I'm confident we all remember in 2024, the Supreme Court ruled in a case related to Trump’s indictment on charges of election interference of the 2020 Presidential election that ex-presidents enjoy substantial immunity from prosecution. It's the reason why Trump is now President of the United States. Also, it's the reason why any President before or after Trump all now have the same exact immunity from prosecution. My point, Obama is off the table for arrest or prosecution. He now has enormous immunity thanks to Trump if the election interference story is true about Obama interfering. In addition, the timing of a "Obama Coup" is just a clever attempt to distract from the Epstein fallout with MAGA and their conspiracy ideology about the deep state corruption, pedophiles in politics et cetera. One thing we do know for sure, President Trump will go down in history as the only U.S. President to be caught on record (audio, insurrection, et cetera) of trying to interfere with a Presidential election, the only U.S. President to organized an insurrection to attempt to overthrow the people's vote in Washington, the only U.S. President to be a convicted felon 34x, and the oldest U.S. President in history. In fact, it's already being written into history books which is something I'm sure Trump still can not figure out a way to stop. I say his story is now in history books such as soft cover books printed in red states like Kentucky and South Dakota, books in public libraries across America along with the fact they're sold at popular book stores across America. There's no whitewashing the Truth about Trump...no more deflection as conspiracy theorists like MAGA along with Democrats seem to be fueling the latest chaos especially when we now realized that Trump has manipulated the lower courts from arresting or prosecuting any past/future President...giving rise to more conspiracy theories by MAGA. We'll soon be back to reality in August when the Trump's tariff war becomes center stage once again on top of the fact that less than 10% of deported immigrants had convictions or arrests. Yet, violent crime across America is still declining from a trend of decline that began in 2024 when Trump was not President. On a positive note - school shootings are down so far this year. We have +40 less school shootings by this time in the year 2025 in comparison to this time last year 2024. #chaos wrbtrader
You did a great job reciting the liberal talking points. You could have just posted a link to media matters and saved yourself some time or just simply posted "whatabout..." I agree wrt the SCOTUS ruling but there are a lot of other people that must go to jail. This cannot be allowed to happen again. The other individuals involved must be held accountable. Clapper, Brennan, Rice, Kerry, Lynch, and McCabe all have to go to jail. So, you're perfectly content that a former President, hand-in-glove with the CIA, FBI, DNI, and DOJ, fabricated an entire edifice of official intelligence reports, weaponizing them as blatant propaganda in what can only be described as a brazen political hit job, explicitly designed to politically assassinate, or more accurately, utterly incapacitate, an incoming, democratically elected president? You're completely fine with this cabal torpedoing the entire first term of a legitimately elected president, sabotaging his agenda from day one, all while simultaneously ripping apart the very fabric of our republic, desecrating the sanctity of our electoral process, and spitting on the bedrock principle of equal justice under law, the very ideals you claim to champion? It's utterly mind-boggling that with irrefutable, undeniable proof, complete with receipts, that the entire establishment gleefully fed you a steady diet of lies for years, you're still just whistling past the graveyard, perfectly willing to embrace blatant political propaganda and cheer on our terrifying descent into banana republic tyranny, because, apparently, the wholesale obliteration of truth and accountability for the fleeting thrill of partisan bloodlust is a perfectly acceptable trade-off for the future of the United States? Because if the very architects of such a monumental deception are allowed to walk away unadjudicated, with the full blessing of the establishment and the media, then frankly, what's left of American democracy to even argue about? Remember, two can play at every game. Are you perfectly fine with Trump manufacturing IC reports about all of his political enemies? Perhaps, Trump should manufacture IC reports about Schiff, Pelosi, etc.
EPSTEIN FILES. Nuf said. all distractions will not stop this train from derailing. We should be talking over/under.
First of all, I stayed on topic about two individuals named Trump, Obama, and then the topic involving the Supreme Court. That post was long enough. To discuss the other topics that you're now discussing would have been a post 3x the length of my prior reply that I choose not to make in the earlier hours of the morning. Simply, I'm not a conspiracy theorist and I will let the conspiracy theorist pretend they know what others care about based upon what they're not talking about. For example, just because I did not mention Trump or those he's hired in the FBI or DOJ manufacturing arrests of his political enemies doesn't imply I don't care...I just do not give a damn especially when I'm doing market research to get ready for the trading day. Simply, time is money especially when I'm expecting a big day in the financial markets. There's nothing political about trading on a special day in the markets. P.S. I've seen too many military friends in a graveyard. wrbtrader
The Trump administration is spinning fabrications to draw attention away from the Epstein fiasco. The simple proof that Trump and Tulsi Gabbard are wildly and falsely accusing Obama of committing a crime punishable by death https://lawandcrime.com/analysis/th...ma-of-committing-a-crime-punishable-by-death/ Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has now joined the ranks of President Donald Trump and certain allies in loosely accusing political opponents, this time former President Barack Obama and Obama administration officials, of committing a crime punishable by death, namely treason. No matter what Gabbard's stated criminal referral to the DOJ may entail, it can't be for treason or a "treasonous conspiracy," as she put it, and there's a simple way to know that is true. Over the years, Law&Crime has covered instances where Trump, Rudy Giuliani, and many others have haphazardly used the term treason — and in the time since, not one treason prosecution has been brought. Nor did special counsel John Durham's investigation of the Russia investigation's origins and "Obamagate" lead to the mass jailings of powerful Democrats, including Obama and Joe Biden, that the president's allies and supporters had long hoped for. Yet, DNI Gabbard spoke at a press briefing on Wednesday and — while not as bold as Trump's statements that Obama was "caught directly," is "guilty" and committed "treason" — nonetheless straightforwardly levied a "treasonous conspiracy" allegation. "I'm leaving the criminal charges to the Department of Justice. I am not an attorney, but as I've said previously, when you look at the intent behind creating a fake manufactured intelligence document that directly contradicts multiple assessments that were created by the intelligence community," she said, "the expressed intent and what followed afterward can only be described as a years-long coup and a treasonous conspiracy against the American people, our republic, and an attempt to undermine President Trump's administration." But be clear, the focus of this piece is not on whether there's any merit to Gabbard's alternate history of Russian efforts to interfere in the 2016 election, the Senate Intelligence Committee's bipartisan consensus about that interference and "efforts to influence the Trump Campaign and the 2016 election," the Mueller probe, or even about Gabbard's overarching narrative that the Obama administration and its officials "manufactured and politicized intelligence to lay the groundwork for what was essentially a years-long coup against President Trump" during his first term. Rather, let's talk about treason, which happens to be the only crime defined in the U.S. Constitution, under Article III, Section 3. The Constitution is clear that treason is "only" an offense in the context of aiding and comforting enemies of the U.S. during war. "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort," the law of the land reads. "No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court." 18 U.S.C. § 2381, using virtually the same language, additionally notes that treason is a capital offense, again for one who, despite "owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere[.]" The punishment is not only a potential death sentence, but short of that, "not less than five years" in prison, at least a $10,000 fine, and a ban from "holding any office under the United States." Whatever you think Obama and the officials in his administration did in 2016, before Trump took office, they are not foreign powers and there was no act of war under the meaning of the Constitution — therefore, treason did not occur. Attorney General Bill Barr, during an interview on CNN in 2020, articulated the correct legal view of the term treason when asked about Trump's "spying" accusations against former President Obama and former Vice President Joe Biden. Trump had said, in part, "Look, we caught the Obama administration spying on our campaign. They spied on our campaign. That's treason. That's treason. If this were the other way around, and it was Democrats instead of Republicans, there'd be people — many people would be in jail already." "But the bottom line is: We caught President Obama and Sleepy Joe spying on our campaign. That's treason. That's illegal," he added. CNN's Wolf Blitzer asked Barr if it was appropriate for Trump to be "accusing his predecessor, President Obama, and former Vice President Biden of committing treason?" "Well, treason is a legal term. I think he's using it colloquially," Barr replied, then and there throwing cold water on anyone believing that treason prosecutions were a real possibility. "You have to have a state of war with a foreign enemy to commit treason," Barr continued. "But I think he feels they were involved in an injustice. And if he feels that, he can say it." Why Gabbard would say it, misleading the president's supporters along the way, is another story. An Obama spokesperson said the "bizarre" claims, though "ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction," were "outrageous enough to merit" a response this time. "Nothing in the document issued last week undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but did not successfully manipulate any votes," said Patrick Rodenbush. "These findings were affirmed in a 2020 report by the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee, led by then-Chairman Marco Rubio." However, in the wildly unlikely scenario where Trump's DOJ actually did purport to bring treason charges against Obama, it would do the Justice Department well to read up on a certain Supreme Court case granting presumptive immunity to official acts of the president.
That is misinformation. Gabbard specifically stated that she is not an attorney and that she will leave the crimes up to the DOJ but that she would call it in general a treasonous conspiracy. So, that article is based upon a lie.
In this case the DOJ should charge Gabbard in making absolutely false accusations. Maybe she should spend her time looking into the National security implications of the Epstein files.
Tulsi Gabbard is referring Obama to the DOJ , accusing him of treason because.... Putin held back damaging information that he had in his possession about Hillary until after her potential election victory. Tulsi Gabbard accuses Hillary Clinton of 'psycho-emotional problems' in latest rant Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard avoided mention of President Donald Trump's Jeffrey Epstein scandal while suggesting former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had "psycho-emotional problems" and used "heavy tranquilizers." During a White House briefing on Wednesday, Gabbard shared a declassified report from House Republicans about whether or not Russian President Vladimir Putin interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. "This report shows Putin held back from leaking compromising material on Hillary Clinton prior to the election, instead planning to release it after the election to weaken what Moscow viewed as an inevitable Clinton presidency," Gabbard said. "In the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment that President Obama ordered, John Brennan, who was CIA Director at the time, and the Intelligence Community, intentionally suppressed intelligence that showed Putin was saving the most damaging material that he had in his possession about Hillary Clinton until after her potential and likely victory." "There were high-level DNC emails that detailed evidence of Hillary's, quote, 'psycho-emotional problems, uncontrolled fits of anger, aggression, and cheerfulness,' and that then-Secretary Clinton was allegedly on a daily regimen of heavy tranquilizers," she continued. "Then-CIA Director Brennan and the intelligence community mischaracterized intelligence and relied on dubious substandard sources to create a contrived false narrative that Putin developed a quote-unquote clear preference for Trump." Watch the video below from Newsmax.