╌>

Hey, Joe Biden! Here Are Some Scandals You Forgot

  

Category:  Op/Ed

Via:  heartland-american  •  5 years ago  •  21 comments

Hey, Joe Biden! Here Are Some Scandals You Forgot
There must have been at least a sniff of scandal, by the way, because even after a federal judge rejected Obama's assertion of executive privilege in efforts to deny Congress files relating to the operation, the administration wouldn't budge. Obama's attorney general, Eric Holder, refused to cooperate, becoming the first sitting attorney general in American history to be held in contempt of Congress -- a vote that included 17 Democrats. It's odd, because today asserting executive privilege...

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



"Know what I was most proud of?" presidential candidate Joe Biden told a crowd on Wednesday. "For eight years, there wasn't one single hint of a scandal or a lie."

In an era where every presidential tweet is an existential threat to democracy, there are probably plenty of people who believe this myth. Off the bat, though, it should be mentioned that even liberal fact-checking outfit PolitiFact once awarded Barack Obama the "Lie of Year" for misleading the American people about his technocratic health care plan.

Obama's most famous lie, of course, upturned millions of lives. Without it, it's doubtful Obamacare -- which was perhaps the only wholly partisan national reform effort in American history -- would ever have passed. Even with a stream of falsehoods, the bill had to be shoehorned through Congress. Media did a lot of heavy lifting for the administration in those heady days.

"If you like your health care plan, you can keep it" was only one of an array of demonstrably false statements fed to the public. You might remember one of Obamacare's architects, Jonathan Gruber, explaining how this "lack of transparency" compounded by "the stupidity of the American voter" was a huge political advantage for the administration. Or maybe you don't.

How many Americans knew, for instance, that "Operation Fast and Furious" put around 2,000 weapons into the hands of narco-traffickers (and an Islamic terrorist), leading to the murder of hundreds of Mexican citizens, and at least one American, a border agent named Brian Terry? Not enough.

There must have been at least a sniff of scandal, by the way, because even after a federal judge rejected Obama's assertion of executive privilege in efforts to deny Congress files relating to the operation, the administration wouldn't budge. Obama's attorney general, Eric Holder, refused to cooperate, becoming the first sitting attorney general in American history to be held in contempt of Congress -- a vote that included 17 Democrats.

It's odd, because today asserting executive privilege is exactly like Watergate. And ignoring courts? Well, Obama did that all the time.

Then again, Obama could secretly send planes filled with cash to pay ransom to an Islamist terror state responsible for the deaths of hundreds of American servicemen (using money that had been earmarked for terror victims), and most reporters still regurgitated echo-chamber talking points. You remember Ben Rhodes bragging about how the Obama administration could trick 27-years-olds whose "only reporting experience consists of being around political campaigns" because they "literally know nothing"?

Politico's Josh Meyer, who did know something, would write a deeply sourced piece -- featuring numerous real-life, on-the-record administration officials -- about the Obama administration's efforts to undermine investigations into a drug-trafficking ring run by Hezbollah operating in the United States, and most major news organizations never even mentioned it.

Today, President Trump's Twitter attacks on CNN reporters are threats to the future of free expression. Back in 2012, the Obama's Department of Justice spied on the Associated Press, tapping around 20 different phone lines -- including cell phone and home lines -- that captured at least 100 staffers who worked for the outlet. The government kept records of all outgoing calls "for both the work and personal phone numbers of individual reporters" and the main line used by reporters in the House of Representatives.

The Justice Department had already spied on Fox News' James Rosen in 2010, collecting his telephone records, looking at his personal emails and tracking his movements. Holder, by the way, shopped the case to three separate judges, until he found one who let him name Rosen a co-conspirator in the crime of reporting the news.

There is, of course, so much more. Obama's CIA director, John Brennan, oversaw an operation of illegal spying on a staffer of the legislative branch. At least five agency officials under his watch broke into Senate computer files. Brennan would attempt to cover up the agency's actions by doubling down, blaming the Senate, and pushing to fire at least one staffer charged with investigating his agency.

Biden might not remember, but the Internal Revenue Service leadership aggressively targeted conservative groups to undermine their voice in elections. The IRS admitted as much in an apology letter. Then there was Obama national security advisor Susan Rice, who went on national television and claimed that terrorist attacks against Americans at Benghazi were a "spontaneous reaction" to "hateful and offensive video," even when she knew it was a sophisticated and pre-planned terror attack. Defenders of free expression were nowhere to be found when the maker of the video was conveniently thrown into jail.

There were cronyistic green projects that enriched political allies, the Secret Service's many embarrassing breaches and general debauchery, Hillary Clinton's infamous attempts to circumvent transparency -- more than likely to cover up favor-trading, and more seriously, Veterans Affairs negligence.

Then again, perhaps Biden feels "most proud" of his mythical eight years of non-scandals because it's about the only thing in his political past he isn't going to be forced to abandon.

COPYRIGHT 2019 CREATORS.COM


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
1  seeder  XXJefferson51    5 years ago

“Today, President Trump's Twitter attacks on CNN reporters are threats to the future of free expression. Back in 2012, the Obama's Department of Justice spied on the Associated Press, tapping around 20 different phone lines -- including cell phone and home lines -- that captured at least 100 staffers who worked for the outlet. The government kept records of all outgoing calls "for both the work and personal phone numbers of individual reporters" and the main line used by reporters in the House of Representatives.

The Justice Department had already spied on Fox News' James Rosen in 2010, collecting his telephone records, looking at his personal emails and tracking his movements. Holder, by the way, shopped the case to three separate judges, until he found one who let him name Rosen a co-conspirator in the crime of reporting the news.

There is, of course, so much more. Obama's CIA director, John Brennan, oversaw an operation of illegal spying on a staffer of the legislative branch. At least five agency officials under his watch broke into Senate computer files. Brennan would attempt to cover up the agency's actions by doubling down, blaming the Senate, and pushing to fire at least one staffer charged with investigating his agency.

Biden might not remember, but the Internal Revenue Service leadership aggressively targeted conservative groups to undermine their voice in elections. The IRS admitted as much in an apology letter. Then there was Obama national security advisor Susan Rice, who went on national television and claimed that terrorist attacks against Americans at Benghazi were a "spontaneous reaction" to "hateful and offensive video," even when she knew it was a sophisticated and pre-planned terror attack. Defenders of free expression were nowhere to be found when the maker of the video was conveniently thrown into jail.

There were cronyistic green projects that enriched political allies, the Secret Service's many embarrassing breaches and general debauchery, Hillary Clinton's infamous attempts to circumvent transparency -- more than likely to cover up favor-trading, and more seriously, Veterans Affairs negligence.”

 
 
 
The Magic 8 Ball
Masters Quiet
1.1  The Magic 8 Ball  replied to  XXJefferson51 @1    5 years ago
Hillary Clinton's infamous attempts to circumvent transparency

what? she just wiped her server with a cloth.... LOL

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
1.1.1  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  The Magic 8 Ball @1.1    5 years ago

Was that before or after she applied the byte of bleach to it? 

 
 
 
The Magic 8 Ball
Masters Quiet
1.1.2  The Magic 8 Ball  replied to  XXJefferson51 @1.1.1    5 years ago

all I know is she used "like a cloth or something"


384

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
1.1.3  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  The Magic 8 Ball @1.1.2    5 years ago

I remember that comment.  Right around the time of bleach byte coming to light.  

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
Professor Quiet
2  Dismayed Patriot    5 years ago

Well I read it, but where was the beat? They pull out all these bullshit supposed scandals as their remix tape but it all falls flat to anyone who actually has read and understands the facts. Why not try and spice it up with some more of those hilarious Russian lies? Some spicy Seth Rich assassination or Obama going to a gay men's club or perhaps the pizza parlor sex ring. Putin would love it I'm sure.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.1  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @2    5 years ago

So many Obama-Biden scandals, so little idiot Biden memory of America’s years of darkness.  Obama Biden was 8 years of non stop scandal.  

 
 
 
The Magic 8 Ball
Masters Quiet
2.1.1  The Magic 8 Ball  replied to  XXJefferson51 @2.1    5 years ago

nonstop scandal is only just a bit of their bs.

384

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.1.2  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  The Magic 8 Ball @2.1.1    5 years ago

Indeed he did build all that!  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.2  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @2    5 years ago

That's a great approach - use obvious false scandals to discredit the real ones!

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
Professor Guide
3  Bob Nelson    5 years ago

Seriously?

A Trump True Believer TM is upset by warmed-over semi-scandals from long ago... while the current Administration is at a level of nepotism, corruption and malfeasance unseen for many decades... if ever... ??

Seriously?

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
3.1  Ronin2  replied to  Bob Nelson @3    5 years ago
is upset by warmed-over semi-scandals from long ago.

What, a never Trumper is upset because someone had the temerity to remind people that the Obama Administration was corrupt POS, that was given a free ride by the media?

while the current Administration is at a level of nepotism, corruption and malfeasance unseen for many decades... if ever... ??

You are hilarious. Trump is bad; but the left has nothing on him. They are on a grand smear campaign to try and make Trump more toxic than he already is. Seems they are not that confident in whomever is left from their clown car of candidates being able to defeat Trump in a national election. It would help if their candidates weren't all trying to prove who can be the furthest to the left.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
3.1.1  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Ronin2 @3.1    5 years ago

Trump is a paragon of virtue compared to the sleaze that is Obama-Biden.  

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
Professor Guide
3.1.2  Bob Nelson  replied to  XXJefferson51 @3.1.1    5 years ago
Trump is a paragon of virtue compared to the sleaze that is Obama-Biden.

I'm going to enshrine that statement... jrSmiley_12_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Bob Nelson
Professor Guide
3.1.3  Bob Nelson  replied to  Bob Nelson @3.1.2    5 years ago

original

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
3.1.4  seeder  XXJefferson51  replied to  Bob Nelson @3.1.3    5 years ago

Compared to democrat officials and candidates, he certainly is.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
4  JohnRussell    5 years ago
What we learned in 2013 is that the unit within the IRS that reviews 501(c)(4) applications had been using the names of organizations as an initial filter to determine who was likely to be engaged in impermissibly pervasive political activity. If a group calls itself "Ohioans United to Defeat Barack Obama's Un-American Agenda," for example, that might be a group that is mostly engaged in political activity.

What would make this a scandal? The IRS had supposedly flagged not just "political sounding" names but names that signaled a conservative orientation, including "tea party," "patriot," "9/12."

Once that news broke, we were off to the races. Despite a complete lack of evidence, Republicans in Congress immediately claimed that this was a political hit job directed from on high in the Obama Administration. Not only was there no evidence to support such claims, but the TIGTA report had made clear that the IRS had already stopped using those filters.

No matter. Republicans knew that they could make hay about this, and the two-sides-to-every-story press would surely write that "Republicans say that the Obama Administration has used the IRS to target its enemies, and although Democrats deny this, an investigation is ongoing."

The only reason that investigations continued, however, was that Republicans insisted on continuing to investigate. Like their obsession with the Benghazi tragedy, which they could never -- even after their own endless series of witch hunts committee inquiries -- turn into a fact-based scandal, Republicans quickly turned "the IRS scandal" into their own echo-chambered conventional wisdom, evidence be damned.

Along the way, people like me would  occasionally  revisit the story and conclude that there was still no there there. And even people who would typically be sympathetic to the Republicans' hyperventilations were not all on board. For example, a year after the non-scandal broke, Chris Wallace on Fox News chastised a Republican for continuing to pursue the story after  finding nothing .

The years dragged on, and the evidence continued not to pile up. But because Republicans have a bottomless well of energy that they use to keep zombie stories alive, they could create news out of non-news simply by continuing to complain about the nonexistent scandal, calling for the impeachment of the IRS Commissioner (who had not even been there during the supposed wrongdoing) and so on.

What is new now? The original claim was that the filters that the IRS's tax-exempt organizations unit had used were biased against right-wing groups. Now, it turns out that even that was not true. In addition to keywords like "tea party," the unit was also looking for words like "occupy," "progressive," and "green energy."

Actually, that information is not new. We have known for years that the IRS was using both left- and right-oriented search terms, but this report provides exhaustive documentation of that fact.

As tax professor Philip Hackney  points out , the non-scandal was always a two-part story: (1) the IRS targeted right-wing groups for extra scrutiny, and (2) the Obama Administration had ordered them to do so.

We never had any proof that the second part was true. Indeed, as I argued all along, it would amount to political malpractice for the Obama people to engage in that kind of dirty trick, because it was so pointless. "We're going to win by having the IRS slow down tax-exempt status applications from tiny local Tea Party groups, none of which have enough money to tax in the first place."

Now, we have proof that the first prong of the non-scandal was never true. The IRS did use politically-oriented search terms to try to sort through applicants for inappropriate levels of political activity, but it did not do so on a partisan or ideological basis. And even so, they stopped using those search terms, in an effort to avoid even the appearance of political intent in their reviews.

Will this stop the Republicans? Of course not. A  New York Times   story  quotes the chair of the House's tax-writing committee: "This report reinforces what government watchdogs and congressional investigators have confirmed time and time again: Bureaucrats at the I.R.S. ... arbitrarily and haphazardly administered the tax code and targeted taxpayers based on political ideology."

No, the report says exactly the opposite. The IRS covered the political spectrum, meaning that regardless of a group's apparent political ideology, they might receive added scrutiny in applying for status as a not-excessively-political organization

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
4.1  JohnRussell  replied to  JohnRussell @4    5 years ago

We could debunk all these "scandals" in a similar way. 

 
 
 
Jasper2529
Professor Quiet
5  Jasper2529    5 years ago
"Know what I was most proud of?" presidential candidate Joe Biden told a crowd on Wednesday. "For eight years, there wasn't one single hint of a scandal or a lie."

Good ol' Joe sank to a new low by relying on his BFF's lies.  jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

bracelets.jpg?itok=q6HmsFLn  

 
 

Who is online






Igknorantzruls
JBB
Dragon
JohnRussell


91 visitors