Is Barack Obama Immune to Prosecution for Russiagate?

Last week National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard declassified a bunch of Russiagate documents and referred former President Barack Obama and officials in his administration to the Department of Justice for potential criminal investigation. There are some legal “experts” who claim that Barack Obama has immunity, while others claim that he has immunity only for certain behaviors.

Experts in the first group point to Trump v. United States (July 2024). According to an article by the Blaze TV staff, the Supreme Court held in this case that “former presidents have absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within their ‘core constitutional powers’ and presumptive immunity for other official acts with the ‘outer perimeter’ of their responsibilities. However, they have no immunity for unofficial or private acts.” 

Mark Levin is of the second group of legal “experts” who believe that Obama does not have immunity in the Russiagate. This site gave the following information on Levin’s legal background. 

Mark Levin is a well-known name in the political arena, but his legal career is equally noteworthy. After graduating with a J.D. from Temple University Beasley School of Law, Levin embarked on a path to see him rise to significant positions within the U.S. government. His role as chief of staff to Attorney General Edwin Meese in the Reagan administration was a crucial period in his legal journey, allowing him to engage with complex legal and constitutional matters.

Levin’s involvement in legal cases during this time gave him substantial experience, and his contributions have been recognized in various conservative legal circles. He also worked with the Landmark Legal Foundation, a conservative legal organization focused on public interest law, further solidifying in his reputation as a constitutional expert.

Levin’s legal background has always been the foundation of his commentary, particularly on issues related to constitutional law, federalism, and individual liberties. His understanding of the law enables him to dissect and analyze policies and court decisions with precision. This legal expertise has also influenced his numerous best-selling books, which often revolve around constitutional principles and the preservation of liberty.

Moreover, Levin continues to use his legal knowledge to influence public policy through his media platform….

The Blaze TV staff interviewed Levin for their recent article. The following information comes from that article. 

Mark Levin recalls the time when President Obama ordered the killing of Al-Qaeda terrorist Anwar al-Awlaki, who was an American citizen.

“He can’t be charged for killing that person, nor should he have been,” says Levin, “but ladies and gentlemen, if the president of the United States … is embezzling funds or he’s running some kind of a drug racket while he’s president of the United States, those are not his official duties, and so after he leaves the presidency, he can be charged with that.”

Orchestrating Russiagate – a “treasonous conspiracy” as Director Gabbard called it – would most certainly fall into the latter category if Obama was found guilty.

If “Barack Obama, is involved in a scheme, the purpose of which is to interfere with a presidential election because he wants Hillary Clinton and the Democrats to win, and subsequent to that, if [he] is involved in a scheme to usurp the new president’s role or to sabotage the new president’s role, that’s not an official duty,” says Levin, “and certainly [he] can be charged with that.”

“There are criminal statutes for making false claims … and hoaxes. And it actually uses the word hoaxes,” he explains. “Donald Trump has called [Russiagate] a hoax from day one, and he’s exactly correct.”

In a recent press conference, President Trump, when asked about the Russiagate developments, was crystal clear: “This is, like, proof – irrefutable proof – that Obama was seditious, that Obama was trying to lead a coup, and it was with Hillary Clinton, with all these other people, but Obama headed it up … and it says so right in the papers.”

If the DOJ conducts its criminal investigation and concurs that the papers indeed incriminate Obama, the Constitution, specifically the separation of powers doctrine and Article II, as well as SCOTUS’ ruling on Trump v. United States, should not protect him from prosecution.

Further, considering all the lawfare waged on President Trump, “Why shouldn’t Barack Obama be criminally investigated, put under oath … in order to determine the extent to which he was involved in a silent coup?” Levin asks.

“So Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (who I like very much), are you prepared to subpoena Barack Obama?”

It is a sad day when one President of the United States (POTUS) presides over an administration that prosecutes a former President of the United States. It may even be called a danger to the Constitution. However, America has already been through several cases where a current administration prosecutes a former POTUS.

This site gives specific information about the various cases when the Joe Biden administration prosecuted Trump. 

·         Classified Documents Case

Special counsel Jack Smith led two federal probes against Trump. The first probe [June]resulted in Trump being indicted for mishandling top secret documents at Mar-a-Lago, his Florida estate. The indictment alleged that Trump enlisted aides and lawyers to help hid records.

The second indictment [July]charged Trump of trying to delete surveillance footage at Mar-a-Lago.

Trump faced 40 felony charges in the classified documents case with the most serious charge carrying a penalty of up to 20 years in prison.

·         Election Interference

Smith unveiled a second case in August when Trump was indicted in Washington on felony charges that he tried to overturn the 2020 election results before the violent mob at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.

This indictment carried four counts that included charges of conspiracy to defraud the United States government and conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding (congressional certification of Joe Biden’s victory).

In addition to the two federal cases, there were two state cases – New York (Stormy Daniels case) and Georgia (election case). In all, there were about 90 charges against Trump. After Trump was re-elected in 2024, Smith dismissed the two federal cases before inauguration day, and the two state cases were put on hold until after Trump leaves the Oval Office.

The bottom line is: If the Biden administration can prosecute Trump for so-called crimes, then the Trump administration should be allowed to investigate possible crimes of Barack Obama. 

Is Barack Obama a Traitor to the United States?

The liberty principle for this freedom Friday concerns national leaders with loyalty to our nation. Americans must understand that there are national leaders, such as president, vice presidents, senators, and representatives, who may not put the good of the nation above their own benefit.

I, along with many other people, have believed for a long time that former President Barack Obama is the power behind the political assaults on President Donald Trump, including impeachments and assassination attempts.

We have all been accused of believing in a secret conspiracy, but the latest information has come to light. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard released declassified documents last week that show that the so-called conspiracy may be true.

In his article published at The Daily Signal, Lorenzo Prieto stated that the declassified documents claim, “the existence of a secret conspiracy led by the Obama administration to undermine President Donald Trump with the Trump-Russian Collusion hoax, according to Fox News.” 

“The implications of this are frankly nothing short of historic,” Gabbard said on this week’s “Sunday Morning Futures.” “Over 100 documents that we released on Friday really detail and provide evidence of how this treasonous conspiracy was directed by President [Barack] Obama just weeks before he was due to leave office after President Trump had already gotten elected. This is not a Democrat or Republican issue. This is an issue that is so serious it should concern every single American because it has to do with the integrity of our democratic republic,” she continued.

The released documents show that before the 2016 election, Russia had shown no intent of meddling with the voting system. Yet, members of the intelligence community would later conspire to accuse President Vladimir Putin of directly interfering with the election to help Turmp win.

“Creating this piece of manufactured intelligence that claims that Russia had helped Donald Trump get elected contradicted every other assessment that had been made previously in the months leading up to the election that said exactly the opposite, that Russia had neither the intent nor the capability to try to ‘hack the United States election,’” Gabbard continued. “So the effect of what President Obama and his senior national security team did was subvert the will of the American people, undermining our democratic republic and enacting what would be essentially a years-long coup against President Trump, who was duly elected by the American people.”

The evidence also incriminates former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former CIA Director John Brennan, former FBI Director James Comey, and former National Security Advisor Susan Rice, as well as Obama. Gabbard stated the intent to file the records with the FBI and the Department of Justice with the hope DOJ would criminally prosecute those involved in the hoax.

Democrats and other liberal supporters are, of course, calling the Gabbard disclosures as “utter nonsense” (Rep. Jim Himes, D-Conn.). They claim that Gabbard is using the information to divert the attention of the public away from the Epstein Files case. They use the fact that no one – neither then-CIA Director Pompeo nor any of the six DNIs – in the first Trump administration said anything about it. However, new classified material was found.

In late May, FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino revealed that his team had uncovered what he called “bags” of classified material related to the Trump-Russia investigation that had been “hidden” during the Comey’ regime’s tenure at FBI.

How did Comey and other alleged co-conspirators hide information, not only from congressional oversight, but even Special Counsel John Durham, who was investigating the FBI and DOJ role in the Trump-Russia hoax? As The Daily Signal reported: “They labeled anything they didn’t want anyone to see as ‘Prohibited Access.’ This classification meant that the information wouldn’t show up in the bureau’s Sentinel case management system. Not just ‘inaccessible,’ The Federalist’s Margot Cleveland explains, but ‘invisible.’”

Durham would not even have known this information existed.

Even if all this information is true – and I have no reason to doubt its truthfulness other than “politics,” I will not fully believe it until I see people arrested, convicted, and sent to prison. If it is true, those involved in actions as well as the cover up of the actions are traitors to America – even worse than Benedict Arnold.

Gabbard promised that more information would be released because whistleblowers are “coming forward now after we released these documents.” The whistleblowers are people “who were working within the intelligence community at this time who were so disgusted by what happened.”