Why Give Obama a Pass on his Scandal Claims?
August 12, 2013
President Barack Obama is referring to the investigation of current administration scandals as “phony.” Is it possible that a “phony” dimension to the scandals is from his administration and not the congressional committees investigating them?
For example, was it not phony for President Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, at the ceremony for the arrival of the bodies of the dead heroes of Benghazi, to refer to a video as the cause of their deaths and not a terrorist attack which they knew to be a fact days before the ceremony?
Was it not phony for the administration to blame a “couple rogue agents in the IRS in Cincinnati” for harassing conservative groups applying for tax exempt status when it was subsequently determined that the harassment originated in Washington?
Was it not phony for Attorney General Eric Holder to claim he would never accuse reporters of participating in spying when he, several days before, signed off on an order to investigate a reporter for such activity?
Is it not troubling that the media follows President Obama around the country, reporting his “phony scandal” accusation, without pointing out these inconsistencies and their consequences? To quote John Adams’s line in the movie “1776:” “Is anybody there? Does anybody care?”