Posted originally on CTH on May 9, 2026 | Sundance
I have been requested to put some context behind a recent set of statements made by former President Barack Obama to Stephen Colbert. As many interested observers understand (some may gain deeper appreciation later on) statements -even defensive- made in furtherance of a conspiracy can be used later in court to highlight intent.
To encapsulate for those who requested, we first start with the recent statement by the former President. Listen closely:
On May 19, 2020, Acting DNI Richard Grenell declassified the hidden paragraph of the Susan Rice memo that was hidden for three years. This enabled us to put a full context to the ‘memo to file‘ that was published by Susan Rice on January 20, 2017; an event that was timed to happen during President Trump’s inauguration.
The context was President Obama and Susan Rice holding a meeting with FBI Director James Comey during the transition period approximately two weeks before President Trump took office. On January 5, 2017, President Obama and Susan Rice were discussing incoming National Security Advisor Michael Flynn with FBI Director James Comey.
When you understand the context, you understand exactly why the Intelligence Community tried to keep this paragraph hidden. The motive to write the January 20, 2017, memo is clear. Also, the IC did not ever expect this to be released. Here’s the formerly hidden paragraph:
Within this paragraph we find the motive for Susan Rice writing it (emphasis mine):
“Director Comey affirmed that he is proceeding “by the book” as it relates to law enforcement.” … “Comey said he does have some concerns that incoming NSA Flynn is speaking frequently with Russian Ambassador Kislyak.” “Comey said that could be an issue as it relates to sharing senssitive information.” “President Obama asked if Comey was saying that the NSC should not pass sensitive information related to Russia to Flynn.” “Comey replied “potentially.”” “He added that he has no indication thus far that Flynn has passed classified information to Kislyak, but he noted that “the level of communication is unusual.”
Remember, the position of President Obama and Susan Rice is that they were never aware of any FBI investigation of Flynn (or the Trump campaign); nor did they have any involvement in directing it to take place.
The content of this January 5th meeting makes the first part of their claim challenging to accept. Thus, the need for Susan Rice to cover for it.
Here’s the full memo in context (including the redacted paragraph):
On January 5, 2017, James Comey officially put President Obama on notice about the FBI conducting an investigation and surveillance upon the Trump campaign. Obviously, Obama already knew this; however, at these moments in real time each of the participants was trying to protect themselves by documenting all of the activity and making sure the entire group was attached to the legal risk if anything went wrong.
Now it gets a little uncomfortable for the Obama White House here because just a few days earlier DNI James Clapper created a document trail from the FBI to the Office of The President. That trail created by Clapper was problematic, and that’s why the January 5th meeting was organized.
We learned from James Comey’s testimony, that a day or two prior to this January 5, 2017 meeting, DNI James Clapper briefed President Obama on the nature of the call between Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak and Michael Flynn.
James Clapper received raw “intelligence cuts” about the call from FBI Director James Comey and used them to brief President Obama.
James Comey knew he gave the information to Clapper, and James Comey knew Clapper went to the White House to brief Obama. As a consequence, it becomes very problematic for the Obama white house to claim they didn’t know about, nor direct, an FBI investigation of incoming President Trump or incoming National Security Advisor Michael Flynn given the fact they were briefed on the intercepted phone communications conveyed by the FBI, via DNI Clapper, to President Obama.
If the FBI wasn’t investigating Flynn, then why was the FBI intercepting his calls?
Understandably President Obama and NSA Susan Rice would be worried about being attached to a potentially very unlawful investigation of the incoming administration and NSA Michael Flynn; hence the ‘stay behind’ meeting.
As a result of prior briefing material given to President Obama, he knew the FBI was monitoring the Trump transition team and intercepting Flynn’s communication. The aspect of Obama questioning Comey about sharing sensitive information from Flynn; and Comey’s response; points to Obama/Rice knowledge of an FBI operation against Flynn.
This is an FBI operation against Flynn (and Trump) that Susan Rice knows she needs to claim she and Obama did not know about.
From a hindsight perspective it gets very sticky for Obama/Rice to deny knowledge with that 1/5/17 meeting content in the fray. That’s the purpose of the Jan 20th CYA memo to file. Think about it:
Question: Ms Rice how can you claim to have no knowledge of an FBI investigation when the FBI was providing the White House FBI with intercepts of Flynn communication?
Are you saying the FBI intercepts were not authorized by President Obama?
Rice’s CYA memo was essentially saying exactly that. She’s positioning FBI Director James Comey as rogue with his investigation, and that is a threat to James Comey. Hence, Comey giving DNI Clapper the information knowing he would walk it into the White House.
Without the memo FBI Director James Comey could claim President Obama and Susan Rice were well aware of the FBI’s Flynn operation.
With the memo Obama/Rice position themselves as having no idea until FBI Director Comey started talking.
That’s the purpose for the memo; Obama & Rice protecting themselves from Comey if things go sideways.
Now, to further illustrate this intent, it’s worth remembering the letter from Susan Rice’s lawyer, Kathryn Ruemmler to the Senate:
Note the second to last paragraph, Rice’s letter in 2018 is trying to deny knowledge of FBI operations, writ large, against the Trump campaign or incoming administration.
This letter from Rice’s lawyer to the Senate Judiciary Committee is false, demonstrably false. However, the written lie highlights that Susan Rice and Kathryn Reummler never expected that “classified paragraph” to ever be released.
….”President Obama asked if Comey was saying that the NSC should not pass sensitive information related to Russia to Flynn.”….
Go back and read that second to last paragraph from Susan Rice in February 2018, and contrast it against what Susan Rice wrote on January 5, 2017. See the problem?
When James Clapper walked directly into the White House with “intelligence cuts” on January 3, 2017, specifically from FBI Director James Comey, to share with President Obama, it is clear the white house legal team around Obama -specifically including Kathryn Reummler- went bananas.
DNI James Clapper was always a doofus, but usefully so. However, in this context doofus Clapper -with his FBI cuts in hand- just infected the White House with direct knowledge of an ongoing FBI investigation of the incoming administration. In that briefing Clapper just walked over their carefully assembled plausible deniability. Clapper carried the evidence into the Oval Office, removing Obama’s ability to say he was unaware of any FBI surveillance of Michael Flynn (and Trump).
The white house next move was to call for the January 5, 2017, meeting with FBI Director James Comey, and the January 20th Susan Rice memo-to-file was supportive material for the intention of again putting the issue onto Comey, not Obama. That is why Susan Rice memorialized the meeting as a cya to mitigate legal risk.
It must be emphasized that for three years the redaction of that key paragraph remained hidden. The DOJ/FBI, Intelligence Community and Robert Mueller’s crew were trying to keep James Comey protected, while simultaneously maintaining the offensive against the Trump administration.
Imagine if this fully unredacted Susan Rice memo had been released in 2017 or 2018? The sunlight would have been unbearable for a multitude of ongoing narratives. Robert Mueller could never have attempted to prosecute Flynn in 2017 against the backdrop of a known and fabricated FBI investigation to target Donald Trump and Michael Flynn. An investigation that President Obama was fully aware of despite his denials.
Centinel2012 