Judge Andrew Napolitano says that as events keep unfolding more and more of the involvement of Hussein Obama in orchestrating the Russia hoax and other criminal plots is…
Stuart Varney asks Judge Andrew Napolitano if Susan Rice is “covering the ‘president’s’ tracks” by writing the CYA memo fifteen minutes after the inauguration of President Trump started at 12 noon on January 20th, 2017.
Napolitano replies, “Sounds like it.” He names the participants in the meeting as Hussein Obama, Joe Biden, James Comey, Acting AG Sally Yates, and Susan Rice. The issue discussed is the Russia, Russia, Russia.
Napolitano asks the obvious question, “Why would she write this thing to herself sixteen days after it occurred, why would she put the phrase ‘by the books’ in quotation marks, what would be the purpose of this unless something came to her or the ‘president’s’ attention between January 5, when the conversation occurred, and January 20th, when she wrote this email to herself, that caused her to either want to varnish the meeting, acknowledge its existence but put a good gloss on it?” [[VIDEO BELOW]]
Napolitano notes that Obama told Chris Wallace and others that he never discussed any of this with law enforcement or intelligence, particularly with the FBI. “The ‘president’ of the United States doesn’t get involved in micro-managing these investigations.” He notes that that claim is defied by the text messages of Strzok and Page, “‘potus wants to know all about this,’ the ‘this’ is not Hillary Clinton, the ‘this’ is the FBI investigation of the Trump campaign.”
“We’re beginning to see more and more inappropriate behavior,” says Napolitano,” and orchestration, if you will, of this, by Barack Obama.”
Varney asks him about another issue, the partisan, political comments made by Ruth Bader Ginsburg at an event at Columbia University. Ginsburg said, “I think it was difficult for Hillary Clinton to get by the macho atmosphere prevailing during that campaign and she was criticized in a way, I think, no man would have been criticized.”
Varney asks, “Why is a Supreme Court Justice weighing in on a political election?” Napolitano can’t explain it but notes that previous time she made similar comments during the campaign, stating that she’d move out of the country if Donald Trump got elected, she was “privately admonished by two of her female colleagues on the Court, saying you’re demeaning the court by doing this.”
He adds, “I suggest to you she’s going to be admonished again. This is reprehensible. It’s one thing for Scalia to give a talk about morality as the basis of law. It’s another thing for her to start saying, ‘poor Hillary lost because Donald Trump was too macho. This is A, absurd, B, far outside the realm of a Supreme Court Justice.”
If you’re also fed up with Facebook censorship targeting patriots and America, look for me on GAB at https://gab.ai/RickRWells, and on my website http://RickWells.US – Please SUBSCRIBE in the right sidebar at RickWells.US to receive my posts directly by email, safely beyond the censorship of little comrade Zuckerberg. Thanks for reading my work.