This week, the Obama administration has seen three “scandals” being pushed: IRS targeting conservative groups, Benghazi, and the DOJ seizure of Associated Press phone records. But as Erza Klein of The Washington Post points out, there doesn’t seem to be much real meat to these “scandals”. Low level staffers are behind the IRS thing (and the real problem is that there is a 501(c)(4) tax exemption in the first place), the Benghazi thing is all about spin, and the AP phone record seizure is probably legal (though I think there is a little more to this one as it relates to an abuse of power). Whether the Obama administration had any direct connection to any of these is really a question.
However, as Conor Friedersdorf from The Atlantic has pointed out, there are real genuine transgressions by the Obama administration that probably should be scandals. Not prosecuting crimes of torture, committing troops to Libya without so much as consulting Congress, order the assassination of an American citizen, gone after whistleblowers like no other administration before it, carried out the awful drone program that has killed hundreds of children, signed into law the power to hold people indefinitely (proving Obama has no idea of why the prison in Guantanamo Bay needs to be closed),…….
It can go on and on. But since Obama is not getting heat for any of that (and frankly, he’s not going to), is it good that he is at least getting grief over something? Anything? At least the media seems to be subjecting the administration to more scrutiny, even if right now they are asking the wrong questions.