Reflections From a Murky Pond

We, the People are finally getting a fairly large amount of credible and legally actionable evidence that Obama deliberately misused America’s intelligence community to thwart President Trump’s first election and to undermine him after he was elected. There are numerous calls for him and many others, including former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, former CIA Director John Brennan, former FBI Director James Comey, and former national security adviser Susan Rice, to be prosecuted for Treason and/or Sedition. But can former federal officials be prosecuted in the Russia-Trump collusion hoax? That is the question that arises from the recent actions of Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard.  

Dir. Gabbard has released declassified documents over what she describes as a “treasonous conspiracy” that was “directed by then President Obama” to provide “manufactured intelligence” that “Russia had helped Donald Trump get elected.” This was despite contradictory intelligence analyses that said the exact opposite: that “Russia had neither the intent nor the capability to try to ‘hack the United States election.’” 

What federal criminal statutes might cover what is alleged to have occurred? What could they legitimately under the law be charged with- and convicted of, without torturing the statute in a manner like Alvin Bragg did?

I can understand why Gabbard described it as a “treasonous conspiracy,” but the federal treason statute (18 U.S.C. § 2381) isn’t legitimately applicable. The misuse, even Obama’s gross misuse, of federal power to target a political opponent is heinous, but Treason, as a crime, can only be applied to someone who “levies war against” the country or “adheres to [its] enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere.” 

Similarly, Sedition statute (18 U.S.C. § 2384) can only properly be levied against “two or more persons” who “conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States … or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States.” As there was no force involved in what happened, the standard for Sedition charges hasn’t been met. 

So, the two most serious, most bandied about, and most emotionally satisfying charges, Treason and Sedition, have to be left off the table… if we, as a nation, are going to even pretend to respect the sanctity of the law. But, Obama and his cabal can still be charged in federal court.

These federal charges are quite applicable based on the evidence we have and prosecutorial precedent. Those charges are: Conspiracy to Defraud the United States(18 U.S.C. § 371); 18 U.S.C. § 1512(k) (Conspiracy to Obstruct an Official Proceeding); Obstruction of and Attempt to Obstruct an Official Proceeding (18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2)); Conspiracy Against Rights (18 U.S.C. § 241). 

And, in a case of exquisitely delicious irony, these are the same charges that Biden’s hitman, Jack Smith filed against President Trump. 😆 👿

Oh yeah! And there’s this problem with the Treason charge as well. 😉

Tags: America | Crime | Deep State | Democrats | Federal Law | Law | Obama | Politics | Russian Collusion | Sedition | Treason

This entry was posted on Tuesday, August 5th, 2025 at 6:15 am and is filed under Politics. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

Recently, the US Attorney General, Jeff Session declared that he and his DoJ would reverse course on the doctrine set forth under Obama and Holder and restart enforcement of federal drug laws as they pertain to marijuana. This, frankly, leaves me feeling ambivalent since one could say that I’m getting conflicting smoke signals… and neither of them have anything directly to do with either medical or recreational use of cannabis.

To me this is an example of federal overreach resulting in the Constitution being in conflict with itself at this time. I find that the entirety of the federal drug laws, except those that cover importation, exportation, or interstate trafficking, to be violations of the 10th Amendment of the US Constitution. However, the Take Care Clause (Section 3, Clause 5) of Article II of the Constitution requires that the Executive shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed. In other words, the Constitution requires the Executive branch to enforce the laws set forth by the Legislative branch unless and until the Judicial branch declares said laws to be null and void.

That conflict is what’s making me ambivalent about this whole thing, not my personal opinions of either medical or recreational use of marijuana.

Tags: 10th Amendment | America | Crime | DOJ | Drug Laws | Drugs | Federal Law | Federalism | Law | Marijuana | Politics | Separation of Powers | Sessions | States Rights | The Constitution | Weed

This entry was posted on Wednesday, January 10th, 2018 at 12:32 pm and is filed under Politics. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.