July 28, 2025 • 7 mins
Today’s question/frustration comes as many on the right want accountability for deep state actors responsible for the Trump-Russia collusion hoax of nine years ago.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
Your questions, Brian's answers. It's time for today's Q and
A of today. This is the Brian mud Show. Yeah,
Today's Q and A. The History of treason and presidential immunity.
This is brought to you by Melissa Ashes. Check our collections.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
Each day a feature a listener question sent by one
of these methods. You may email me Brian Mudd at
iHeartMedia dot com, hit me up on social at Brian
mud Radio. You may also use the iHeartRadio talkback feature
We'd love it if you would love us, make us
your top preset inside of the iHeartRadio app the Brian
Mudshow podcast your number two pre set. While you're in there,
look for a little microphone button. See it tappen. You
(00:38):
may lay down a message right there, maybe for a
future Q and A just like this one.
Speaker 3 (00:45):
The Supreme Court rule that a president could not be
prosecuted for decisions he made that were part of his
official duty. I don't think committing treason has anything to
do with official duty. Or attempting a coup is not
an official duty, So isn't there vulnerability there?
Speaker 2 (01:07):
From the point of principle, I hear you, I understand
and agree with what you're saying from both the legal
and political reality. However, so today's question and you can
kind of detect the frustration as well comes as money
on the right want accountability for the deep state actors
responsible for the Trump Rushing collusion hoax of nine years ago.
(01:28):
I've been asked about it every day since. Information has
dropped over the past week. However, as I said last
Thursday in my Top three Takeaways, Director of National Intelligence
Tulsi Gabbard released new evidence and the Trump Rushia collusion
hopes that did two things. First, it illustrated that in fact,
President Obama did personally collude with deep state actors led
by then CIA Director John Brennan to pedal the discredited
(01:51):
Steel dossier also known as the Hunter Biden Tales, to
undermine the Trump presidency and all the nonsense. We'd eventually
see that played out. But here's the thing, nothing changes.
No one is going to jail over this, most certainly
brought Obama won't be DC jury's wouldn't convict the deep
state actors that John Durham brought charges against four years ago.
(02:12):
It's most definitely not going to happen now now, Following
those comments, President Trump, who earlier in the week right
before the dropping of the newly declassified documents, had this
to say when asked about the potential legal liability for
former President Obama, and specifically whether the Supreme Court's ruling
in his case last year aids Obama, Trump said, it
(02:35):
probably helps him a lot. Probably helps a lot, the
immunity ruling. It doesn't help the people around him at all,
but it probably helps him a lot. He's done criminal answers,
no question about it, but he has immunity. Obama oohs
me big. And you know, speaking of big things. You know,
(02:55):
what are you smiling about, Joel?
Speaker 4 (02:57):
Nothing?
Speaker 2 (02:58):
But that just sounds very true. Trump being Obama is
me big. He's done criminal things, but he goives me big.
So at this point, even President Trump, who let's not forget,
is the actual victim of the Russian collusion hoax, thinks
Obama is off the hook from potential liability, which speaks
volumes and addressing today's topic. Under federal law, treason is
(03:23):
defined as whoever owing allegiance to the United States, levy's
war against them, or adheres to their enemies, giving them
aid and comfort within the United States, or elsewhere is
guilty of treason. Okay, that is the the law on treason.
So without getting into the legal weeds, boy, it would
(03:45):
be a really tough putt to bring treason charges for
any of the Trump Russia collusion hoaxer's litt alone President Obama, who,
based on the evidence provided, became knowledgeable and potentially directed
the misinformation campaign after President Trump's win in twenty sixteen, had,
for example, President Obama colluded with Russia directly on this,
(04:05):
then it could be stated that he would be adhering
to our country's enemies. But the collusion was within his
administration's intelligence agencies. So, in other words, independent of factors
like the presidential immunity ruling and the political reality that
a DC jury is beyond unlikely to ever find administration actors,
most especially President Obama, guilty, it may be a stretch,
(04:29):
at least legally anyway, to even say that what tiam
Obama did was treason. Sedition you can absolutely make the
case for, but treason. On that note, treason is one
of the rarest prosecutions to be attempted in the least
successful in gaining the conviction. To give you an idea
(04:49):
in the history of the United States. I'm curious, Joel,
you know you don't really hear about this much, but
how many times would you have expected and there had
to have been trees cases more or less than what
there actually have beened?
Speaker 4 (05:02):
I would I would have thought there would have been
more than Okay, what the number is that you're about
to reveal? He definitely, definitely would have been a higher
percentage of convictions.
Speaker 2 (05:14):
Okay, Yeah, when you factor in that we've been around
for two hundred and forty nine years, there have only
been forty cases brought. Only forty brought for treason. Of those,
only thirteen convictions two hundred and forty nine years, thirteen
convictions for treason, none since the Tokyo Rose case of
(05:36):
nineteen fifty two. The thirty three percent conviction rate for
treason in the United States stands as the least successful
attempted federal charge brought. To give you an idea across
all federal cases, like, if the Feds bring charges against you,
how likely are you going down for that? Ninety four
(05:59):
percent of the time? Ninety four percent? Yet treason only
forty cases, only a thirty three percent success rate in
trying those cases. As for the immunity ruling that president
and again, so then you put this in the context
of okay, so Obama going down for this obviously not right,
and just as for the immunity ruling the President Trump
(06:22):
himself thinks protects President Obama from charges and the Trump
versus United States the immunity case of last year, the
Supreme Court ruled former presidents have absolute immunity from criminal
prosecution for their actions within their core constitutional powers, and
then presumptive immunity for other official acts within the quote
(06:46):
unquote outer perimeter of their responsibilities. No immunity applies to
unofficial or private acts. So all the documentation released by
the Director of National Intelligence shows the President Obama's involvement
was through official channels and not unofficial acts or in
(07:06):
his private life. This is analogous to President Trump's call,
for example, to Raethlisberger, the Georgia Secretary of State, back
in twenty twenty, seeking to find extra votes for him
or to not certify election results, for example. So I
understand the desire for account of building. I understand the
frustration by many on the right. However, I will always
(07:28):
tell you what you need to hear, as opposed to
what you might want to hear, And two sides of stories,
one sete of facts. These are the facts
Your questions, Brian's answers. It's time for today's Q and
A of today. This is the Brian mud Show. Yeah,
Today's Q and A. The History of treason and presidential immunity.
This is brought to you by Melissa Ashes. Check our collections.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
Each day a feature a listener question sent by one
of these methods. You may email me Brian Mudd at
iHeartMedia dot com, hit me up on social at Brian
mud Radio. You may also use the iHeartRadio talkback feature
We'd love it if you would love us, make us
your top preset inside of the iHeartRadio app the Brian
Mudshow podcast your number two pre set. While you're in there,
look for a little microphone button. See it tappen. You
(00:38):
may lay down a message right there, maybe for a
future Q and A just like this one.
Speaker 3 (00:45):
The Supreme Court rule that a president could not be
prosecuted for decisions he made that were part of his
official duty. I don't think committing treason has anything to
do with official duty. Or attempting a coup is not
an official duty, So isn't there vulnerability there?
Speaker 2 (01:07):
From the point of principle, I hear you, I understand
and agree with what you're saying from both the legal
and political reality. However, so today's question and you can
kind of detect the frustration as well comes as money
on the right want accountability for the deep state actors
responsible for the Trump Rushing collusion hoax of nine years ago.
(01:28):
I've been asked about it every day since. Information has
dropped over the past week. However, as I said last
Thursday in my Top three Takeaways, Director of National Intelligence
Tulsi Gabbard released new evidence and the Trump Rushia collusion
hopes that did two things. First, it illustrated that in fact,
President Obama did personally collude with deep state actors led
by then CIA Director John Brennan to pedal the discredited
(01:51):
Steel dossier also known as the Hunter Biden Tales, to
undermine the Trump presidency and all the nonsense. We'd eventually
see that played out. But here's the thing, nothing changes.
No one is going to jail over this, most certainly
brought Obama won't be DC jury's wouldn't convict the deep
state actors that John Durham brought charges against four years ago.
(02:12):
It's most definitely not going to happen now now, Following
those comments, President Trump, who earlier in the week right
before the dropping of the newly declassified documents, had this
to say when asked about the potential legal liability for
former President Obama, and specifically whether the Supreme Court's ruling
in his case last year aids Obama, Trump said, it
(02:35):
probably helps him a lot. Probably helps a lot, the
immunity ruling. It doesn't help the people around him at all,
but it probably helps him a lot. He's done criminal answers,
no question about it, but he has immunity. Obama oohs
me big. And you know, speaking of big things. You know,
(02:55):
what are you smiling about, Joel?
Speaker 4 (02:57):
Nothing?
Speaker 2 (02:58):
But that just sounds very true. Trump being Obama is
me big. He's done criminal things, but he goives me big.
So at this point, even President Trump, who let's not forget,
is the actual victim of the Russian collusion hoax, thinks
Obama is off the hook from potential liability, which speaks
volumes and addressing today's topic. Under federal law, treason is
(03:23):
defined as whoever owing allegiance to the United States, levy's
war against them, or adheres to their enemies, giving them
aid and comfort within the United States, or elsewhere is
guilty of treason. Okay, that is the the law on treason.
So without getting into the legal weeds, boy, it would
(03:45):
be a really tough putt to bring treason charges for
any of the Trump Russia collusion hoaxer's litt alone President Obama, who,
based on the evidence provided, became knowledgeable and potentially directed
the misinformation campaign after President Trump's win in twenty sixteen, had,
for example, President Obama colluded with Russia directly on this,
(04:05):
then it could be stated that he would be adhering
to our country's enemies. But the collusion was within his
administration's intelligence agencies. So, in other words, independent of factors
like the presidential immunity ruling and the political reality that
a DC jury is beyond unlikely to ever find administration actors,
most especially President Obama, guilty, it may be a stretch,
(04:29):
at least legally anyway, to even say that what tiam
Obama did was treason. Sedition you can absolutely make the
case for, but treason. On that note, treason is one
of the rarest prosecutions to be attempted in the least
successful in gaining the conviction. To give you an idea
(04:49):
in the history of the United States. I'm curious, Joel,
you know you don't really hear about this much, but
how many times would you have expected and there had
to have been trees cases more or less than what
there actually have beened?
Speaker 4 (05:02):
I would I would have thought there would have been
more than Okay, what the number is that you're about
to reveal? He definitely, definitely would have been a higher
percentage of convictions.
Speaker 2 (05:14):
Okay, Yeah, when you factor in that we've been around
for two hundred and forty nine years, there have only
been forty cases brought. Only forty brought for treason. Of those,
only thirteen convictions two hundred and forty nine years, thirteen
convictions for treason, none since the Tokyo Rose case of
(05:36):
nineteen fifty two. The thirty three percent conviction rate for
treason in the United States stands as the least successful
attempted federal charge brought. To give you an idea across
all federal cases, like, if the Feds bring charges against you,
how likely are you going down for that? Ninety four
(05:59):
percent of the time? Ninety four percent? Yet treason only
forty cases, only a thirty three percent success rate in
trying those cases. As for the immunity ruling that president
and again, so then you put this in the context
of okay, so Obama going down for this obviously not right,
and just as for the immunity ruling the President Trump
(06:22):
himself thinks protects President Obama from charges and the Trump
versus United States the immunity case of last year, the
Supreme Court ruled former presidents have absolute immunity from criminal
prosecution for their actions within their core constitutional powers, and
then presumptive immunity for other official acts within the quote
(06:46):
unquote outer perimeter of their responsibilities. No immunity applies to
unofficial or private acts. So all the documentation released by
the Director of National Intelligence shows the President Obama's involvement
was through official channels and not unofficial acts or in
(07:06):
his private life. This is analogous to President Trump's call,
for example, to Raethlisberger, the Georgia Secretary of State, back
in twenty twenty, seeking to find extra votes for him
or to not certify election results, for example. So I
understand the desire for account of building. I understand the
frustration by many on the right. However, I will always
(07:28):
tell you what you need to hear, as opposed to
what you might want to hear, And two sides of stories,
one sete of facts. These are the facts
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.