The Russian collusion hoax is back in the spotlight, and President Donald Trump is naturally interested in seeing those responsible for the hoax held accountable. And at the top of the list is Barack Obama, whom Trump noted was the ringleader of the hoax, along with Hillary Clinton, James Comey, James Clapper, and others. According to Trump, their actions were treason. And while he may have a point, can Obama face trial for treason?
“They tried to rig the election and they got caught, and there should be very severe consequences for that,” Trump insisted.
The evidence, of course, is the bombshell report from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, which dropped last week and exposed how Obama and his inner circle — think James Clapper, John Brennan, and Susan Rice — cooked up a scheme to frame Trump for Russian collusion. Gabbard’s report alleges they “manipulated and withheld” key intelligence to paint Trump’s victory as a Kremlin plot, despite knowing Russia didn’t alter vote counts. “The information we are releasing today clearly shows there was a treasonous conspiracy in 2016 committed by officials at the highest level of our government,” Gabbard said, calling for criminal prosecutions.
This isn’t just hot air. Gabbard’s report includes over 100 documents that detail how Obama’s team pushed the discredited Steele dossier and ignored pre-election intelligence that Russia wasn’t trying to rig the vote. A Dec. 7, 2016, memo to Clapper explicitly stated, “Foreign adversaries did not use cyberattacks on election infrastructure to alter the US Presidential election outcome.” Days later, Obama’s national security team met to spin a different narrative, leaking to the Washington Post that Russia used “cyber means” to sway the election. That’s cute: fabricating a crisis to delegitimize a duly elected president. Really?
Related: Trump Drops an Epic Truth Bomb About Obama and Russiagate
Contrary to the claims of Democrats who are dismissing Gabbard’s evidence, the documents revealed a coordinated effort to subvert Trump’s mandate. Democrats predictably cite a Senate Intelligence Committee report from Trump’s first term, which claimed Russia waged an “aggressive effort” to influence voters. But that report never proved vote tampering—just vague “counterintelligence threats.” The left still wants you to believe Russia flipped the election, but the facts don’t add up — no vote changes, no hacked machines — just a narrative to cripple Trump’s presidency.
So can Obama face treason charges?
The Constitution is clear: “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.”
Constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley explained in 2017, when Democrats were agitating to charge Trump with treason:
Article III of the Constitution defines this crime as consisting “only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.” With neither a declaration of war nor an act of levying of war, such a charge is both absurd and dangerous. Many countries like China routinely charge communications with foreign organizations to be treason.
Indeed, Turkey’s Recep Tayyip President Erdogan this week pledged to “chop off the heads” of some of the thousands of Turks arrested as supporting the failed coup last year, including political opponents. That is precisely why the Framers, and later courts, have narrowly defined this crime and why relatively few treason cases have been brought and even fewer have succeeded in this country.
So, manipulating intelligence to undermine a president doesn’t neatly fit that definition; it’s not wartime betrayal. However, it’s still a grotesque abuse of power. Gabbard’s referral to the Justice Department might push for charges like conspiracy or obstruction, especially since CIA Director John Ratcliffe’s review already flagged “multiple procedural anomalies” in the 2016 intelligence assessment.
For example, the Steele dossier, a cornerstone of the Russia hoax, was known to be unreliable yet was forced into the intelligence community’s report by Obama’s stooge, Brennan. This wasn’t a mistake; it was a calculated move to smear Trump and undermine his presidency. The mainstream media, of course, lapped it up, peddling the “Russia collusion” myth while ignoring Obama’s role. And now, with Trump back in power, accountability is on the way.
It looks like the walls are closing in on Obama and his lackeys. Gabbard’s documents are now with the DOJ, and Trump’s not backing down. The evidence points to a conspiracy that demands accountability. No one — not even a former president — should be above the law.
