Attorney General Pam Bondi's August 2025 order for a grand jury to investigate allegations that the Obama administration fabricated the Russia collusion narrative to undermine Donald Trump's 2016 presidency, has ignited a firestorm. Fuelled by DNI Tulsi Gabbard's declassified documents, the probe targets Obama, Clinton, and top officials like James Comey and John Brennan, accusing them of a "treasonous conspiracy" to subvert democracy. If big names are indicted, the fallout could dwarf the Epstein scandal's impact on Trump or the George Floyd unrest, risking political chaos, social division, and institutional collapse.
Bondi's probe, reported by Fox News and Infowars on August 5, 2025, stems from Gabbard's July 2025 declassification of over 100 documents, including a December 2016 meeting record where Obama allegedly directed an intelligence assessment claiming Russia aided Trump's election. Gabbard asserts this assessment, published January 2017, relied on "shoddy sources" like the discredited Steele dossier and suppressed evidence showing Russia didn't target the election's outcome. Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley's declassified 2018 DOJ report appendix further alleges the FBI, under Comey, ignored intelligence suggesting Clinton's campaign planned to falsely tie Trump to Russia, while mishandling her email investigation. Stephen Miller called it a "literal coup," claiming it meets the elements of seditious conspiracy.
Here, the claim is that Obama's team weaponised intelligence to delegitimise Trump's 2016 win, a parallel abuse of power. However, Democrats, per The Washington Post, counter that multiple probes, including Robert Mueller's, confirmed Russia's interference to boost Trump, and Gabbard's claims lack proof of criminality. The truth remains murky, as statutes of limitations may limit indictments, and evidence like meeting records is circumstantial.
If the grand jury indicts figures like Obama or Clinton, the consequences could be seismic, surpassing the Epstein scandal's political damage to Trump or the 2020 Floyd protests' unrest. Here's why:
1.Political Polarization and Institutional Distrust: Indicting a former president and secretary of state would deepen America's divide. Trump's base views this as justice for a "treasonous" plot, but Democrats, per NBC News, call it a politically motivated distraction from Epstein's fallout. Trust in the DOJ, already battered by lawfare cases (e.g., Bragg, Willis), would erode further if indictments appear partisan.
2.Social Unrest: The 2020 Floyd protests, sparked by a drug-addicted man's death, burned cities. Indicting liberal icons could ignite worse. X posts like @FoxNews (July 27, 2025) suggest Obama's implication galvanises both sides. Progressive strongholds, urban centers like Seattle or Portland, could see riots surpassing Floyd's, as activists view this as Trump's revenge. Unlike Epstein, where Trump's ties are speculative, Obama and Clinton are Democratic heroes, making their indictment a direct attack on the Left's identity.
3.Global Implications: An Obama indictment would shock allies, signalling U.S. instability. The New York Times notes Russia's 2016 interference was confirmed by bipartisan Senate reports, so discrediting it risks foreign policy credibility. If allies doubt U.S. intelligence, cooperation on issues like Ukraine or China could falter, akin to how urban decay (e.g., San Francisco) signals domestic weakness.
4.Legal Precedents: Indictments would set a dangerous norm, legitimising future probes of ex-presidents. This could embolden Democrats to target Trump post-tenure, perpetuating a cycle of retribution. The Hill notes statutes of limitations (e.g., seven years for conspiracy) may block charges, but even failed indictments could normalise political prosecutions.
To prevent chaos and restore trust, the following steps are critical:
1.Transparent Investigations: The DOJ must release all declassified documents and grand jury findings, as Grassley did with the Durham annex. The Federalist (August 5, 2025) emphasises public transparency to counter claims of partisan overreach. An independent oversight panel, including bipartisan figures, should verify evidence, ensuring no repeat of the alleged Biden lawfare coordination.
2.DOJ Reform: Strengthen post-Watergate firewalls to prevent White House influence, as seen in Biden's alleged role in Trump's cases. Reuters (August 5, 2025) notes Bondi's probe risks appearing as Trump's counter-lawfare, so codifying DOJ independence is essential to avoid cycles of vengeance, similar to proposed judicial reforms for biased judges like Merchan.
3.De-escalating Rhetoric: Trump and Gabbard must avoid inflammatory terms like "treason" or "coup," as CBS News (August 5, 2025) notes these inflame tensions. Media and X influencers should report facts, not amplify division, as seen in Epping's misrepresentation. Bipartisan leaders must call for calm to prevent Floyd-level riots.
4.Legal Safeguards: Courts must enforce statutes of limitations and dismiss baseless charges, as with Jack Smith's unconstitutional role. Newsweek (August 5, 2025) questions what crimes could be charged, so judicial rigor is key to avoid politicised indictments.
5.Public Dialogue: Town halls and bipartisan forums, amplified on X, can educate voters on the probe's findings, countering narratives that fuel anger.
If Obama and Clinton face charges, the Left's reaction could make the Floyd protests look tame. Urban centres, already strained by decay (e.g., Boston's drug markets), could erupt, as progressives see this as an attack on their heroes, unlike Epstein's peripheral impact on Trump. However, the probe's success hinges on concrete evidence, not Gabbard's "irrefutable" claims, which The Washington Post (August 5, 2025) calls unproven. Without airtight proof, indictments risk backfiring, galvanising Democrats and fracturing institutions further. By opting for transparency, reform, and restraint, the U.S. can navigate this crisis, ensuring justice without descending into chaos, if lucky. If not, expect more chaos.
https://www.naturalnews.com/2025-08-04-hillary-clinton-could-face-life-term-treason.html
"Attorney General Pam Bondi signed an order directing an unnamed federal prosecutor to present evidence to a grand jury to the Russia collusion hoax.
Bondi's Monday order is a response to Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard's criminal referral two weeks ago.
"Bondi ordered an unnamed federal prosecutor to initiate legal proceedings, and the prosecutor is expected to present department evidence to a grand jury to secure a potential indictment," reports Fox News, citing a DOJ spokesperson. "Bondi is taking the referrals from Gabbard 'very seriously.'"
"The spokesperson said Bondi believed there is 'clear cause for deep concern' and a need for the next steps."
More from Fox News:
The DOJ confirmed two weeks ago it received a criminal referral from Gabbard. The referral included a memorandum titled "Intelligence Community suppression of intelligence showing 'Russian and criminal actors did not impact' the 2016 presidential election via cyber-attacks on infrastructure" and asked that the DOJ open an investigation.
No charges have been brought at this stage against any defendants. A grand jury investigation is needed to secure an indictment against any potential suspects.
The revelation that the DOJ is moving forward with a grand jury probe comes after Gabbard declassified intelligence in July that shed new light on the Obama administration's allege determination that Russia sought to help Trump in the 2016 election.
Former President Barack Obama and his intelligence officials allegedly promoted a "contrived narrative that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help President Trump win, selling it to the American people as though it were true. It wasn't," Gabbard said during a press briefing of the intelligence.
Among the declassified material was a meeting record revealing how Obama allegedly requested his deputies prepare an intelligence assessment in December 2016, after Trump had won the election, that detailed the "tools Moscow used and actions it took to influence the 2016 election."
That intelligence assessment stressed that Russia's actions did not affect the outcome of the election but rather were intended to sow distrust in the democratic process.
Excerpt from Gabbard's July 23rd White House press briefing detailing how the Obama administration attempted to delegitimize Trump's 2016 Presidency.
There is irrefutable evidence that detail how President Obama and his national security team directed the creation of an intelligence community assessment that they knew was false. They knew it would promote this contrived narrative that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help President Trump win, selling it to the American people as though it were true. It wasn't.
The report that we released today shows in great detail how they carried this out. They manufactured findings from shoddy sources. They suppressed evidence and credible intelligence that disproved their false claims. They disobeyed traditional tradecraft intelligence community standards and withheld the truth from the American people.
In doing so, they conspired to subvert the will of the American people who elected Donald Trump in that election in November of 2016. They worked with their partners in the media to promote this lie, ultimately to undermine the legitimacy of President Trump and launching what would be a years-long coup against him and his administration.
Just recently, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller called the entire operation a literal coup.
"The Russia collusion hoax against President Trump remains the single greatest hoax and the greatest assault on our democracy in the history of this country," said Miller Sunday. "There's no comparison, there's no parallel to anything else. It was a coup, and I'm using that term literally. It was a coup to overthrow a democratically-elected government."
"The new information that has been revealed by the Director of National Intelligence and by the FBI, eliminates any scintilla of doubt about the intention, the premeditation, the planning, and orchestration of this conspiracy. It meets all of the criminal elements of a seditious conspiracy against the United States. It meets the criminal elements of an insurrection."