The 2 Reasons Obama Criminalized Intel Agencies
Amidst the saturnalia which ensued over Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe being unable to determine just how often President Donald Trump beats his wife, it was gratifying to hear more sober interpretations in Sunday’s announcement by Attorney General William Barr.
First, it would probably be appropriate to clarify that there is no evidence, nor has there ever been evidence presented that the president beats his wife. In this case, there haven’t even been accusations thereof, as far as I know – but my satirical framing of the issue is quite germane to the topic of baseless accusations and irrelevant conclusions.
On Monday, listeners to both Rush Limbaugh’s and Sean Hannity’s radio shows were treated to a bit of the unexpected in their opening monologues, juxtaposed against the jubilation attendant to the Mueller probe being unable to tie the Trump campaign to collusion with Russia in order to rig the 2016 presidential election. Both hosts offered admonitions (for their listeners not to exult in the non-findings of the probe) which bordered on chastisement.
In Limbaugh’s case, it was a directive for his listeners not to be too happy about the findings since we knew from the outset that there was no such collusion. As Limbaugh sees it, this development only opens the door for Democrats to pursue any and all other measures they see as having the potential to bring Trump down. Barr’s announcement wasn’t hours old before leftist operatives and the press (a bit of redundancy there) began the “just because Mueller couldn’t find anything, doesn’t mean there’s nothing there” mantra. Mr. Hannity’s monologue was similar, and even more emotive.
One quote from Mr. Limbaugh, which he refined for Tuesday’s show, encapsulated the nature of the Mueller probe more succinctly and accurately than anything I’ve heard, and clarifies precisely why festivities are not in order.
“[T]he counterintelligence apparatus of the United States of America, the entire counterintelligence apparatus – this would be the FBI counterintel, the CIA, the NSA, the vaunted so-called intelligence agencies – were all repositioned and retooled for one express purpose, and that was to reverse the election results of 2016.” (Rush Limbaugh, March 26, 2019)
Limbaugh also expanded on the fact that President Trump has acknowledged that the repositioning of these resources for this purpose “traces back to the Obama administration.” I accept this proposal, and that these designs likely had two principal purposes:
1. To compromise if not neutralize Trump as a going political concern, and/or
2. To serve as misdirection from the array of high crimes committed by elements of the Obama administration.
Considered as objectively as someone in my position can consider it, a cursory look at any dozen or so untoward actions of the Obama administration by an incoming administration with no dog in the fight would have suggested that these things merited a real close look, probably by a special prosecutor. In an environment in which we had a press unfettered by ingrained leftist ideology and objectives, such a body would have practically forced the new administration to look into such things as Benghazi, the Fast and Furious gun scandal, Uranium One, John Brennan and the CIA’s involvement in the rise of ISIS, the widespread misuse of government surveillance and, of course, Hillary Clinton’s illegal email server.
What Mr. Limbaugh’s comment regarding our counterintelligence apparatus essentially means is that government agencies were weaponized – or more accurately, criminalized – in order to carry out a criminal act, this being the reversal of the 2016 election.
Part of what has irked Limbaugh, Hannity and many others throughout this debacle is the personal carnage that took place in the wake of the special counsel “investigation.”
Six Trump associates were charged in the Mueller probe, including former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos, former White House National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, former Trump campaign aide Rick Gates, former Trump personal attorney Michael Cohen and former Trump adviser Roger Stone. Other parties were charged and similarly intimidated, threatened and otherwise squeezed by Mueller’s tainted team, including author Jerome Corsi, who refused to plead guilty to lying to investigators about wanting to contact WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange during the 2016 election.
Many of these people were essentially ruined; in the case of Corsi, this hits very close to home, since he is a colleague. Some of these folks made deals with the devil in the face of imprisonment and threats against their families simply because they did not have the financial resources to fight the charges. Who is going to effect restitution for these men?
I can’t help but think of the obscenity represented by abject gangsters being empowered to this degree within our government, the cavalier manner in which they believe they can destroy people’s lives in the pursuit of their aims, and how things might have transpired had I been unlucky enough to have asked the wrong questions of the wrong people in 2016 and suddenly found Mueller’s minions at my door, sigmoidoscopes at the ready.
These are criminal activities to be sure, and the only reason they are not being acknowledged as such is because the foxes are running the henhouse. As Limbaugh and Hannity pointed out all week, the press is quite complicit in this criminality, and should be held similarly accountable.
If nothing else, the Mueller probe has demonstrated that we are being governed by a criminal cabal that not only feels at liberty to unlawfully target a sitting president, but to pursue any charges it likes against any citizen that will further this objective.
Is this an America we’re willing to put up with?
I’ll leave the reader to determine what the appropriate course of action against such a body might be. I’m fairly certain that mine wouldn’t get past my editor.
Article posted with permission from Erik Rush