It seems that President Donald Trump is attempting to give his disgruntled supporters a new target to direct their ire after he broke his promise to release the Epstein Files. Tulsi Gabbard released a memo that included “proof” that Obama was guilty of “treasonous conspiracy” and asked the DOJ to investigate.
They’re claiming that during the 2016 Russia election interference investigation, Obama directed the US intelligence community to suppress their findings that Russia did not hack voting infrastructure and instead to mislead the public about their findings.
Trump said on Wednesday during a meeting with the President of the Philippines, “We found absolute — this isn’t like evidence, this is like proof, irrefutable proof, that Obama was seditious. That Obama was trying to lead a coup. And it was with Hillary Clinton and with all these other people, but Obama headed it up […] It was Obama, he headed it up. And it says so right in the papers.”
They’re flooding the zone with feces again. Throwing out “proof” of a conspiracy and calling it treason. Releasing a memo and documents that they refer to in the most extreme terms as definitively establishing Obama’s guilt.
If you take the time to read the memo, Gabbard conflates two distinct claims. The first is that Russia interfered in the 2016 election, including by the use of “cyber means” such as by hacking Democrats and leaking material or spreading misinformation online. The second is that Russia interfered in the election by hacking voting equipment. Gabbard and the Trump administration are pretending that these are the same claim.
They’re also hoping that their followers either can’t tell the difference, or just run with it while ignoring the fact-checkers. None of the investigations ever concluded that Russia changed vote counts.
Gabbard’s memo is essentially a long series of communications where the intelligence community found that Russia likely interfered in the election by spreading misinformation, targeting democrats for hacks and leaking what they found. Much of the memo also includes communications where officials acknowledge that Russia did not target voting infrastructure or change votes.
Later in the memo, Gabbard offers her definitive proof of the Obama-led coup. According to her, “Deep State” officials within the intelligence community began leaking falsehoods to the press that indicated that Russia used “cyber means” to influence the election. Leaks such as, “this presidential campaign marks the first time Russia has attempted through cyber means to interfere in, if not actively influence, the outcome of the election” and “The CIA has concluded in a secret assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency”.
What about this is controversial? Gabbard’s memo is making it seem like these leaks are attempting to communicate to the public that Russia hacked voting machines when the long list of communications she provides in the memo show that the intelligence community believed otherwise. Clearly, these leaks are entirely consistent with what the intelligence community found and believed – that Russia used “cyber means” to influence the election such as by spreading misinformation online and hacking democrats.
This is all perfectly clear if one is equipped with at least a 4th-grade level of reading comprehension. They are pointing at completely inconsequential communications and screaming as loudly as possible that they prove treason when they clearly prove nothing.
Anyway, with all of that irrefutable proof in hand, Trump urged the DOJ to target Obama. Gabbard sent a criminal referral for Obama to the DOJ.
Should Michelle fear for her husband? Well, even if Obama held a press conference tomorrow and admitted that he ordered intelligence agencies to make up intel about Russia’s hacking of voting machines and also sent Navy Seals to give Donald Trump and his children malaria, presidents are immune from prosecution according to the Supreme Court.
Yes, remarkably, that immunity covers infecting others with malaria and using the power of the federal government to undermine elections as long as it is an official act of the president, which typically just refers to the president wielding the powers granted to them by law.
Earlier this year, the SCOTUS virtually guaranteed that presidents cannot be criminally prosecuted for anything that they do while they are in office. They cannot be prosecuted for official acts, and official acts can’t even be used to prosecute unofficial acts.
What interesting times we are living in. The Trump administration is fabricating a wild conspiracy that Obama attempted a coup, but because SCOTUS wanted to protect Trump from criminal prosecution, Obama can’t be prosecuted either even if the conspiracy were true.
Rafael Perez is a columnist for the Southern California News Group. He is a doctoral candidate in philosophy at the University of Rochester. You can reach him at rafaelperezocregister@gmail.com.