What’s New Dear Reader Asked? What Has Changed Since This Story First Broke? The Black Art Of Connecting The Dots
Same as it ever was…I can hear my buddy Scott stomping around in the background uttering some Texas chatter about getting to the point. What is the bottom-line here in this tale of woe and intrigue that has left a huge and deep brown stain on the reputation of our intelligence community (IC) and exposed the flaws in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) for all to see?
The Army bottom line up front (BLUF) is that a Special Counsel, Special Master or Special Prosecutor needs to be assigned to investigate the government malfeasance that took place in the 2016 election, including the events leading up to it, the events that took place after the election before Trump took office, the events that took place after he became president, as well as the lawfare that took place over the years since he left office.
I know-I Know, Special Counsels/Prosecutors/Masters are somewhat like a rash or itch that comes in the summer and never goes away. The problem I believe we are trying to address here is a decades old tradition of not holding people-leaders-agencies-accountable. How would a Special (whatever) do that?
I’m naïve enough to believe that if you structure it right it could have the impact or effect desired: to crisply document events that qualify for attention and then to package them into discrete somewhat bundles of “pain” for each case. With a sliding scale of recommended punishment.
Reminiscent of an occasion when I was assigned to do a formal investigation into the compromise of a classified document in my unit in Germany. I reported in to brief the Battalion Commander of my task from the Division Chief of Staff and before I could finish describing the guidance, the LTC interrupted me to tell me his thoughts: “I want to treat this like a nuclear detonation, there are some in the middle of the blast area who will be obliterated, others somewhat distant will be burned and scarred, perhaps lose body parts. Others farther out on the periphery will be hurt by the winds.”
Oh, My! Which struck me as very humorous as I reminded the good LTC that my charge was to do a damage assessment from the view of what was disclosed by who to whom and how and to lay out some facts-fact finding. I was a direct report to the Chief of Staff-and if the good LTC had any recommendations, suggestions, or “mandates” I suggested he take them up directly with COL Schmidt.
The wrongs that must be righted are too numerous (various and sundry) to detail here. But a good start includes the issues that defy common sense and logic and therefore must be documented to support decisions-charge, not charge, censure-rebuke, whatever.
Things like (deep breath) when did the Obama administration know about Hillary Clinton’s (HRC) plan to smear Trump-and what did they (Obama and his staff) do about it: why not just tell her to “knock it off”? Did the Obama administration-particularly the IC–ODNI, CIA, FBI, etc. not know about the DNC–HRC–Perkins Coie–GPS Fusion funded Russia Pee Pee Hoax (Steele Dossier?) Who made the decision to go after Paul Manafort after the FBI dropped the original investigation: what changed? What spying measures were approved on candidate Trump-president elect Trump and then President Trump via the FISA court? Who was colluding with the Five-Eyes to setup Trump campaign members, for instance Papadopoulos who was provided 10K dollars cash for an overseas appearance but was savvy enough not to bring those funds back into the US-where he was accosted by FBI agents-who spent an inordinate amount of time looking for something in his luggage? Why wasn’t anybody held accountable for the railroading of Michael Flynn, starting with the attempted “honey pot” smear that started overseas? When Comey told President Trump he was not under investigation-but he was-Comey’s FBI was going after a sitting President: what do they call that? Why wasn’t Sussman charged with treason for unauthorized access to White House Communications information when he approached the CIA in February 2017 to push the Alfa Bank hoax against a sitting president? Who approved the Mueller effort when it was very clear that there was no there, there as early as July 2016? Why do many of the key players-Schiff, Clapper, Brennan, Comey and other admin officials-who submitted statements certifying they had no firsthand knowledge of Russia-Putin-Trump collusion, still push that lie in the face of all the evidence that has come in that debunks it: what can be done about former Obama administration officials malfeasance, both in and out of office?
The list of treasonous events is voluminous-and that’s without even talking about the 6 Jan pipe bombers, the breach team that acted on the barriers (Ray Epps,) the FBI gallows, the shooter who climbed the scaffolding, fired a pistol and disappeared into the crowd? The decision by DC Capital police to tase, baton and lob stun grenades into a peaceful crowd at the capital who had no place to go when they were attacked? Who made the decision-after the threat of the pipe bombs was discovered and reported-to open the Capital and let those supposed maniacs into the building-just as the congress was being evacuated because of the bombs and the report of shots fired? Make that decision make sense (and explain the coincidence of the same technique happening in Michigan mere months earlier…)
What about going after the Biden administration lawfare efforts to undermine candidate Trump-the opposition party lead candidate-leading up to the 2024 election, in particular the collusion between the White House, DOJ, the FBI, NARA and the General Services Administration that resulted in the raiding of former President Trump’s residence and the stripping of the protections afforded to former president’s records?
It doesn’t hurt my head to have multiple efforts ongoing to piece or part these efforts up. The ultimate charge of conspiracy, treason, sedition and gross abrogation of the public trust is the end result to pursue. But we don’t want a never-ending investigation that times out-outlives-the Trump Presidency.
Along the way there should be a review and reform of the ODNI in consideration that it is a flawed implementation in comparison to that expressed by the 9-11 Commission and that needed by America because as a political solution-a compromise-to a practical problem-the solution does not answer the mail.
The BLUF is that the ODNI is too focused on politics: political intelligence.
You know who does Political Intelligence very well? The CIA and State INR: that is their world and bless them for it. You know who absolutely sucks at it? Most of the other IC elements, but the tippy top suckiest is the FBI. It is a no brainer, corrupting influence if you attempt to combine Law Enforcement Agency (LEA) evidentiary standards and requirements intended to withstand scrutiny in case law and the courts system, with somewhat loosey goosey intelligence ambiguity conventions that are graded in terms of questionable, doubtful, possible, probable, likely-where certainty is almost never a thing.
If we need certainty to flesh out shades of gray in the IC that means infiltrating, bribing, compromising or otherwise corrupting foreign politicians and leaders to obtain strategic objectives-intelligence requirements: just like they do to us. From that perspective the LEA vice IC methodological difference is more like Minority Report than some true crime forensic drama. With the IC most tactics, techniques and procedures (TTP) fall under the “gentleman don’t read other gentlemen’s mail” category.
The IC is interested in ferreting out, stopping/countering, changing, redirecting or influencing actions and activity that are counter to US strategic objectives. The FBI/LEA is looking to “get their man.” The one will likely never be known about unless it is necessary to achieve the strategic objective, while the other enters the public view routinely.
There is a reason that some of the stars on the Memorial Wall to the service of the fallen in CIA Headquarters, Langley Virginia are anonymous.
Like the Obama administration caught politely monitoring the communications (spying) on Germany’s beloved “Angela Merkel” that caused quite an international flare up for the “not like other politicians Wunder Kind.” Or Brennan “spying” on (the polite term among gentleman is monitoring or surveilling in the context of compliance assurance) the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Staff reviewing CIA files on Abu Ghraib in Senate spaces to ensure they were complying with the agreed upon rules: no printing, no exporting, no sharing, no exfiltrating classified files agreement (all of which they were doing/violating.)
What many call the awkward kabuki dance of mutual “looking the other way” which was undoubtedly discovered when one side or the other spilled the beans and created a Mexican standoff that was more like a liar’s poker episode.
It would not have been the first time that inside baseball “stuff” leaked-particularly by the SSCI-which had become infamous-behind the scenes-for being about as security conscious as a sieve. Recall the infamous SSCI Security Chief debacle: Wolfe had been on the job for nearly three decades…more on that later.
Or the FBI at the highest levels-senior leaders-lying to the FISA court to obtain illegal warrants to spy on the Trump Campaign personnel communications by leveraging classic two hop surveillance. When FISA warrants are obtained on a target to obtain collateral information on their associates-syncs and sources, links and nodes, associations and affiliations, trap lines of coordination-that is classic IC tradecraft or Hoover adopted Mafia TTPS: it is called spying/tradecraft for a reason.
But the FBI sucks at it-they left breadcrumbs-an IC op cannot afford to have breadcrumbs and dirty finger or shoe prints left behind and-in this case-it was all based on easily proven and embarrassing lies.
What is-in a nutshell-a good example of the above? The details associated with the Russia-Russia-Russia-Pee Pee hoax from beginning to end is perhaps the best exemplar: it was nearly a whole of government charade.
Another one is Sussman-
During the time period from about 2007 through the start of the HRC Steele Dossier shenanigans that resulted in the Russia, Russia, Russia Pee Pee Hoax and a president sanctioned interference in a federal election, there were a lot of largely political shenanigans that went relatively unreported. Were some author or national news entity focused on these events it might come to be known as the emergence and revenge of the deep state.
This period is germane to our story in consideration that the Russia Collusion Hoax was not a one off when viewed in this context, but rather somewhat like Clausewitz’ theory of “war as a continuation of politics by other means.” Only in this case the US experienced the somewhat silent hand of a choreography of events to achieve non-disclosed outcomes that shockingly lined up like some unnatural weather occurrence to achieve outcomes. And-I know-what the hell am I talking about?
I would start with the story of Congressman Curt Weldon and Senator Ted Stevens, but that automatically “slingshots” one back to the future circa the mid-1990s. I’ve already somewhat written about how this “cycle” of national, political manipulation and malfeasance in actuality had its roots-specifically referring to somewhat of the first major cycle of manipulation, corruption and influence operations-in the 1950s.
The topic or subject is “how long has the FBI and/or the CIA been involved in putting a greasy thumb on the scale of strategic and national policy/politics?” And at the behest of who?
Max Dribbler
17 July 2025
LSMBTG: Lamestream media echo chamber (LMEC-L) social media (SM) big tech tyrants (BT) and government (G)
If you enjoyed this article, then please REPOST or SHARE with others; encourage them to follow AFNN
Truth Social: https://truthsocial.com/@AFNN_USA
Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/afnnusa
Telegram: https://t.me/joinchat/2_-GAzcXmIRjODNh
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AfnnUsa
GETTR: https://gettr.com/user/AFNN_USA
Parler: https://parler.com/AFNNUSA
CloutHub: @AFNN_USA
2 thoughts on “Obama And His Administration Qualify For Charges Of Treason: Does Our Political Class Have The Courage To Pursue Such An Action In The Face Of A Preponderance Of Evidence? Part 2 or Part 17”