Obama’s ‘silent coup’ isn’t immune Levin calls for DOJ probe

In the wake of National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard’s declassification of a trove of Russiagate documents, leading her to refer former President Barack Obama and other Obama administration officials to the Department of Justice for potential criminal investigation, certain legal “experts” are claiming Barack Obama has immunity.

They point to Trump v. United States (July 2024), in which the Supreme Court held that former presidents have absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within their “core constitutional powers” and presumptive immunity for other official acts within the “outer perimeter” of their responsibilities. However, they have no immunity for unofficial or private acts.

Mark Levin recalls the time when President Obama ordered the killing of Al-Qaeda terrorist Anwar al-Awlaki, who was an American citizen.

“He can’t be charged for killing that person, nor should he have been,” says Levin, “but ladies and gentlemen, if the president of the United States … is embezzling funds or he’s running some kind of a drug racket while he’s president of the United States, those are not his official duties, and so after he leaves the presidency, he can be charged with that.”

Orchestrating Russigate – a “treasonous conspiracy” as Director Gabbard called it – would most certainly fall into the latter category if Obama was found guilty.

If “Barack Obama, is involved in a scheme, the purpose of which is to interfere with a presidential election because he wants Hillary Clinton and the Democrats to win, and subsequent to that, if [he] is involved in a scheme to usurp the new president’s role or to sabotage the new president’s role, that’s not an official duty,” says Levin, “and certainly [he] can be charged with that.”

“There are criminal statutes for making false claims … and hoaxes. And it actually uses the word hoaxes,” he explains. “Donald Trump has called [Russiagate] a hoax from day one, and he’s exactly correct.”

In a recent press conference, President Trump, when asked about the Russiagate developments, was crystal clear: “This is, like, proof – irrefutable proof – that Obama was seditious, that Obama was trying to lead a coup, and it was with Hillary Clinton, with all these other people, but Obama headed it up … and it says so right in the papers.”

If the DOJ conducts its criminal investigation and concurs that the papers indeed incriminate Obama, the Constitution, specifically the separation of powers doctrine and Article II, as well as SCOTUS’ ruling on Trump v. United States, should not protect him from prosecution.

Further, considering all the lawfare waged on President Trump, “Why shouldn’t Barack Obama be criminally investigated, put under oath … in order to determine the extent to which he was involved in a silent coup?” Levin asks.

“So Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (who I like very much), are you prepared to subpoena Barack Obama?”

To hear more of his analysis, watch the video above.

Want more from Mark Levin?

To enjoy more of “the Great One” — Mark Levin as you’ve never seen him before — subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.