Dems and Obama have been exposed. Mounting evidence suggests the Obama administration engaged in serious corruption with ObamaGate. Democrats and their media allies are going spend the next few months gaslighting the public by focusing on the most feverish accusations against President Barack Obama. But fact is, we already have more compelling evidence that the Obama administration engaged in misconduct than we ever did for opening the “collusion” investigation.
It isn’t conspiracy-mongering to note that the investigation into President Trump was predicated on an opposition-research document filled with fabulism and, most likely, Russian disinformation. We know the Department of Justice withheld contradictory evidence when it began spying on those in Trump’s orbit.
We have proof that many of the relevant warrant applications were based on “fabricated” evidence or riddled with errors. We know that members of the Obama administration, who had no genuine role in counterintelligence operations, repeatedly unmasked Trump’s allies. And we now know that, despite a dearth of evidence, the FBI railroaded Michael Flynn.
The larger context only makes these facts more damning. By 2016, the Obama administration’s intelligence community had normalized domestic spying. Obama’s director of national intelligence, James Clapper, famously lied about snooping on American citizens to Congress. His CIA director, John Brennan, oversaw an agency that felt comfortable spying on the Senate, with at least five of his underlings breaking into congressional computer files.
His attorney general, Eric Holder, invoked the Espionage Act to spy on a Fox News journalist, shopping his case to three judges until he found one who let him name the reporter as a co-conspirator. The Obama administration also spied on Associated Press reporters, which the news organization called a “massive and unprecedented intrusion.”
Obama officials were caught monitoring the conversations of Iran-deal opponents in Congress. What makes anyone believe these people wouldn’t create a pretext to spy on the opposition party? If anyone does, they shouldn’t, because, on top of everything else, we know that Barack Obama was keenly interested in the Russian-collusion investigation’s progress.
In her very last hour in office, National Security Adviser Susan Rice wrote a self-preserving e-mail to herself, noting that she’d attended a meeting with the president, Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates, FBI Director James Comey and Vice President Joe Biden in which Obama stressed that everything in the investigation should proceed “by the book.”
Did high-ranking Obama administration officials not always conduct such investigations “by the book”? It is curious that they would need to be specifically instructed to do so. It is also curious that the outgoing national security adviser would need to mention this meeting — 15 minutes after Trump had been sworn in.