By Renee Parsons
With the mid term elections less than sixty days away, the Democrats made a fatal faux pas as pretend President Joe Biden resorted to a dark and dismal Soul of the Nation vernacular. That over reach revealed the Dems true totalitarian nature as millions of Americans were threatened and maligned – probably not the best political strategy to win since Democrats were already deep in the electoral weeds.
Given that a majority of Americans believe Biden’s speech to have been a ‘dangerous escalation’ that was ‘designed to incite conflict’ among Americans, it is not surprising that the Democrats have fallen back on former President Barack Obama as a ‘feel-good’ alternative to bail them out of their self-imposed political suicide as if today’s voter still believes Obama’s narcissistic double-talk.
Obama’s efforts will benefit the Democratic House and Senate campaign committees with a focus on Gubernatorial, Senate and House contests in battleground states such as Georgia, Pennsylvania and Michigan.
While Democrats tyrannical behavior becomes the ‘norm’ with an escalation of FBI raids, the arrest of top Trump aides Bannon and Navarro, initiating widespread censorship across all forms of social media and their obvious contempt for the American public, still referred to as the ‘deplorables,” the party of Jefferson/Jackson has descended into a frantic pit of utter panic and fear as many credible America First candidates have scored a multitude of impressive primary victories across the country.
Not only will Obama be forced to defend Biden’s piss-poor record on a wide variety of failed policies including immigration, inflation, energy, the economy and Ukraine, revisiting the role of Mr. Change-You-Can-Believe-In about the creation of Operation Crossfire Hurricane may be an especially fruitful endeavor.
On July 5, 2016, FBI Director announced that there would be no prosecution of Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton for mishandling of classified emails as Obama’s Secretary of State. Do we dare assume that Comey made this decision without providing President Obama without a heads-up or that he disagreed with Comey’s decision?
Even before the 2016 election and several months before Obama left office in January 2017, OCH began on July 31, 2016 as an FBI-generated counter intelligence surveillance to determine if a low-level Trump volunteer was colluding with the Russians to influence the outcome of the upcoming Presidential election.
A redacted July 31, 2016 memo discovered by Judicial Watch was written by the FBI’s Peter Strzok regarding OCH’s start provides an early clue with reference to an “anonymous release of information during the campaign that would be damaging to Mrs. Clinton (and President Obama).” It would be more than enlightening to know exactly what ‘damaging information” Strzok was referring to regarding both HRC and especially Obama.
Further, in a Sept. 2, 2016 text exchange, FBI’s Lisa Page writes that she was preparing a talking points memo because “potus wants to know everything we’re doing.” Obviously, even prior to September, Obama must have been fully aware of the OCH and its laser focus on the Trump Administration.
By November 9th, Trump’s unexpected win was what the NY Times called a “stunning repudiation” of the country’s political establishment – and from there, all hell broke loose.
The Steele Dossier was leaked by BuzzFeed News in January, 2017 which proved to be a DNC – Hillary Clinton generated and paid for piece of fiction. although the corporate media, knowing it was uncorroborated and false, created their usual hysteria and blame-game frenzy to negatively finagle public opinion.
The political chaos began immediately after inauguration with the take-down of former General Michael Flynn as Trump’s National Security Advisor which was later proved to be a set up by two FBI agents. With Flynn as Trump’s NSA, he would be the first Trumper to identify the trail of OCH for what it was. He had to GO.
Forward to early January, just prior to Trump’s inauguration, Obama’s National Security Advisor Susan Rice wrote a truncated, partially classified, redacted ambiguous memo documenting a curious January 5th Oval Office meeting which raises more questions than it answers. The meeting was attended by Rice, Comey, Sally Yates and Vice President Joe Biden about the future of Michael Flynn, we now know, to be the agenda item of interest.
In what appears to be a lengthy DOJ redacted deposition with Sally Yates dated September 7, 2017, Yates recalls the January 5th White House meeting to discuss the FBI’s Flynn ‘probe.” Also included are Yates’ redacted notes regarding the FBI’s internal response at which time Comey assures Yates that two agents had been sent to interview Flynn. It was that interview which the FBI used to sand bag Flynn.
In addition, Sidney Powell, Flynn’s attorney, offers her insights into the true context of Rice’s memo vis a vis current events at the time. On February 8, 2018 Sen. Charles Grassley followed up requesting Rice to provide clarification on the January 5th meeting.
On January 6th, the day after the Oval Office meeting, Comey conducted a briefing with president-elect Trump at Trump Towers ostensibly to provide him with the salacious details of the Dossier which Comey knew to be unverified. FBI General Counsel James Baker feared that Comey would “blackmail” Trump during that meeting and former US Attorney Joe DiGenova remains convinced that Obama colluded with Comey’s to exactly do that.
In early 2020, Flynn was exonerated when the DOJ dropped all the charges. Obama responded in his typically haughty manner that the “rule of law is at risk” and that “there is no precedent that anybody can find for someone who has been charged with perjury just getting off scot-free.” Once touted as a legal scholar, Obama was incorrect. Flynn was not charged with perjury but rather compelled into admitting a “false statement to the FBI.’
To sum up, full clarity is still necessary regarding many elements of President Obama’s participation in the OCH episode which potentially represents a very grave threat to our country’s stability and the rule of law. There are still too many loose ends and unresolved questions that only a thorough, authoritative Congressional oversight investigation with subpoena powers can legitimately address. More recently, there has been a shocking lack of judicial/legal accountability conducted by brazenly partisan judges in cavalierly denying a Motion for Dismissal as if any judge is a law unto itself.
It is essential that a newly elected Congress in January be willing to step up, take charge and pursue legal satisfaction to implement the rule of law to the FBI, the DOJ and every other Federal department where the embedded administrative staff has assumed a level of hegemony they are not entitled to.
Renee Parsons served on the once prestigious ACLU’s Florida State Board of Directors and as president of the ACLU Treasure Coast Chapter. She has been an elected public official in Colorado, staff in the Office of the Colorado State Public Defender, an environmental lobbyist for Friends of the Earth and a staff member of the US House of Representatives in Washington DC. She can be found at reneedove3@yahoo.com.