Why President Obama Will Survive the Scandals

On Wednesday, President Obama struck back against a rising chorus of criticism in Congress and the media over his handling of a trio of scandals that have rocked Washington.

Wednesday’s actions may represent a turning point in the scandals that have dominated the last week or so, because as of now, there’s no evidence that either the president or anyone in the White House or his re-election campaign had anything to do with any of the three scandals.

President Obama speaks at the White House Wednesday. Source: YouTube/whitehouse.gov

President Obama speaks at the White House Wednesday. Source: YouTube/whitehouse.gov


  1. The IRS actions, although they were discussed high in that agency’s ranks, likely didn’t even spill over into the Treasury Department, which oversees it. Congress will investigate this, as it should, and Attorney General Eric Holder has said the Justice Department will investigate it to see if criminal charges are warranted.  And there probably will be changes in criteria used to grant political groups not-for-profit status. But without more direct evidence linking the president  or his campaign to this shameful effort, he won’t be hurt by it.
  2. Congress also will investigate the AP scandal, but I suspect they’ll get nowhere, because as I wrote here Wednesday, DOJ’s efforts were probably legal, part of the metastasis of the national security state. Chances for a new shield law have improved, which is a good thing.  But again, no direct link to the president.
  3. Finally, on Benghazi, Wednesday’s document dump showed an even more confusing chain of events in the Rice “talking points” than we had seen before. The documents, which had been released to Congress several months ago, reveal intense in-fighting between the State Department and the CIA, which may have been trying to conceal clandestine operations there. But again, no evidence whatsoever of any White House or Obama campaign involvement.

With Wednesday’s actions, the president began to move beyond these scandals, even as Congress and the media will harp on them, for good and bad reasons.

He already has proposed reforms in the IRS and journalists’ confidentiality and on Thursday in the Rose Garden he called on Congress to “fully fund” his “budget request to improve [embassy] security around the world.” Talk about turning the tables!

The email dump also pretty much absolved UN Ambassador Rice, who just read talking points State and CIA couldn’t agree on. The president may even appoint her National Security Adviser, which doesn’t require Senate confirmation. He also will focus on implementing the recommendations made by the Pickering-Mullen group to improve embassy security.

Most of the Republicans’ questions on Benghazi now involve former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. President Obama will let her fend for herself—the Clintons have a lot of experience dealing with scandals, don’t they?

Thus far, public opinion hasn’t wavered much. Even prominent conservatives like Charles Krauthammer and Bill O’Reilly have urged caution in linking the president to these scandals. They may sense that he’s going to come out of them unscathed.


  1. So Far, Obama Has a Pretty Clean Record | The Independent Agenda - May 22, 2013

    […] anything that’s been alleged so far in the Obama administration remotely compare with this? That’s why the Beltway media needs to get off their Twitter feeds and […]

  2. What the Obama Presidency Really Means | The Independent Agenda - May 30, 2013

    […] I’ve written, the trio of scandals that have preoccupied the media for the last few weeks won’t really touch him, although the Justice Department’s spying on journalists like the AP and Fox News’ James Rosen […]

  3. The Independent Agenda Is on Hiatus | The Independent Agenda - June 3, 2013

    […] summer is a good time to hit the pause button. The continuing focus  on scandal and the shrinking prospects for any long-term “grand bargain” on the budget, plus the remote […]

Leave a Reply