Washington is filled to the brim with folks who understand power and nothing else.
Muth's genius (and there is no doubt he is "some kind" of genius) is very much like that of Obama, except Obama has used his to prey upon those who view the world through the lens of racism instead of that old Teutonic culture of Albrecht Muth.
I like con men because they make life interesting. I particularly like them when they are made to pay the piper.
Obama knows he is being pursued by his piper (and I imagine he enjoys the thrill of being pursued). But it will be great fun when justice finally catches up.
Part of me even wonders if the NYT ran this article because they know it will resonate, consciously and unconsciously, because of Muth's parallels with Obama.
It is interesting that mention is made in the second paragraph that Antonin Scalia was a dinner guest of this charlatan. Apparently that is one of the "hooks" to get people to read the rest. (Riding the tail of the SCOTUS decision on Obamatax, perhaps?)
The article says Muth's father died when he was an infant and his mother "turned down opportunities to ascend higher", thus denying him his supposed rightful heritage. As a result, he develops into a self-indulgent, narcissistic, power-hungry homosexual who says he understands the reason Hillary stayed in her marriage to Bill Clinton. While there are definitely signficant similarities between Muth and Obama, I doubt that the NYT editors actually want people to come to the realization that Obama is a "fabulist" like Muth.
Seems to me that Obama is doing to America what Muth did to his wife. Both seem to act out of revenge toward their mothers, whose decisions caused them essentially to grow up fatherless. What is truly disturbing is that there are so many people who know the emperor is naked but are unwilling to leave his parade.