ShareThis Page
White House corruption |
Featured Commentary

White House corruption

| Thursday, May 1, 2014 8:55 p.m

There are two major scandals that will taint President Barack Obama’s legacy: Benghazi and the targeting of conservative groups by the IRS.

When both of these scandals came to light, senior Obama administration officials, out of habit, immediately blamed everything and everyone outside the White House. But as we move forward with lawsuits and demands for answers, the White House walls are starting to cave in.

This week, an email obtained by Judicial Watch revealed White House communications adviser Ben Rhodes as the architect of then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice’s Sunday show talking points on Benghazi, where, five times, she misrepresented the reason for the attack. To make matters worse, Rhodes specifically stated in the emails that focus needed to be on “an Internet video,” not a “broader failure of policy.”

The White House previously denied involvement in changing or altering talking points and, just days before the 2012 presidential election, Obama took offense at anyone suggesting his White House was deliberately misleading the American people about the cause or motive for the attack.

When the IRS scandal broke early last summer, senior IRS officials and the White House blamed a few “low-level” and “rogue” employees working in a small Cincinnati office for the targeting of conservative tea party groups. We’ve known for months that talking point is demonstrably false.

New email evidence shows the now-infamous Lois Lerner was working with senior officials at the Department of Justice to consider bringing criminal charges against conservative groups that might have “lied” on their tax-exempt application forms. Lerner noted that her old Federal Election Commission friends were concerned about a flood of new groups they wanted to “shut down.” A criminal prosecution of just one would intimidate the rest into silence.

Further, Lerner was regularly working with the former chief of staff to former IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman, who visited the White House a record 118 times during the period of the targeting between 2010 and 2011.

But it wasn’t just Democrats or Lois Lerner’s friends in the IRS who were expressing concern over new conservative tea party groups. Obama led the charge publicly in speeches and in interviews with the media while lamenting the free speech power the Citizens United ruling gave people to create such groups and to raise money. He mentioned “shady” groups repeatedly, the same “shady” groups the IRS and DOJ were working to silence. Coincidence? Not a chance.

When Republicans take over the Senate in November, they’ll have more power to enforce investigations of Obama administration scandals coming out of the House Oversight Committee. When this power is applied, Obama will feel the pressure and more information pointing directly to White House involvement in corrupt behavior previously denied will be exposed.

It’s only a matter of time.

Katie Pavlich is the news editor of Her exclusive Trib columns appear the first and third Fridays of each month.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.