Obama's Fbi: Lawbreakers Or Law Enforcers?

There have been several allegations that the FBI under President Obama broke the law. These include claims of malfeasance and political corruption, with suggestions that the FBI fixed the investigation of Hillary Clinton to clear her and her associates, and then launched an investigation of Donald Trump for partisan political reasons. There are also allegations that the Obama administration broke the law by conducting clandestine surveillance of the 2016 Trump presidential campaign.

Did Obama's FBI illegally investigate Trump?

The claim that Obama's FBI illegally investigated Trump is a complex and highly contested issue. Some sources allege that the FBI, under the leadership of then-acting director Andrew McCabe, initiated an investigation into Trump's alleged ties to Russia, suspecting him of "wittingly or unwittingly" acting as a Russian agent. This investigation, known as "Crossfire Hurricane," began in July 2016 and focused on members of Trump's orbit. A subsequent probe, launched in May 2017, specifically targeted Trump himself and was undertaken after he fired James B. Comey, the former FBI director.

However, critics argue that the FBI's investigation lacked a legitimate basis and was politically motivated. They claim that the FBI relied on fabricated evidence, such as the Steele dossier funded by Hillary Clinton, and ignored exculpatory evidence. Additionally, it is alleged that the FBI tried to influence the outcome of the 2016 election by protecting Hillary Clinton from indictment in the email scandal, which involved her use of a private email server for classified information. Barack Obama was also implicated in this scandal, as he had communicated with Hillary using her non-state department email.

Furthermore, there are accusations that the Obama administration wiretapped Trump and buried evidence of spying. Obama is also accused of supporting unconditional, warrantless wiretapping and covering up Trump's spying evidence.

On the other hand, supporters of the investigation argue that the FBI had an "articulable factual basis" to suspect Trump of posing a threat to national security. They point to Trump's firing of Comey as a legitimate reason to investigate potential obstruction of justice.

In conclusion, while there are allegations and evidence suggesting political motivations and irregularities in the FBI's investigation of Trump, determining whether Obama's FBI illegally investigated him is a complex legal matter that involves interpreting evidence and applying relevant laws. The full truth may never be known, and it remains a highly contentious issue in American politics.

Did Obama's FBI fix the investigation of Hillary Clinton?

While there is no direct evidence that Obama's FBI fixed the investigation of Hillary Clinton, there is evidence that suggests Obama influenced the investigation.

In 2015, it was revealed that Obama had used a pseudonym in email communications with Clinton, indicating that he was aware of her private server and that it was not secured. Obama's administration also intervened to delay several Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests until after Election Day to shield Clinton from further scrutiny.

In addition, Obama repeatedly defended Clinton when questioned about her private server, blaming the controversy on politics. However, while the FBI was conducting an investigation, Obama should have refrained from making his own judgments on the case.

The consensus among critics is that Obama's support and praise for Clinton throughout the primaries favored her and made it virtually impossible for her to be held accountable. This, combined with the fact that Clinton's staff were granted immunity and a team of lawyers guided her throughout the investigation, suggests that the investigation may have been influenced by external factors.

Furthermore, it is worth noting that no presidential candidate has ever won their party's nomination while under an FBI investigation, yet Clinton received the Democratic nomination despite the ongoing inquiry. This further supports the notion that Obama's FBI may have handled the investigation with a degree of leniency towards Clinton.

Did Obama's FBI commit felonies?

There are several allegations that the FBI under President Obama committed felonies. These include the claim that the FBI and the Department of Justice (DOJ) fixed the investigation of Hillary Clinton, clearing her of any wrongdoing in the email scandal, and then launched an investigation of Donald Trump for partisan political reasons.

The email scandal involved Hillary Clinton using an unapproved/unsecured server and devices to communicate, including a private email account. Classified information was sent through this email, including when Clinton was abroad. It was later discovered that President Obama was also communicating with Clinton using her non-state department email, under an alias.

The allegations suggest that the FBI and DOJ did not want Clinton indicted and, therefore, took no action against her. This was despite the fact that Obama, as a sitting president, indicated on TV that Clinton did not intend to harm national security, even though intent is not an element of the crime she committed.

The congressional investigations into these allegations centre on claims of political bias, unequal application of the law, and potential felonies by senior officials, including leaking classified documents, obstructing justice, and violating Fourth Amendment guarantees.

While these allegations have not been proven, if true, they would represent a deep corruption scandal, with the FBI subverting the law to protect a preferred presidential candidate and damage the opposition.

Did Obama's FBI obstruct justice?

There are several instances that suggest that Obama's FBI obstructed justice.

Firstly, in the George Zimmerman prosecution, Obama made a statement about the shooting of Trayvon Martin, saying, "I think every parent in America should be able to understand why it is absolutely imperative that we investigate every aspect of this... If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon." The Department of Justice then deployed its Community Relations Service to Sanford, Florida, facilitating marches, demonstrations, and rallies. The DOJ also set up a tip line for people to call in with stories of Zimmerman's racism, and Obama later suggested that Zimmerman was a racist. This statement and the subsequent actions of the DOJ could be interpreted as an attempt to influence the outcome of the investigation.

Secondly, in the case of the New Black Panthers, the Obama administration stopped any investigation into the group's actions when they wielded billy clubs outside a voting place in Philadelphia. J. Christian Adams, a Justice Department lawyer at the time, wrote that he believed the dismissal of the case was "motivated by a lawless hostility toward equal enforcement of the law." This suggests that the Obama administration may have obstructed justice by preventing an investigation into potential voter intimidation by the New Black Panthers.

Thirdly, in June 2009, Obama fired AmeriCorps Inspector General Gerald Walpin, who had been appointed by President Bush in 2007. Walpin had been investigating allegations that Sacramento Mayor and former NBA star Kevin Johnson had misused federal grant money for AmeriCorps. Walpin recommended criminal charges and refused to lift a suspension on Johnson, leading to his firing by the Obama administration. This firing violated federal law, and an investigation by Congress was met with stonewalling and the withholding of documents by the Obama White House.

Additionally, Obama's interference in Navy court-martials and the Michael Brown case has also been cited as potential obstruction of justice. Obama's statements and deployment of federal resources in these cases could have influenced the outcome of the investigations.

Furthermore, the Obama administration's handling of the investigation into the Iran ransom payments, the Hillary Clinton email scandal, and the Benghazi attack has also been criticized. In the case of the Iran ransom payments, Attorney General Loretta Lynch refused to answer questions from Congress, and the Obama administration hid key documents. Regarding the Hillary Clinton email scandal, thousands of emails were deleted, and hard drives and phones were destroyed, obstructing the investigation. In the Benghazi case, a Senate Intelligence Committee report stated that the Obama administration's failure to provide access to necessary documents and witnesses hindered the investigation.

Finally, the Obama-Biden State Department, under John Kerry, has been accused of obstructing FBI arrest operations against individuals linked to Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs. The State Department forced the FBI to stand down on arrests in eight cases due to "on-going politics," which endangered national security and hampered the FBI's law enforcement efforts.

These instances suggest that Obama's FBI may have obstructed justice on multiple occasions. However, it is important to note that the interpretation of these events may vary, and the determination of whether obstruction of justice occurred would depend on a legal review of the specific facts and circumstances of each case.

Did Obama's FBI violate the Fourth Amendment?

The Fourth Amendment protects citizens against "unreasonable searches and seizures".

In 2015, it was revealed that President Barack Obama had been communicating with Hillary Clinton using her non-state department email. Obama was using an email and name that masked his identity. This was illegal, as classified information was being sent through the email, server, and devices—including when Clinton was abroad.

In April 2016, Obama made clear that he did not want Clinton indicted. At the time of this statement, many witnesses had yet to be interviewed, including Clinton. Intent is not an element of the crime she committed.

In addition, Obama has been accused of supporting unconditional, warrantless wiretapping, which would also violate the Fourth Amendment.

In a separate incident, the FBI was found to have violated the Fourth Amendment in its handling of confidential human sources and intelligence collection in the lead-up to the January 6, 2021, Electoral Certification. The FBI did not canvass field offices for intelligence from CHSs prior to January 6, which could have helped the FBI and law enforcement with their preparations.

However, it is important to note that the FBI's statements to Congress about not canvassing field offices were not found to be intentionally inaccurate but rather the result of confusion and lack of coordinated communication.

Frequently asked questions