House Intelligence Committee staff told me that after an exhaustive investigation reviewing intelligence and interviewing intelligence officers, they found that Brennan suppressed high-quality intelligence suggesting that Putin actually wanted the more predictable and malleable Clinton to win the 2016 election.
Instead, the Brennan team included low-quality intelligence that failed to meet intelligence community standards to support the political claim that Russian officials wanted Trump to win, House Intelligence Committee staff revealed. They said that CIA analysts also objected to including that flawed, substandard information in the assessment.

On Tuesday, Henry said that he had obtained independent confirmation of the claims made by Fleitz in that report.
For three years, the received wisdom in Washington has been that 17 intelligence agencies concluded that Russia had interfered in the election to help Trump win. It then transpired that only four agencies had actually been involved.
The Senate Intelligence Committee, chaired by embattled Republican Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC), issued a report last month that appeared to confirm the work of the intelligence agencies.
However, that conclusion may soon be contradicted.
President Trump has accepted the claim that Russia interfered in the election — though he does not believe Russia actually helped him win, and he has publicly cast doubt on the idea that Russia preferred him over Clinton, his Democratic rival.
Breitbart News noted in 2017: “[T]he Russians may just as well have preferred Hillary Clinton, who had given Russia everything it wanted while serving as President Barack Obama’s Secretary of State — from the ill-fated “reset,” to a surrender of U.S. missile defenses in Eastern Europe, to the sale of 20% of America’s uranium reserves to a Russian company closely tied to the Russian state.”
“This could be a bombshell,” Henry told Carlson on Tuesday.

BREAKING: List of Obama Operatives Who Unmasked General Mike Flynn Revealed… Including Brennan, Clapper and Samantha Power

By Cristina Laila
Published May 13, 2020 at 1:39pm

Share on Facebook Tweet Email

Acting DNI Richard Grenell declassified the list of Obama officials involved in the unmasking of General Mike Flynn in his conversations with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

CBS reporter Catherine Herridge obtained the list of Obama operatives who unmasked General Flynn.
Names include former CIA Director John Brennan, Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power and former DNI chief James Clapper.
Here’s the list:
TRENDING: Sidney Powell Hits Back Against Judge Sullivan's Dirty Political Move to Delay Flynn Case, 'Proposed Amicus Brief Has No Place in This Court'

Via Catherine Herridge:

SCOOP @CBSNews obtains @RichardGrenell notification to congress declassified “unmasking list” Flynn between late 2016 and January 2017 pic.twitter.com/axc8MHvYYd
— Catherine Herridge (@CBS_Herridge) May 13, 2020

Grenell was seen delivering a satchel of documents to the DOJ last week and according to ABC, he also discussed the list of Obama officials involved in unmasking Flynn.

This is a breaking story…please refresh for updates.

All of these unmaskings of @GenFlynn took place before Inauguration Day 2017. They were hysterical Trump won. And there was no reason whatsoever for @SamanthaJPower to be the primary consumer of that intel. The #ObamaGate coup was launched the morning after Election Day. https://t.co/zI0MUlTTcH — John ‘Murder Hornet’ Cardillo (@johncardillo) May 13, 2020

**vector7** · May 17th, 2020, 18:20

At 4:02 in the video below: Susan Rice knew Trump was never working for Russia, the reason she was willing to accuse Trump officials of treason against their own country was because they were more concerned about the rise of China, Obama Administration's allies (9:29)

View: https://youtu.be/kg_CYep9HWY?t=242

Stand Up: The Level Playing Field (32min) FF to 17:54 in the video below: Deepstate/China Connection

View: https://youtu.be/7N_zOzw1XRM?t=1074

**vector7** · August 19th, 2020, 19:44

Millie Weaver broke a documentary called ShadowGate last week that was instantly banned on Twitter, YT and FB.

It described in detail how the Obama Administration was spying on everyone including the Trump Administration. Twitter has blocked "Latest" searches for #ShadowGate.

She was arrested on the day she was uploading this full documentary on bogus charges and the DA in Ohio also tried to have CPS take her children.

She was a freelance journalist for Inf0wars. AJ severed their relationship this morning. To this day the video is banned on most social networks, although people are still reposting it everyday. Evault and bitchute links are still working.

Also interesting is today Clearforce covered in the video, pulled down their Board of Directors page from the internet.Official Trailer - Shadow Gate#ShadowGate ��️ pic.twitter.com/3OLb008mLh — Millie Weaver �� (@Millie__Weaver) August 11, 2020 pic.twitter.com/9UJ70pth6q — Roy �� (@rede4futbl) August 14, 2020 Just spoke with @Millie__Weaver . She has not eaten since for over a day. She has severe intolerances with foods and the jail cannot accommodate. Trying to see if we can get her out on bail today if possible - She thanks everyone for the support. Thank you @ezralevant — ToRE (@TweetWordz) August 15, 2020 I have permission from @Millie__Weaver to post this. Will provide an update on her soon. (wrong unedited pic was uploaded) #FreeMillie #ShadowGate pic.twitter.com/VyZrm2nWdF — ToRE (@TweetWordz) August 16, 2020 Thank you #GAB I guess Patriots could only hold off YT for so long. They had to GROUP their troll armies and PERSONAS activated. It cannot be hidden now. https://t.co/qEi2hhbQEH — ToRE (@TweetWordz) August 17, 2020 Add Twitter...v v v Viral Shadowgate Documentary Deleted by Facebook and YouTube After Film Maker’s Arrest Movie was going viral with millions of views. 2 days ago on 17 August, 2020 Paul Joseph Watson Millie Weaver

25 Comments

The Shadowgate documentary, which went viral after one of its producers was arrested on Friday, has now been removed by both YouTube and Facebook.

Journalist Millie Weaver was charged with alleged “robbery, tampering with evidence, obstruction justice, and domestic violence” after police officers apparently from a local SWAT team showed up at her Ohio home Friday morning and took her to the Portage County Jail in Ravenna.

The Portage County Sheriff’s Office later confirmed that there was a “secret indictment” against Weaver but refused to give further details.

A woman claiming to be Weaver’s mother later commented that there had been a family dispute over a $50 cellphone on April 25, but that she had almost immediately dropped all charges against Weaver and expressed shock that her daughter had been arrested.

The arrest occurred on the eve of Weaver releasing Shadowgate, a documentary that purports to expose the “operational role the shadow government played behind the scenes carrying out the coup against President Trump.”

After the documentary received millions of views following its upload to Facebook and YouTube, both websites censored the film, with YouTube claiming the movie violated its rules against “hate speech.”
Weaver is expected to appear in front of a “tentative bond meeting” later today.

The full Shadowgate documentary can still be seen below.

The Portage County (Ohio) Prosecuting Attorney is one Victor V. Vigluicci, a staunch Democrat. Didn't see that one coming!https://t.co/Z5eCIeAfGe — Mark Pukita for US Senate '22 (R-OH) DEBOOSTED �� (@mpukita) August 16, 2020
Millie weavers case approved by county prosecuting attorney Victor Vigluicci - has a history of corruption just one case. Google is your friendhttps://t.co/qyf8JQr1l4#FreeMillieWeaver — Nice Guy101 (@bendover3263) August 17, 2020Millie Weaver is supposed to say goodbye to her kids! Because of Shadow Gate. She needs our help! — MargaretDeWys (@margaretdewys) August 17, 2020

Wow. Their even interfering in their phone signals. My YT connections are fine and i have great internet connection to everything else. — unconfused (@marysuem1) August 17, 2020
VERY curious why they are removing them from grandparents, if that is indeed true. If you find out what made them an unacceptable placement, please update. — Awkward Penguin (@kittymeowmou) August 17, 2020
Just spoke with @Millie__Weaver . She has not eaten since for over a day. She has severe intolerances with foods and the jail cannot accommodate. Trying to see if we can get her out on bail today if possible - She thanks everyone for the support. Thank you @ezralevant — ToRE (@TweetWordz) August 15, 2020https://t.co/VkvyMcDvgN — SweetReali-Tea �� (@SweetTeaSouthH1) August 19, 2020 The #ShadowGate Documentary has been banned across multiple social media platforms as "hate speech". Why are they so scared? — Millie Weaver �� (@Millie__Weaver) August 19, 20202 words. Roger Stone. — Big Papa Pump (@ChronicFOMO) August 19, 2020Shadowgate implicated Roger Stone as working directly with Paul Manafort under this shell company as controlled opposition basically. Seems like a psyop to muddy the waters and it has definitely done that. — Cdub (@ThisIsCdub) August 19, 2020
Flashback:
Maxine Waters Confirms Obama setup a Shadow Government using a "Big Brother" Database in 2013 When He Leaves Office (1min)

We must not be getting thru to people. We keep mentioning it - and it is ignored. Maxine's video circulated, but there is a larger interview with him. He was ignored as a whistleblower.https://t.co/w5a5q5ZASA — Audra (@audra_shumaker) May 22, 2020

**vector7** · August 19th, 2020, 20:52

Over the target! — BigUglyTruth (@BigUglyTruth1) August 19, 2020

**vector7** · August 22nd, 2020, 00:25

Obama-Biden Administration Imported Foreign Terrorists to Bolster ANTIFA’s Ranks

This would make a lot of sense.

Published 3 days ago on Aug 18, 2020 By Shane Trejo

A stunning report is indicating that the Obama administration imported foreign terrorists to the U.S. in preparation for the ANTIFA/Black Lives Matter uprising that is currently laying waste to America’s cities.

Ukraine-based independent journalist George Eliason published the bombshell report on Tuesday alleging that the foreign terrorists were brought overseas due to the scheming of former President Barack H. Obama and CIA Director John Brennan.

“It is an American problem caused by the former Obama-Biden administration’s continuing coup against the Presidency of Donald Trump,” Eliason writes of the ANTIFA/BLM terror uprising.

Eliason noted that ANTIFA terrorists were trained in Syria as part of a Kurdish neo-Marxist fighting force. He believes that since ANTIFA are “part of an insurgency ground force with provable foreign government representation and foreign insurgents from terrorist groups,” Geneva Conventions protections no longer apply to them.

He also performed extensive investigative work to determine the origins of ANTIFA and their leadership. Through careful analysis of ANTIFA’s official website, his investigation led back to Ben Utzer, who Eliason describes as “Antifa’s German Pirate Party chubby, never miss a meal, pasty white leader of the boots on the ground Obama-Biden Antifa-BLM insurrection.”

“Utzer is the German directing the traffic for American Antifa seditionists willing to murder and destroying their own cities for a foreign hacker-politico who owns a little security company and loves dogs,” Eliason writes.

Eliason showed social media posts made by the German Pirate Party echoing ANTIFA talking points, opposing President Trump’s plan to restore law and order amidst sustained rioting, and even using the hashtag #WeAreAllAntifaNow. He contends that Utzer’s agitating shows that the terror group is actually headquartered in Europe.

“Antifa, BLM, and other groups were brought in to create a funnel catching disenfranchised people from across the spectrum bringing them under one umbrella for the IO coup project. This is how the manpower problem for sedition was tackled,” he writes.

He pulled up other social media activity from the Pirate Party to make the case that they are a foreign entity effectively staging a coup d’état against the Trump administration.

“Let’s be clear. A German political party with European Parliament representation declared war on the nascent presidency of Donald Trump in no uncertain terms in early December 2016,” Eliason writes.

He is calling on American patriots to form militia-type groups to defend the homeland while this foreign coup plays itself out. He argues that supporting law enforcement should be a top priority for Americans who want to save their nation from the leftist occupation.

“While this is going on if you care about the country, the police that protected you need your protection. With all the defunding they are short-staffed and demoralized. Contact them about building auxiliary support groups and then do what they say to do,” Eliason writes.

“We went through this in Donbass after these same nationalists took over the country in 2014. Donbass stood against it because the people stood behind the police pushing Ukraine’s version of Antifa out,” he concludes.

Big League Politics will continue to report about Eliason’s important investigative work as it is released to the public. He plans to release more articles about ANTIFA’s origins in the days to come.

pic.twitter.com/OPjDvv6eYX — Urban Plowboy (@CurmudgeonofLA) August 21, 2020

**vector7** · August 22nd, 2020, 00:34

More threats from the Obama's...

Unbelievable! Michele Obama has bluntly released a threat to America that unless people vote for Biden she can promise that things will get worst! That’s the agenda of the liberals - do what we tell you or face our own self-made violence, chaos, and lawlessness! #Trump2020 pic.twitter.com/ShsJrJU8CR
— Amir Tsarfati (@BeholdIsrael) August 21, 2020

Thread: Obama: His Coup Or Theirs?

Thread Tools

Display

Re: Obama: His Coup Or Theirs?

Re: Obama: His Coup Or Theirs?

Re: Obama: His Coup Or Theirs?

Re: Obama: His Coup Or Theirs?

Re: Obama: His Coup Or Theirs?

Re: Obama: His Coup Or Theirs?

Re: Obama: His Coup Or Theirs?

Re: Obama: His Coup Or Theirs?

Re: Obama: His Coup Or Theirs?

Re: Obama: His Coup Or Theirs?

Re: Obama: His Coup Or Theirs?

Re: Obama: His Coup Or Theirs?

Re: Obama: His Coup Or Theirs?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions