The Tables Have Turned: Democrats Own Argument Can be Used to Strip Obama of Immunity

July 29, 2025 - President Trump’s former impeachment attorney David Schoen has turned the tables on Barack Obama, asserting that the former president could still face impeachment and lose his immunity for alleged crimes tied to the Russia collusion hoax. Schoen’s bombshell, rooted in constitutional precedent set by Democrats themselves, opens the door to holding Obama accountable for what many see as a deliberate attempt to undermine Trump’s 2016 election victory—a scheme that demands prosecution given the mounting evidence.

Schoen, speaking on Newsmax’s “American Agenda” on July 27, 2025, pointed to the Democrats’ own playbook from Trump’s second impeachment in 2021. “President Trump is right when he said the immunity decision would help President Obama,” Schoen stated. “But you know what it doesn’t help him with? Impeachment.” He cited Article I, Section 3, Clause 7 of the Constitution, which Democrats argued allows impeachment of former presidents to bar them from future office. “According to the Democratic Party and the House managers in the second impeachment trial, a former President, once out of office, is still subject to impeachment,” Schoen explained. “In other words, they’ve argued Lincoln could be impeached, George Washington impeached. Certainly, as I predicted at the time, this would come back—because President Obama could be impeached if this evidence really says what it says.”

This evidence, Schoen noted, stems from declassified documents released by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard on July 18, 2025. Gabbard’s briefing accused Obama, along with former DNI James Clapper, FBI Director James Comey, and CIA Director John Brennan, of orchestrating a post-2016 election meeting to fabricate the Russia collusion narrative. A suppressed 2016 intelligence assessment, according to Gabbard, found Russia lacked the intent or capability to hack U.S. elections, yet Obama allegedly ordered a new report claiming interference, contradicting earlier findings. This, Gabbard claims, was a calculated effort to delegitimize Trump’s presidency, fueling years of investigations and political turmoil.

Schoen emphasized that impeachment could strip Obama of the presidential immunity granted by the Supreme Court’s July 2024 ruling in Trump v. United States, which protects only official acts during a presidency. “The language itself says you’re still subject to criminal prosecution or indictment,” Schoen told Newsmax, suggesting that post-office actions, like any cover-up, leave Obama vulnerable. Constitutional scholar Mike Davis, in a July 2025 interview with Benny Johnson, reinforced this, stating Obama has “zero legal protection” for post-presidency conduct, such as obstructing justice or conspiring against Trump’s administration.

The Justice Department, led by Attorney General Pam Bondi, is now reviewing Gabbard’s documents, with FBI Director Kash Patel tasked to investigate potential charges like conspiracy (18 U.S.C. § 241) or obstruction (18 U.S.C. § 1512). A 29-page annex to the 2023 Durham report, set for release, reportedly contradicts testimony from Brennan, Comey, and Hillary Clinton, raising the specter of perjury (18 U.S.C. § 1001). With statutes of limitations potentially extended for ongoing conspiracies, as CIA Director John Ratcliffe noted on July 27, 2025, Obama’s role in Russiagate could face scrutiny. Justice demands that those who weaponized false narratives against a duly elected president face consequences—no one should be above the law.