Posted on 05/15/2013 7:48:14 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Politico reported earlier today that Washington DC has begun to turn against Barack Obama and his administration. Thanks to Obama’s own arrogance, write Mike Allen and Jim VandeHei, he has little good will inside the Beltway anyway, and that leaves him with few passionate defenders in the latest scandal cascade:
The town is turning on President Obama — and this is very bad news for this White House.
Republicans have waited five years for the moment to put the screws to Obama — and they have one-third of all congressional committees on the case now. Establishment Democrats, never big fans of this president to begin with, are starting to speak out. And reporters are tripping over themselves to condemn lies, bullying and shadiness in the Obama administration.
Buy-in from all three D.C. stakeholders is an essential ingredient for a good old-fashioned Washington pile-on — so get ready for bad stories and public scolding to pile up. ….
Obama’s aloof mien and holier-than-thou rhetoric have left him with little reservoir of good will, even among Democrats. And the press, after years of being accused of being soft on Obama while being berated by West Wing aides on matters big and small, now has every incentive to be as ruthless as can be.
Many will treat that last claim with considerable skepticism. The press has had plenty of opportunities to demand accountability from the White House, but have mostly acted as its apologists instead. Benghazi is one case in point, long before there were any whistleblowers to report, too. The terrorist attack took place because Obama’s intervention in Libya and decapitation of the Moammar Qaddafi regime set the terrorist networks in eastern Libya free. Both the attack on our consulate and the larger problem of al-Qaeda’s attempt at its own coup in Mali — which took French military intervention to narrowly prevent — resulted directly from the decision by Obama to take out the Qaddafi regime without putting boots on the ground.
Not only has the media largely ignored that chain of consequences in the Benghazi story, they’re ignoring it in the context of Syria and proposed Western intervention there, too. That’s not even a “scandal” issue, but a critical sequence that needs to be properly aired and analyzed before we end up doing the same thing in Syria that we did in Libya — and the only obstacle to connecting those dots seems to be the desire of the media to preserve Obama’s Libya intervention as some sort of foreign-policy triumph.
But perhaps things are changing, if only in a self-interested way. The New York Times editorial board, which earlier kinda-sorta cheered the IRS’ focus on conservative groups, gets its dudgeon to medium-high on the seizure of AP phone records:
The Obama administration, which has a chilling zeal for investigating leaks and prosecuting leakers, has failed to offer a credible justification for secretly combing through the phone records of reporters and editors at The Associated Press in what looks like a fishing expedition for sources and an effort to frighten off whistle-blowers. …
For more than 30 years, the news media and the government have used a well-honed system to balance the government’s need to pursue criminals or national security breaches with the media’s constitutional right to inform the public. This action against The A.P., as the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press outlined in a letter to Mr. Holder, “calls into question the very integrity” of the administration’s policy toward the press.
The records covered 20 phone lines, including main office phones in New York City, Washington, Hartford, and the Congressional press gallery. The guidelines for such subpoenas, first enacted in 1972, require that requests for media information be narrow. The reporters’ committee said this action is so broad that it allowed prosecutors to “plunder two months of news-gathering materials to seek information that might interest them.”
The Washington Post editorial board, which sharply criticized the White House over the IRS scandal, offers a we-told-you-so on the AP scandal:
WHEN THE Justice Department launched its investigation of alleged leaks of national security information by the Obama administration a year ago, we were skeptical. The history of such probes is mainly a tale of dead ends and unintended negative consequences. That this effort to criminalize a leak was launched amid an election-year uproar seemed especially inauspicious.
Our forebodings have been borne out with the revelation that federal prosecutors have undertaken a broad sweep of the Associated Press’s phone records. Whatever national-security enhancement this was intended to achieve seems likely to be outweighed by the damage to press freedom and governmental transparency.
USA Today’s editors call it “a torrent of abuse” and part of a pattern in this administration (via Gabriel Malor):
Another day, another excessive use of government power by the Obama administration.
First came disclosures Friday that the Internal Revenue Service had singled out conservative advocacy groups for extra scrutiny when the groups sought tax-exempt status. On Monday came news that the Justice Department, in a rare intrusion into the work of news reporters, had seized wide-ranging phone records from the Associated Press.
They seem to be the only ones connecting any dots here. Plus, they point out that this abuse of power all but disqualifies the DoJ to investigate the other abuse of power erupting this week:
Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole argued Tuesday that prosecutors acted cautiously. But the sweeping seizure of data on 20 AP phones lines smacks more of a fishing expedition. Those records are now in government files and could be misused in the future. Prosecutors seized the data secretly rather than offer the AP a chance to negotiate what it would turn over, even though the records weren’t going anywhere. They treated the AP more like a hardened criminal than an upstanding news organization.
As for the IRS revelation, Attorney General Eric Holder has ordered a criminal investigation to determine whether anyone at the agency broke the law. That’s a start. But the Justice Department’s decision-making in the AP case doesn’t inspire confidence in the result.
It would build a little more confidence in the media if these outlets would connect a few more of these dots.
They watched obama piss on everyone else, and told them all it was raining.
But once he did it to them they finally take notice?
Rats are deserting the ship. Saw Chris Matthews turn on Obama this morning. Pretty soon, his only friend will be Valerie Jarrett.
Liberal, activist press....meet the liberal, activist government that you carried more water for than Gunga Din and ushered into two terms in the White House. This is what you supported, this is what you wanted, this is what you got. You should be happy.
Funny how fast they turn when it’s their playpen being raided, isn’t it?
Be careful what you wish for...
Interesting that the media never thought that a dictator would turn on them.
The liberal media may not like the idea of going after Obama, but they may now be thinking "we have to get him before he gets us."
They will do the BAD ,BAD ,Bad for a short time then jump right back into Obama’s pocket
Yeah, nothing a little chocolate on the pillow can’t fix.
Gotta love Schadenfreude! Nice to see the American version of Pravda get crapped on by this administration which they worked so hard to put in the white House!
Obviously too close to the bone for our media “watchdogs.”
But where were all these self-regarding phonies on Banghazi and the IRS, et cetera?
Have a hard believing that Matthews would do anything but make excuses for him.
So obviously a distraction from Bengahzi. Obvious because the Balack obama regime has admitted to it, which lefties NEVER do (deny, deny, deny their motto), and, the liberalist of the lib commentators are actually attacking Balack obama for the IRS and AP phone records. Remember, these are the mediots that get their talking points directly from the regime.
Yep, the MSM are simply removing their lips from Obama’s arse long enough to catch their breath; then they will plant them right back on.
Of course, just like an abused housewife or a woman married to a Middle Eastern man, they’ll go running back for more shabby treatment.
Many of the media are Idealists and therefore never even considered Obama’s actions against them as a real possibility.
SURPRISE!, SURPRISE!, . . .
So true. . .
Saw Chris Matthews turn on Obama this morning.
It’s refreshing watching the media try to remember what hard hitting, investigative journalism looks like as they round on the administration for a change with laser scrutiny
Probably nothing more than a lover's spat. Soon enough, they'll be a dedicated couple again.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.