S E E D E D C O N T E N T
At a Las Vegas tech conference last week, former president Barack Obama told an audience that his presidency had been scandal-free. “I didn’t have scandals, which seems like it shouldn’t be something you brag about,” Obama joked, according to Newsweek . We hear this talking point quite often from Democrats.
Now, perhaps the president didn’t experience the fallout from a scandal, which is very different from never having been involved in one. For this confusion, Obama can thank the political media.
Why does it matter now? For one thing, historical revisionism shouldn’t go unchallenged. Democrats are running to retake power, and many of them were participants or accomplices in numerous corrosive scandals that have been airbrushed.
The other reason, of course, is that when we start to juxtapose the mythically idyllic Obama presidency with the tumultuous reign of Trump, we’re reminded that many journalists largely abdicated their responsibilities for eight years — which has a lot to do with the situation we find ourselves in today.
It’s not about Obama’s brazen lying about Obamacare or even recurrent abuse of power . I’m talking about supposed non-scandals like “ Operation Fast and Furious ,” a program devised by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) that put around 2,000 weapons into the hands of narco-traffickers (and an Islamic terrorist), leading to the murder of hundreds of Mexicans and at least one American, border agent Brian Terry.
The body count could have been higher when a homegrown extremist who, with another assailant, attempted to murder the audience at a “Draw Muhammad” contest in Garland, Texas with one of the Fast and Furious weapons. An off-duty police officer killed both of the attackers .
Despite the incompetence, absurdity, recklessness, and fatalities of the program, the entire affair never really received scandal-like attention. No one lost his job. There will almost certainly be a tweet from Trump this week that political media will afford more attention than a story in which an American border agent was murdered with the gun Obama’s ATF provided.
Not even when the administration refused to cooperate with congressional investigators was it handled like a scandal. Not even when a federal judge rejected Obama’s assertion of executive privilege in efforts to deny Congress files relating to the gun-walking operation was it treated as a scandal. Not even when we learned that Obama attorney general Eric Holder misled Congress about when he was made aware of the program did it rise to the importance of a Trump tweet. Holder became the first sitting attorney general in American history to be held in contempt of Congress — a vote that included 17 Democrats — and Obama still never paid a political price.
As it was, the Obama administration persistently ignored courts and oversight, breaking norms because it was allowed to do so. The president was articulate, friendly, and progressive. He might have executed an American citizen without a trial (not a scandal!), but his contempt for the process could be forgiven.
It’s why Obama could secretly send planes filled with cash to pay a ransom to a terror state (using money earmarked for terror victims) and most reporters and analysts would regurgitate the justification they heard in the echo chamber. One Politico reporter might drop a 14,000-word heavily sourced investigative piece (two officials involved in the program went on the record) detailing how the Obama administration undermined law enforcement efforts to shut down an international drug-trafficking ring run by the terror group Hezbollah operating in the United States, and most major news organizations never even mentioned the piece.
When they did, it was usually to give space to former Obama officials to smear the reporter .
It needn’t be said, but if the names were changed to Trump and Russia, the president would be accused of sedition. But by any conceivable journalistic standard, it’s a scandal that should have triggered widespread coverage. So when we see mass indignation over every single hyperbolic statement from the current president, it’s a bit difficult to buy the outrage.
An Obama official famously bragged to The New York Times Magazine that he could rely on the ignorance, inexperience, and partisan dispositions of reporters to convey administration talking points to help push through preferred policy. Rather than being hurt or embarrassed by this kind of accusation of unprofessionalism, many reporters are more reliant on the same people than ever before.
Yet many professionals who supposedly deplore the authoritarian nature of an administration that doesn’t answer CNN’s questions were generally quiet when Obama spied on reporters. The Obama DOJ spied on the Associated Press in an attempt to crack down on internal leaks . The DOJ tapped around 20 different phone lines—including cell phone and home lines—that snared at least 100 staffers who worked for the outlet. The Justice Department spied on Fox News reporter James Rosen in 2010, collecting his telephone records, looking at his personal emails and tracking his movements.
Color me skeptical, but somehow I doubt similar Trump efforts would be framed as a “ rare peek into a Justice Department leak probe, ” as if we were pulling the curtains back on a fashion show. It would be, rightly, depicted as an assault on democracy.
Then again, spying was also never really given the scandal treatment during the Obama years. As Obama’s CIA director, John Brennan became aware of an operation of illegal spying of a legislative branch staffer over torture files and misled the media about it. Did the president know? Shrug. The story hardly made a dent. Likewise, Obama’s director of national intelligence, James Clapper, admitted he misled Congress about spying on American citizens. No scandal.
Today both these people are on TV chumming around with serious journalists who allow them to continue to make reckless, unsubstantiated political statements all the time. It isn’t Chuck Todd on “Meet the Press” who asks Clapper tough questions, it’s Meghan McCain on “The View .”
There was unprecedented politicization of the government under Obama — most of it, I imagine, excused for being part of a good cause. The NLRB . The Justice Department . The IRS. The Office of Special Counsel, which reviews whistleblower allegations, found that IRS employees urged callers to vote for Obama, wore pro-Obama swag, and campaigned for Democrats in conversations with taxpayers — all of it illegal.
But far more seriously, IRS leadership, specifically Lois Lerner, aggressively targeted conservative groups before elections. The IRS admitted as much in an apology letter. Lerner was held in contempt by Congress for refusing to comply with investigators’ demands. She never answered questions for this genuine attack on democracy.
What difference does it make, right? While the extent of the incompetence and negligence during the Benghazi terror attack on September 11, 2012 is still unknown, what we do know is that Obama and a number of high-ranking officials in his administration lied about what happened for partisan reasons . Susan Rice went on a number of national television shows and claimed that Benghazi was a “spontaneous reaction” to “hateful and offensive video,” even when she knew it was a sophisticated and pre-planned terror attack. (Rice is now on the Netflix board, and Obama is a very rich man . At some point you’ve made enough money, but that time is not yet . )
Although they knew it was a complex terror attack, Obama and Hillary Clinton cut television ads to placate radicals in Islamic nations by repeating the claim that a video perpetuated the attack, and apologizing for American free speech — a scandal in itself.
Worse, however, the administration detained the man who produced the offensively amateurish “Innocence of Muslims,” and initially charged him with lying about his role in the production of the video . This was a blatant attack on free expression. Yet most of the mainstream press continued to take the administration’s word for it and report that the video was the cause of the “ protests .”
Democrats in general just kept pretending that every accusation was merely a partisan, racist plot to undermine the president. Whether it was bypassing process and oversight to fund cronyistic green projects that enriched political and ideological allies with tax dollars, or the Secret Service’s embarrassing debauchery or Hillary Clinton’s attempts to circumvent transparency or, perhaps the most immoral, the Veterans Affairs’ negligence regarding veterans , they would never admit they faced a scandal.
This double standard in coverage makes today’s often sanctimonious reactions to Trump a bit difficult to take. Many reporters will snarkily point out that most of the stories critics latch onto have been reported on or broken by mainstream journalists. It’s true. There are plenty of good journalists out there. But it’s the intensity of the coverage and the framing of the events that is evidence of ideologically motivated coverage. And every time Obama or his allies claim that they were scandal-free, millions of Americans are reminded of the obsequiousness of most media coverage.
David Harsanyi is a Senior Editor at The Federalist.
The Obama scandals were never held up as scandals by a media, that was simply not interested in holding Obama accountable. As Iv'e said many times here, it was always Obama's highly politicized Justice Department which did the "investigating".
Mr Harsanyi has most listed in his article. Let's see, the "Fast & Furious" operation, spying on US citizens, the IRS/Lois Lerner scandal, Clinton-Benghazi and Clinton-e-mail scandals. Yup, that's 5 of them. We may soon revisit the e-mail scandal and there is a new one on the horizon - spying on a political campaign.
Yeah, most of which involved high level Obama cabinet members busting a DC two step by pleading the fifith
Yep, scandal free my ass.
If that comment wasn't so misinformed it would be absolutely hilarious.
Just about spit my coffee on my keyboard when I read the article title! The numerous Obama administration scandals were largely downplayed or not reported at because the mainstream(?) media in this country was mostly controlled by the liberal left! No way they would even consider demonizing a liberal left Democrat president. Same people still control the media today so of course they will have a field day viciously demonizing a Republican one, whatever the reason, deserved or not.
Yep, they doted over Obama for all eight years he was POTUS.
Still are.
Add these to Obama's list of "no scandals" ...
Nailed it! And those are only a few...
Thanks. I was in a rush to get out and run errands, and those were just off the top of my head. Here's another -- the 3 American NoKo hostages that Trump just negotiated to have released? Two of them had been imprisoned during Obama's presidency, but he did nothing about them.
It was called the policy of "strategic patience', AKA leave it all for the next guy.
Sorry, just not correct.
Kim was a legal resident of China since 2001 and has a US passport. He has the option, after being flown to the USA, of flying back to China and resuming his business with his wife.
The other two gentlemen, a Chinese national and a South Korean, both with US passports, were legal residents of North Korea when they were detained in April of 2017 and May of 2017 during the first year of the Trump Admin.
# of people released from NK:
Obama = 11
Trump = 3
What else ya got?
Point?
I agree. Your comment was pointless.
Uranium was has been debunked many times over....even by fox news.
How many bimbo eruptions did Obama have? No Playmates. No Porn Stars. No Sex Scandals..
I refer you back to my post above about the media. And scandals are scandals no matter who or what the subject matter.
I can't believe that you didn't know that Obama had (and still has) the complicit national and international media, "fact check" sites, and people in very influential political places to protect him from potential sex/identity/suspicious death scandals.
Yesterday, I told you the same that I'll tell you today: I am not your personal research librarian or Internet search engine. The information has been easily accessible for many years on DDG or, if you prefer, you can use Google or Bing but please be aware that those search engines track personal data more than DDG does.
There isn't one to that particular fantasy land, though if there were, it would undoubtedly be much more likely to track and abuse your personal data that Google or Bing.
I never said that. I said that I am not your personal research librarian or personal search engine. I gave you three search engines to use so you can expand your knowledge. All you have to do is go to one of them, type in key words ... and voila! a world of knowledge will be available to you.
Your comments are quite amusing!
Gee, I just searched "Obama's complicit national and international media, "fact check" sites" and the first two links were about Trump...
Gee, that means that you used the wrong key words. Keep trying!
Nope, I used the key words that were the crux of you posit.
Not surprisingly, another fail...
Only to you and those who unsurprisingly up-voted your comment.
I know. That's why I stopped doing others' homework a while ago. I also recognize baiting comments when I see them.
Well all you had to do was truncate his posit and then post a bunch of partisan websites that site each other as 'reliable' sources. Considering the sources you came up with, perhaps he was intentionally obfuscating out of embarrassment.
But hey, it's nice that you're letting him copy from you paper. Alas, you'll both get a failing grade.
Actually, I didn't 'complain' at all. I know it's hard for some here to recognize but that's what a factual statement looks like.
There WAS no 'information', there were conspiracy theories and innuendo.
Conversely, he may not have wanted to post links because he knew that there was no reliable source to support his fallacious posit. Of course that would presume that he has the capacity to be embarrassed, which requires the ability to feel shame, so maybe not...
Skirting the Coc "BF"
Well hell, how could she do that when you posted such GIANTS of the fourth estate like:
With hard hitting journalists like, Tom Zawistowski, who times out of his busy day @ his communications business in small time Ohio to do investigative journalism at it's finest.
Who could possibly challenge such well vetted sources?
Let me assure you that I am quite capable of doing research. Y'all should know that about me by now. I used the 'parameters' set by another member and posted a truthful characterization of the results.
Let me also assure you that I wouldn't bring the sources you supplied to a spitball fight, much less post them here as reliable sources to support a posit I was arguing in favor of.
You know Tex, you're right.
I should have thanked you for searching for and then posting links that are so completely lacking in journalistic value and veracity that they prove how utterly ridiculous the content of the prior post actually is.
Thanks bud...
Bullshit. I'm attacking the false content of the comment and your failed attempt at bolstering it.
Oh and BTFW, NO cogent person would hang their hat on a local Tea Party website as a source for reliable information.
If you'd followed mine you wouldn't have thanked me...
In my best John Wayne voice: That'll be the day.
No matter the voices in your head, the fact remains.
Yes and I am sure that the purpose of posting conspiracy theory sources and then demanding that their 'contents' be cogently argued is pure deflection.
I'll note here that the member that posted the original comment BAILED after being asked to support his posit. YOU jumped in and failed miserably in an attempt to bolster his posit.
Since then, your only argument is that I and others didn't debunk the bullshit you linked. In NO WAY am I obligated to waste my time slogging through bullshit sources for your amusement. Since the member of the original post made the assertion, it is on him, and now you as his volunteer surrogate, to prove his posit.
Post an intellectually HONEST source, that supports the original posit and I will endeavor to address what it contains. But STOP demanding that each and every POS source thrown up here should be accepted as worthy of consideration and STOP pretending that anyone who refuses to do so is by default incapable of making a cogent argument.
Really? What is incorrect about my characterization of your first source? I'll wait for your cogent and informative reply.
There is a difference between advice and rebuke. Look it up.
So no HONEST source is forthcoming. Got ya. Not surprised.
Like so many of your posts, this one is mindless.
That is evident from your continued replies. /s
I don't suppose you see how incredibly ridiculous that sounds? It is just absurd.
Well, your comments surely show a strong alignment with Pee Wee's thinking, "I know you are but what am I?"...
On that I'll give him credit - as I always have. His problem was never women or monetary corruption, it was always his ideology
Which the American people voted to support in back to back elections...
And how many have occurred with Trump since he has been in the White House? How many female interns has he used to moisten his cigars? How many have given him a BJ in the Oval Office?
Just about all the so called alleged sex scandals Trump has been accused of is less than 8 years old.
Whatever his faults, Trump understands how the system and power work. As Trump said, Eric Holder would never have recused himself from a case that threatened to tarnish Obama. Trump knows what having two lackeys as AG mean for protecting Obama. Having a loyalist political enforcer as AG and a fawning news media, who even Obama's staff correctly mocked as an echo chamber who would repeat what they were told, gave Obama advantages no other modern president has had.
Of course not. Obama never gave Holder a reason to recuse himself.
Cons should just stop with the Obama/trump comparisons. Even with his faults Obama will always be a thousand times the man trump is.
Hear!!! Hear!!!
But, even though they know it is true, they will never admit it.
Exactly.
More than once I've wondered if the NT trumpies aren't just pranking us, bigly. They can't possibly regard this "president" in a positive way, well maybe one, for sure, lol.
Either that, or they are being paid a nice sum to promote Trump here on the Internet, the home of their most hated media sites. Otherwise, it makes no sense why they would do so.
Umm.....if I answered that truthfully I'd likely get suspended. (grin)
It can't be since 'brazen lying' and 'recurrent abuse of power' are Trump's hallmark. It would make one a hypocrite to call out Obama for something now accepted with open arms. Not that being hypocritical has ever stopped Trump sycophants.
To some weasels a lie supporting a liberal policy is a thousand times worse than a hundred lies supporting conservative policies. These slime bags LOVE Trumps lies that tickle their ears and tell them what they want to hear regardless of its veracity. Obama spoke a lot of truth that troubled their ears and made their greasy bigoted insides squirm like a racist worm on a dull hook.
"leading to the murder of hundreds of Mexicans" Zero evidence of such, purely hypothetical.
"and at least one American, border agent Brian Terry."
"On the evening of December 14, 2010, U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry and others were patrolling Peck Canyon, Santa Cruz County, Arizona , 11 miles from the Mexican border. The group came across five suspected illegal immigrants. When they fired non-lethal beanbag guns, the suspects responded with their own weapons, leading to a firefight. Terry was shot and killed; four of the suspects were arrested and two AK-pattern rifles were found nearby. The Attorney General's office was immediately notified of the shooting incident by email. The rifles were traced within hours of the shooting to a Phoenix store involved in the Fast and Furious operation, but the bullet that killed Terry was too badly damaged to be conclusively linked to either gun."
"accounts of the operation insist that ATF agents were prevented from intervening not by ATF officials, but rather by federal prosecutors with the Attorney General's office , who were unsure of whether the agents had sufficient evidence to arrest suspected straw-buyers. According to some reports, many agents insisted they were prevented from making arrests because prosecutors were unwilling to engage in what could become a potentially contentious political battle over Second Amendment rights during an election year , particularly given the difficult nature of prosecuting straw buyers, and the weak penalties associated with it, even if successful. Instead, prosecutors instructed ATF agents not to make arrests, but rather continue collecting evidence in order to build a stronger case."
So not an Obama scandal.
"Lois Lerner" (a Bush appointee) ", aggressively targeted conservative groups before elections."
While the IRS was looking for 501 c3 & 501 c4 rule breakers for the tax exempt status they did reference words such as " Tea Party ", "Patriots", or " 9/12 Project ", but they also referenced the words "progressive," "occupy," "Israel," "open source software," "medical marijuana" and "occupied territory advocacy" in the case file.
So again, not an "Obama" scandal targeting only conservatives as they falsely claim.
"the man who produced the offensively amateurish “Innocence of Muslims,” and initially charged him with lying about his role in the production of the video . This was a blatant attack on free expression. Yet most of the mainstream press continued to take the administration’s word for it and report that the video was the cause of the “ protests .”
"the administration detained the man who produced the offensively amateurish “Innocence of Muslims,” and initially charged him with lying about his role in the production of the video . This was a blatant attack on free expression. Yet most of the mainstream press continued to take the administration’s word for it and report that the video was the cause of the “ protests .”
The facts:
"The movie was written and produced by Nakoula Basseley Nakoula , using the pseudonym of "Sam Bacile"."
"On September 27, 2012, U.S. federal authorities stated Nakoula was arrested in Los Angeles for allegedly violating terms of his probation ."
"On November 7, 2012, Nakoula pleaded guilty to four of the charges against him and was sentenced to one year in prison and four years of supervised release ."
" Protests were held in many nations, through Islamic countries in the Middle East, Asia, and Africa as well as the United Kingdom, France, the Netherlands and Australia".
Again, not an "Obama" scandal.
And with Benghazi the Republicans spent four years and 8 partisan investigations all to conclude Hillary couldn't have actually prevented anything and there was no evidence Obama was trying to avoid calling it a terror attack just before the 2012 election as many half wits claim. In fact the day after the Benghazi attack President Obama said "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.".
So of all the supposed "scandals" this partisan hack lists above, how many Obama officials were indicted and convicted of ANY crimes?
I'll give you a hint, it starts with a "Z" and ends with "ero".
Thank you for correcting the record.
Ten years since it began ZERO Obama campaign or administration officials ever indicted for malfeasance...
That makes Obama's two terms the squeaky cleanest in history and the fact of the matter is that is a fact.
Trump's partial term is already turning out to be one of the most corrupted in history by any comparison.
Holy shit, you’ve really convinced yourself of that haven’t you? You and 11 other people apparently.
Sad!
Notice to Trumpists: If you are still supporting Trump at this late date, you have hereby forfeited the right to ever call any politician, or any human being for that matter, a 'liar.' Thank-you for your co-operation regarding this matter.
And the question has to be asked. How the hell can they possibly admonish their children not to lie when they cheer every time Trump does it? Trump has erased the 9th Commandment from their memory. Roy Moore will have to chisel it off his monument.
I didn't have sandals either.
Oh. SCANDALS?
Never mind.
I didn't have sandals either.
Oh. SCANDALS?
Never mind
LOL... Buzz that reminds me so much of the old SNL and Rosan Rosana danna in her skit.
"Ooo That's different, never mind !!"
cute
Rosanna Dandana (Gilda Radner) is exactly why I do my "never mind" bits now and then.
She was precious, Gilda Radner that is.
A great loss to the world of comedy, and to her husband.
Those were my two favorite characters
Add another scandal and illegal act from the Trumpster.
I've never seen a more corrupt person in the WH.
I can't disagree. Trump has set a new bar for corruption. Well beyond Nixon or anybody else.
Lets hope that we never again see anyone to challenge that low bar, it can only improve from here.