RUTHFULLY YOURS

As former FBI Director James Comey’s best friend, Robert Mueller, stocks his Seinfeld investigation-about-nothing with every Democratic lawyer and Hillary and/or Obama donor he can find, we are treated to the delicious irony of collusion with Russia being confirmed — and the colluder-in-chief being Ex-president Barack Hussein Obama.

Even Obama’s Democrat supporters are now acknowledging he knew about Russia’s hacking of the DNC and Podesta emails. They are acknowledging that he did nothing but are not acknowledging the reason why – that he thought Hillary Clinton was going to succeed him and he wanted to do nothing to offend the Russians to whom he had once famously promised more “flexibility.”As Fox News Politics reported:

President Trump criticized his predecessor for allegedly doing “nothing” about reports that Russia interfered in last year’s presidential campaign, in a recent interview.“I just heard today for the first time that (former President) Obama knew about Russia a long time before the election, and he did nothing about it,” Trump said in the interview set to air Sunday on “Fox & Friends Weekend.” “The CIA gave him information on Russia a long time before the election. … If he had the information, why didn’t he do something about it?”

Even Rep. Adam Schiff, ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, acknowledged that President Obama’s refusal to embarrass his Russian friends by doing nothing was a mistake:

President Obama’s decision to not act sooner on Russian election interference last year was “a very serious mistake,” says California Rep. Adam Schiff.

“I think the administration needed to call out Russia earlier, and needed to act to deter and punish Russia earlier and I think that was a very serious mistake,” Schiff said in an interview on CNN’s “State of the Union” on Sunday.

Schiff, the top ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said that Obama was hesitant to confront Russia over its active measures campaign for fear of being seen as helping Hillary Clinton and of fueling Donald Trump’s allegations that the election was being “rigged” against him.

That is the excuse made by those caught with their hands in the cookie jar. What happened to our democracy being at stake, the sanctity of our electoral process being violated? It was okay to jeopardize our national security through inaction as long as it was thought it might embarrass Hillary? But when Trump won, suddenly it became an issue for which he was responsible?

As noted, Obama’s collusion with the Russians began years earlier when he conspired to gut U.S. missile defense efforts in Europe. As Investor’s Business Daily noted over a year ago, President Obama had other plans and his betrayal of our allies was exquisitely ironic:

Yet within hours of Medvedev’s election as president in 2008, the Russian announced that Moscow would deploy SS-26 missiles in his country’s enclave of Kaliningrad situated between our NATO allies Poland and Lithuania.

He wanted the U.S. to abandon plans to deploy missile interceptors in Poland and warning radars in the Czech Republic designed to counter a future threat from Iran.

What did President Obama do? He caved in and notified the Poles in a midnight phone call on Sept. 17, 2009 — the 70th anniversary of the Soviet Union’s invasion of Poland — that we were pulling the plug on that system due to Russian objections.

Putin then watched in 2012 as Obama promised Medvedev at the Nuclear Security Summit in Seoul, South Korea, that after his re-election he would have more “flexibility” to weaken missile defense, which would help him fulfill his dream of U.S. disarmament.

Hillary Clinton herself was not above colluding with the Russians, as she did in the Uranium One Deal in which Clinton Foundation donors benefited from her enabling the transfer of 20 percent of our uranium supplies to Russia.  That deal was one reason Putin was probably rooting for Hillary, not Trump.

Instead of investigating Team Trump for collusion and its business dealings with Russia, how about a special counsel to investigate the Uranium one deal? How about a special counsel to investigate Hillary Clinton’s illegal email server and destruction of emails under subpoena?

Instead of President Trump obstructing justice by firing an FBI Director he was constitutionally empowered to fire, how about a special counsel to investigate Loretta Lynch’s collusion with the Clinton campaign and obstruction of justice, starting with her meeting with Bil Clinton on the tarmac?

We know from Comey’s testimony that Lynch advised him to call the Clinton investigation a “matter” as the Clinton campaign was calling it. We know that Lynch met on the tarmac with the husband of the subject of a federal investigation. We know that after that meeting, Comey usurped the power of the attorney general and announced that despite all the evidence he himself cited, Hilary would not be prosecuted.

Coincidence? One thinks not, particularly if reports about Loretta Lynch communicating with former DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman-Shultz that the Clinton investigation wouldn’t be allowed to go too far are accurate. As Fox News judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano is contending:

Judge Andrew Napolitano says former Attorney General Loretta Lynch could be facing jail time for obstruction of justice if emails to former DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Shultz reportedly about furthering DNC interests surface.

“It is alleged, this document has not seen the light of day yet, if it exists that there is one or several emails between Debbie Wasserman Shultz and Loretta Lynch concerning the behavior that Loretta Lynch will take to further the DNC interests while Mrs. Lynch was the Attorney General, that if it happened, would be misconduct in office,” he said.

In all of this there are only two real crimes that we are certain of: James Comey’s leak of his memo on his conversation in the Oval Office and the unmasking and leaking of the name of former National Security Adviser Mike Flynn. As law Professor Jonathan Turley notes:

… Comey demonstrated a pattern of unethical conduct beginning with his appointment as FBI director during the Obama administration. Specifically, Turley and other constitutional experts have noted that Comey’s acquiescence to former Attorney General Loretta Lynch’s order for him to refer to the FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s illegal handling of classified materials, via an unsecured email server, as a “matter” rather than a criminal investigation proved that he lacked the integrity necessary for someone who treasures the FBI’s supposed political independence…

But the “clearest violation” of federal law that Comey may have committed came after he was fired by the president. During his testimony the former FBI director admitted to leaking his memo to a friend and former colleague at Columbia Law School with, as Turley noted, “the full knowledge that the information would be given to the media.” That was extremely odd and inappropriate, given that Trump had asked Comey to investigate and stop various leakers within the government before Comey himself became a leaker.

Why was releasing the memo potentially a violation of the law? Turley says because it was most likely created using a government computer and because it addressed “a highly sensitive investigation on facts that [Comey] considered material to that investigation.” In fact, Comey communicated that information confidentially to top aides, and later noted that we sought to give it to the special counsel (which he helped facilitate with the leak) because he felt it was vital to the ongoing ‘Russia’ investigation.

Obstruction of justice? How about President Obama secreting away in his presidential library records regarding former National Security Adviser Susan Rice’s involvement in unmasking the names of Team Trump officials in intelligence reports — for five years! From Breitbart News:

The National Security Council cannot hand over records relating to former National Security Adviser Susan Rice’s surveillance of Americans, because they have been moved to the Obama presidential library and may be sealed for as many as five years, conservative watchdog Judicial Watch announced Monday.

The NSC informed Judicial Watch in a letter dated May 23 that materials related to Rice’s requests to know the identities of Americans swept up in surveillance of foreign targets, including any Trump campaign or transition officials, have been moved to the library.

The NSC’s Director of Access Management John Powers said in the letter:

Documents from the Obama administration have been transferred to the Barack Obama Presidential Library. You may send your request to the Obama Library. However, you should be aware that under the Presidential Records Act, Presidential records remain closed to the public for five years after an administration has left office.

Judicial Watch earlier this year filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for those documents, including of communications between Rice and any intelligence community member or agency regarding any Russian involvement in the 2016 elections, the hacking of Democratic National Committee computers, or any suspected communications between Russia and Trump officials.

Throw in Loretta Lynch and John Koskinen in the political targeting of the Tea Party and Eric Holder’s role in Operation Fast and Furious and withholding of records under executive privilege, and you have a rogues gallery of felons in the most corrupt administration. The very real possibility exists that James Comey, Susan Rice, Loretta Lynch Lois Lerner, John Koskinen, and even Hillary Clinton herself are guilty of federal crimes and belong in federal prison.

Of course, if Hillary Clinton had won, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. But Hillary lost and the Democrats made a foolish strategic error in pursuing charges of collusion and obstruction of justice based on sheer vengeance. There was no evidence of Trump collusion or obstruction  and now the tables are turned. The investigation of Loretta Lynch and other revelations could be the undoing of the Obama administration’s criminal enterprise, its trampling of our Constitution and our laws. Reopen the Hillary investigation and expand it to iuinclude the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One. Prosecute the lot of them – and lock them all up.

Daniel John Sobieski is a free lance writer whose pieces have appeared in Investor’s Business Daily, Human Events, Reason Magazine and the Chicago Sun-Times among other publications.