Russiagate Investigation Now Endangers Obama by Eric Zuesse!
(2019-12-29 at 14:43:27 )

Russiagate Investigation Now Endangers Obama by Eric Zuesse

Former United States President Barack Obama is now in severe legal jeopardy, because the Russiagate investigation has turned 180 degrees; and he, instead of the current President, Donald Trump, is in its cross-hairs.

The biggest crime that a United States President can commit is to try to defeat United States of American democracy (the Constitutional functioning of the United States Government) itself, either by working with foreign powers to take it over, or else by working internally within the United States of America to sabotage democracy for his or her own personal reasons.

Either way, it is treason (crime that is intended to, and does, endanger the continued functioning of the Constitution itself), and Mr. Obama is now being actively investigated, as possibly having done this.

The Russiagate investigation, which had formerly focused against the current United States President, has reversed direction and now targets the prior President.

Although he, of course, cannot be removed from office (since he is no longer in office), he is liable under criminal laws, the same as any other United States of American would be, if he committed any crime while he was in office.

A December 17th order by the FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) Court severely condemned the performance by the Federal Bureau of Investigation under Mr. Obama, for having obtained, on 19 October 2016 (even prior to the United States Presidential election), from that Court, under false pretenses, an authorization for the Federal Bureau of Investigation to commence investigating Donald Trumps Presidential campaign, as being possibly in collusion with Russias Government.

The Courts ruling said:

In order to appreciate the seriousness of that misconduct and its implications, it is useful to understand certain procedural and substantive requirements that apply to the governments conduct of electronic surveillance for foreign intelligence purposes. Title I of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA ), codified as amended at 50 USC. 1801-1813, governs such electronic surveillance. It requires the government to apply for and receive an order from the FISC approving a proposed electronic surveillance. When deciding whether to grant such an application, a FISC judge must determine among other things, whether it provides probable cause to believe that the proposed surveillance target is a "foreign power" or an agent a foreign power..

The government has a heightened duty of candor to the FISC in ex parte proceedings, that is, ones in which the government does not face an adverse party, such as proceedings on electronic surveillance applications. The FISC expects the government to comply with its heightened duty of candor in ex parte proceedings at all times. Candor is fundamental to this Courts effective operation..

On December 9, 2019, the government filed, with the FISC, public and classified versions of the OIG Report. .. It documents troubling instances in which Federal Bureau of Investigation personnel provided information to NSD[National Security Division of the Department of Justice] which was unsupported or contradicted by information in their possession.

It also describes several instances in which Federal Bureau of Investigation personnel withheld from NSD information in their possession which was detrimental to their case for believing that Mr. [Carter] Page was acting as an agent of a foreign power. ..

On December 18th, Martha McCallum, of Fox News, interviewed United States Attorney General Bill Barr, and asked him (at 7:00 in the video) how high up in the Federal Bureau of Investigation the blame for this (possible treason) goes:

MACCALLUM: Were you surprised that he [ Mr. Obamas FBI Director James Comey] seemed to give himself such a distance from the entire operation?

"JAMES COMEY: As the director sitting on top of an organization of 38,000 people you can not run an investigation that is seven layers below you. You have to leave it to the career professionals to do."

MACCALLUM: Do you believe that?

BARR: No, I think that the - one of the problems with what happened was precisely that they pulled the investigation up to the executive floors, and it was run and bird dogged by a very small group of very high level officials. And the idea that this was seven layers below him is simply not true.

The current (Trump) A.G. there called the former (Obama) FBI Director a liar on that.

If Comey gets heat for this possibly lie-based FBI investigation of the United States Presidential nominee from the opposite Party of the sitting United States President ( Mr. Comeys own boss, Obama), then protecting himself could become Mr. Comeys top motivation; and, in that condition, protecting his former boss might become only a secondary concern for him.

Moreover, as was first publicly reported by Nick Falco in a tweet on 5 June 2018 (which tweet was removed by Twitter but fortunately not before someone had copied it to a web archive), the FBI had been investigating the Donald Trump campaign starting no later than 7 October 2015. An outside private contractor, Stefan Halper, was hired in Britain for this, perhaps in order to get around laws prohibiting the United States Government from doing it.

(This was "foreign intelligence" work, after all.

But was it really? That is now being investigated.)

The Office of Net Assessment (ONA) "through the Pentagons Washington Headquarters Services, awarded him contracts from 2012 to 2016 to write four studies encompassing relations among the United States, Russia, China and India". Though Mr. Halper actually did no such studies for the Pentagon, he instead functioned as a paid FBI informant (and it is not yet clear whether that money came from the Pentagon, which spends trillions of dollars that are off-the-books and untraceable), and at some point Donald Trumps campaign became a target of Mr. Halpers investigation.

This investigation was nominally to examine "The Russia-China Relationship: The impact on United States Security interests." Allegedly, George Papadopoulos said that " Mr. Halper insinuated to him that Russia was helping the Donald Trump campaign", and Mr. Papadopoulos was shocked at Mr. Halpers saying this.

Probably because so much money at the Pentagon is untraceable, some of the crucial documentation on this investigation might never be found. For example, the Defense Departments Inspector Generals 2 July 2019 report to the United States Senate said "ONA personnel could not provide us any evidence that Professor Halper visited any of these locations, established an advisory group, or met with any of the specific people listed in the statement of work." It seems that the Pentagon-contracted work was a cover-story, like pizza parlors have been for some Mafia operations. But, anyway, this is how Americas "democracy" actually functions.

And, of course, the United States of Americas Deep State works not only through governmental agencies but also through underworld organizations. That is just reality, not at all speculative. It has been this way for decades, at least since the time of Mr. Trumans Presidency (as is documented at that link).

Furthermore, inasmuch as this operation certainly involved Mr. Obamas CIA Director John Brennan and others, and not only top officials at the FBI, there is no chance that Mr. Comey would have been the only high official who was involved in it. And if Mr. Comey was involved, then he would have been acting in his own interest, and not only in his boss - and here is why: Mr. Comey would be expected to have been highly motivated to oppose Mr. Trump, because Mr. Trump publicly questioned whether NATO (the main international selling-arm for the United States of Americas "defense"-contractors) should continue to exist, and also because Mr. Comeys entire career had been in the service of the United States of Americas Military-Industrial Complex, which is the reason why Mr. Comeys main lifetime income has been the tens of millions of dollars he has received via the revolving door between his serving the federal Government and his serving firms such as Lockheed Martin.

For these people, restoring, and intensifying, and keeping up, the Cold War, is a very profitable business. It is called by some "the Military-Industrial Complex," and by others "the Deep State," but by any name it is simply agents of the billionaires who own and control United States-based international corporations, such as General Dynamics and Chevron. As a governmental official, making decisions that are in the long-term interests of those investors is the likeliest way to become wealthy.

Consequently, Mr. Comey would have been benefitting himself, and other high officials of the Obama Administration, by sabotaging Donald Trumps campaign, and by weakening Donald Trumps Presidency in the event that he would become elected. Plus, of course, Mr. Comey would have been benefitting Mr. Obama himself. Not only was Mr. Trump constantly condemning Mr. Obama, but Mr. Obama had appointed to lead the Democratic National Committee during the 2016 Presidential primaries, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who as early as 20 February 2007 had endorsed Hillary Clinton for President in the Democratic Party primaries, so that Shultz was one of the earliest supporters of Ms Clinton against even Mr. Obama himself. In other words, Mr. Obama had appointed Ms Shultz in order to increase the odds that Ms Clinton - not Mr. Sanders- would become the nominee in 2016 to continue on and protect his own Presidential legacy.

Furthermore, on 28 July 2016, Ms Schultz became forced to resign from her leadership of the DNC after WikiLeaks released emails indicating that Ms Schultz and other members of the DNC staff had exercised bias against Bernie Sanders and in favor of Hillary Clinton during the 2016 Democratic primaries - which favoritism had been the reason why Mr. Obama had appointed Ms Shultz to that post to begin with. She was just doing her job for the person who had chosen her to lead the DNC. Likewise for Mr. Comey. In other words: Mr. Comey was Mr. Obamas pick to protect Ms Clinton, and to oppose Mr. Trump (who had attacked both Ms Clinton and Mr. Obama).

Nowadays, Mr. Obama is telling the Partys billionaires that Elizabeth Warren would be good for them, but not that Mr. Sanders would - he never liked Mr. Sanders. He wants Ms Warren to get the voters who otherwise would go for Mr. Sanders, and he wants the Partys billionaires to help her achieve this (be the Partys allegedly "progressive" option), so that Mr. Sanders will not be able to become a ballot option in the general election to be held on 3 November 2020. He is telling them whom not to help win the Partys nomination.

In fact, on November 26th, Huffington Post headlined "Obama Said He Would Speak Up To Stop Bernie Sanders Nomination: Report" and indicated that though he will not actually say this in public (but only to the Partys billionaires), Mr. Obama is determined to do all he can to prevent Mr. Sanders from becoming the nominee.

In 2016, his choice was Hillary Clinton; but, today, it is anyone other than Mr. Sanders; and, so, in a sense, it remains what it was four years ago - anyone but Mr. Sanders.

Mr. Comeys virtually exclusive concern, at the present stage, would be to protect himself, so that he will not be imprisoned.

This means that he might testify against Mr. Obama.

At this stage, he is free of any personal obligation to Mr. Obama - Mr. Comey is now on his own, up against Donald Trump, who clearly is his enemy.

Some type of back-room plea-bargain is therefore virtually inevitable - and not only with Mr. Comey, but with other top Obama-appointees, ultimately.

Mr. Obama is thus clearly in the cross-hairs, from now on.

Congressional Democrats have opted to gun against Donald Trump (by impeaching him); and, so, Donald Trump now will be gunning against Mr. Obama - and against the entire Democratic Party (unless Mr. Sanders becomes its nominee, in which case, Mr. Sanders will already have defeated that Democratic Party, and its adherents will then have to choose between him versus Mr. Trump; and, so, too, will independent voters).

But, regardless of what happens, Mr. Obama now is in the cross-hairs.

That is not just political cross-hairs (such as an impeachment process); it is, above all, legal cross-hairs (an actual criminal investigation).

Whereas Donald Trump is up against a doomed effort by the Democratic Party to replace him by Vice President Mike Pence, Mr. Obama will be up against virtually inevitable criminal charges, by the incumbent Trump Administration.

Mr. Obama played hardball against Donald Trump, with "Russiagate," and then with "Ukrainegate"; Donald Trump will now play hardball against Mr. Obama, with whatever his Administration and the Republican Party manage to muster against Mr. Obama; and the stakes this time will be considerably bigger than just whether to replace Mr. Trump by Mr. Pence.

Whatever the outcome will be, it will be historic, and unprecedented.

(If Mr. Sanders becomes the nominee, it will be even more so; and, if he then wins on November 3rd, it will be a second United States of American Revolution; but, this time, a peaceful one - if that is even possible, in todays hyper-partisan, deeply split, USA.)

There is no way that the outcome from this will be status-quo.

Either it will be greatly increased further schism in the United States, or it will be a fundamental political realignment, more comparable to 1860 than to anything since.

The United States already has a higher percentage of its people in prison than does any other nation on this planet.

United States of Americans who choose a "status-quo" option will produce less stability, more violence, not more stability and a more peaceful nation in a less war-ravaged world.

The 2020 election-outcome for the United States will be a turning-point; there is no way that it will produce reform.

United States of Americans who vote for reform will be only increasing the likelihood of hell-on-Earth.

Reform is no longer an available option, given the United States of Americas realities. A far bigger leap than that will be required in order for this country to avoid falling into an utter abyss, which could be led by either Party, because both Parties have brought the nation to its present precipice, the dark and lightless chasm that it now faces, and which must now become leapt, in order to avoid a free-fall into oblivion.

The problem in the United States of America is not either Mr. Obama or Mr. Trump; it is neither merely the Democratic Party, nor merely the Republican Party; it is instead both; it is the Deep State.

That is the reality; and the process that got us here started on 26 July 1945 and secretly continued on the United States of American side even after the Soviet Union ended and Russia promptly ended its side of the Cold War.

The United States regimes ceaseless thrust, since 26 July 1945, to rule the entire world, will climax either in a Third World War, or in a United States revolution to overthrow and remove the Deep State and end its dictatorship-grip over the United States of America.

Both Parties have been controlled by that Deep State, and the final stage or climax of this grip is now drawing near.

The United States of America thus has been having a string of the worst Presidents - and worst Congresses - in United States history.

This is todays reality.

Unfortunately, a lot of United States of American voters think that this extremely destabilizing reality, this longstanding trend toward war, is okay, and ought to be continued, not ended now and replaced by a new direction for this country - the path toward world peace, which FDR had accurately envisioned but which was aborted on 26 July 1945.

No matter how many United States of Americans might vote for mere reform, they are wrong.

Sometimes, only a minority are right.

Being correct is not a majority or minority matter; it is a true or false matter.

A misinformed public can willingly participate in its own - or even the worlds - destruction.

That could happen. Democracy is a prerequisite to peace, but it can not exist if the public are being systematically misinformed. Lies and democracy do not mix together any more effectively than do oil and water.

Reprinted here from the "Strategic Culture Foundation" provides a platform for exclusive analysis, research and policy comment on Eurasian and global affairs. We are covering political, economic, social and security issues worldwide. Since 2005 our journal has published thousands of analytical briefs and commentaries with the unique perspective of independent contributors. SCF works to broaden and diversify expert discussion by focusing on hidden aspects of international politics and unconventional thinking. Benefiting from the expanding power of the Internet, we work to spread reliable information, critical thought and progressive ideas.