Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
Historically, the actions of a departing president aiming to sabotage his successor are unprecedented in American politics.
Recent declassified documents reveal that in 2016, former President Barack Obama and his national security team allegedly manipulated and politicized false intelligence to portray Donald Trump as a Russian asset. Notably, this occurred despite their awareness of the falsehood.
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who uncovered and published the declassified documents, characterized these actions as an egregious abuse of power, suggesting they constitute a treasonous conspiracy.
Allegations of Treason and Seditious Conspiracy
The terms treason and seditious conspiracy carry strict legal definitions. In many cases, the involvement of violence or force is a core component. However, the actions in question may align more closely with severe offenses like conspiracy to defraud the government and infringing rights under the guise of law. This involves the use of knowingly false evidence to support a case against Trump and obstruct lawful government functions, such as elections.
The roots of this alleged plot trace back to Hillary Clinton. On July 26, 2016, she purportedly sanctioned a scheme to tarnish her political opponent by alleging collusion with Russia as the presidential election approached. This smear campaign was designed to divert attention away from her own escalating email scandal. Clinton’s campaign financed a dossier that amounted to little more than a collection of fabrications from her associates.
Upon discovering Clinton’s activities, the CIA promptly informed the Obama administration. During meetings on July 28 and August 3, 2016, then-CIA Director John Brennan briefed Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and FBI Director James Comey.
Brennan’s notes recorded his recounting of Clinton’s strategy to vilify Trump by suggesting interference from Russian intelligence. This information was closely guarded.
The truth behind this narrative was obscured by those involved, who failed to inform Congress or the American public. Instead, they allowed Comey and the FBI to initiate a lengthy investigation dubbed “Crossfire Hurricane,” leading to the alleged weaponization of authority to target Trump.
The Role of the FBI and Media in Propagating the Narrative
From the study’s outset, the FBI had debunked critical aspects of the dossier, even firing its creator, Christopher Steele, for dishonesty. Steele had previously been a compensated informant for the FBI. Nevertheless, Comey pursued and obtained surveillance warrants from the FISA court targeting Trump campaign associate Carter Page. No evidence of wrongdoing ever materialized.
As the Trump campaign persevered, the same adversaries quadrupled down on their efforts. Documents released by Gabbard indicate that a December 8, 2016 draft of the President’s Daily Briefing assessed that Russian and criminal actors did not affect the outcome of the U.S. elections through cyber activities, contradicting the emerging Trump collusion narrative.
On December 9, Obama held a meeting with select cabinet members, including Clapper, Brennan, and FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. During this meeting, they ordered a new Intelligence Community Assessment designed to undermine the existing findings and propagate the false narrative of Trump-Russia collusion.
The alternative conclusion stated that Russia intervened in the election to assist Trump in winning. The validity of this claim did not seem to matter to those involved.
Brennan and Comey ensured the discredited dossier influenced the new Intelligence Community Assessment, which was expedited before Trump took office. The urgency stemmed from a desire to present a false narrative that could entrap Trump before his presidency officially began.
On January 6, 2017, Comey visited Trump Tower with the misleading Intelligence Community Assessment, falsely implying Russian interference and presenting dubious accusations from the dossier. Despite the intense scrutiny, Trump strongly denied these allegations, arguing they were absurd.
Unperturbed, Comey and his associates continued their investigation into Trump and perpetuated the collusion narrative. Clapper leaked information to CNN, while media outlets engaged in a campaign of public condemnation against Trump, lacking substantive evidence.
When Comey faced termination, he took FBI documents with him and leaked them to a media friend, triggering the appointment of special counsel Robert Mueller. Ultimately, Mueller’s investigation found no evidence of a collusion conspiracy.
Consequences and Accountability
Those who reported responsibly on the fabricated scandal were aware of its baselessness long before Mueller’s conclusions. In a 2018 book, I asserted that credible evidence to justify the initial investigation initiated by Comey was nonexistent. I described the probe as a cleverly disguised initiative seeking any incriminating evidence under dubious legal pretenses.
Further details emerged in my subsequent publication, where I detailed how nefarious actors allegedly conspired to oust Trump from office. They reportedly fabricated evidence, altered laws, and attempted to frame Trump for collusion that never transpired.
The newly restructured FBI has begun investigating Brennan and Comey, marking a promising initial step towards accountability. However, numerous individuals, including Obama and Clinton, share responsibility, and the call for justice extends well beyond those two.
This began with the collusion controversy and has continually developed into various specious prosecutions orchestrated by Special Counsel Jack Smith, driven by the Biden administration’s influence.
Reports indicate the FBI is exploring the potential for broad conspiracy charges, encompassing numerous actions aimed at swaying three pivotal presidential elections—2016, 2020, and 2024.
Utilizing this legal pathway poses dual advantages. Firstly, it could extend any elapsed statute of limitations to incorporate recent overt acts like the raid on Mar-a-Lago. Secondly, it may facilitate prosecutions in neutral venues outside biased jurisdictions like Washington, D.C.
Critical evidence remains declassified and sealed, concealed for nearly a decade within intelligence agencies. Even without this vital information, it remains evident that senior officials abused their power for political ends, compromising the integrity of their respective offices.
Their loyalties appear to have shifted from serving the Constitution and rule of law to prioritizing their interests. This personal animus against Trump formed the basis for their systematic attempts to dismantle his presidency.
The ultimate remedy for deceit lies within the truth. Justice, in turn, demands unwavering commitment to what is right.
