President Obama's scandal-free delusion!

David Limbaugh | Creators Syndicate

Upon hearing that former President Barack Obama recently boasted that he had a scandal-free administration, my first thought after regaining my faculties was: How can I possibly cram all the evidence refuting this in a little bitty column?
Then I read that what he actually said was, "We didn't have a scandal that embarrassed us." At first blush, that sounds better, right? Because I assume he doesn't mean he's incapable of being embarrassed. After a little more thought, though, it occurred to me that this construction just highlights the real reason he has apparently deluded himself into thinking he served eight honorable years: The liberal media had his back the entire time, even when he treated them like dirt.

In fact, Obama was a perpetual power-abusing machine. He was so routinely high-handed and selectively contemptuous of the rule of law that people were beginning to think presidential authoritarianism was the new normal. How ironic that so many of Obama's enablers are now projecting these sins onto President Trump, who — to this point, at least - hasn't actually crossed the line into flouting the Constitution. The left believes — and acts on the belief — that the ends justify the means, and so, it naturally assumes we will do the same.

Obama was hell-bent on fundamentally transforming America as founded, and he was willing to scratch, bite, kick, steal and flush the rule of law to accomplish it — and he did, like no president before him. In other words, Obama's lies were OK because lies are sometimes necessary for the greater good.

For your review, let me just give you a list of examples, many of them snatched from my two Obama books, which chronicled his two disgraceful terms. Not all technically qualify as scandals, but enough do;

Benghazi: In addition to the scandalous betrayal and death of our people, Obama and his cohorts concocted and disseminated the lie that the attack on our consulate was caused by an anti-Muslim video. Later, Judicial Watch obtained a smoking-gun email from top-level Obama aid Ben Rhodes, sent to a dozen members of Obama's inner circle, that contained talking points to prepare then-U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice for the Sunday talk shows. Three of the four main bullet points Rhodes was advising Rice to convey were patently false, including the lie about the video. They knew, because the CIA made it clear, that the attack was not the result of a spontaneous protest to an anti-Muslim video but preplanned by al-Qaida. The Obama administration manufactured this canard to insulate Obama from criticism two months before the November 2012 election, as he had boasted that he had al-Qaida on the run.

Obama's IRS conspired to target conservative and pro-Israel groups for discriminatory treatment in acquiring tax exemptions.

Obama and then-Attorney general Eric Holder's Justice Department was never held to account for its actions on the gunrunning scandal known as Operation Fast and Furious, in which an American was murdered with weapons this administration deliberately put into the hands of Mexican cartels.

This same Justice Department was also under a cloud due to scandals involving its massive culling of Associated Press reporters' phone records concerning a leak investigation, slandering Fox News reporter James Rosen over classified information, and monitoring Rosen's phone calls and emails.

Obama's lies on Obamacare were legion and scandalous: He knew from the jump we couldn't keep our plans or our doctors, and that Obamacare would reduce rather than increase people's access to care. He knew it wouldn't reduce premiums by $2,500 for the average family of four. He deceived us when he said no federal dollars would be used to fund abortions. He grossly distorted the picture of the true number of uninsured. His goal, proved on videotape, was always single-payer. He used budgetary accounting gimmicks to grease Obamacare by the CBO, including the double counting on Medicare.

After Obama's failure to pass cap-and-trade legislation through Congress to purportedly reduce the global temperature by suppressing traditional energy production and consumption, his Environmental Protection Agency unilaterally and unconstitutionally issued a decree to accomplish his goal administratively. Some called this one of the biggest power grabs in American history, as the EPA had positioned itself to regulate fuel economy, set climate policy for the nation and amend the Clean Air Act — powers never delegated to it by Congress.

The Obama administration flagrantly defied a federal court order on his moratorium on offshore drilling when his interior secretary, Ken Salazar, said he would just reimpose the moratorium based on information that wasn't fully developed earlier.

Obama rigged the playing field to secure for his labor-union friends a bigger stake in his new General Motors than was warranted by their actual ownership interest. He robbed secured creditors of their preferred-creditor status and the value of their investment by using the power of his office to strong-arm a restructuring of the company. When Democratic Party donor and super-lawyer Tom Lauria opposed this plan on behalf of his client, according to Lauria, the White House threatened to destroy his client's reputation.

The Obama-Hillary Clinton FISA scandal, the egregiousness of which is being casually dismissed by many, will someday be fully exposed.

Then, there's the Iran nuclear deal, Obama's unprecedented federal land grabs; his dismissal of a voter-intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party that had already been won; his bullying of doctors and insurance companies when it served his purposes; his endless stirring of the racial pot; his bullying and fact-starved attack on BP that culminated in his authoritarian command, "Just plug the damn hole"; his stable of unaccountable "czars"; his war on Fox News, which preceded Trump's battles with the press that Democrats find so horrifying; the Department of Veterans Affairs scandal; the Solyndra scandal; the deliberate targeting of the coal industry; the shakedown of banks; the massive redistribution scheme disguised as an economic stimulus program; the federal commandeering of the student loan program; his public dressing down of the Supreme Court; his whispered hot-mic pledge to Russia to be more flexible on missile defense; his cavalier treatment of Arizona and its immigration laws; and gobs more.

I truly could go on, but I trust you get the picture.
David Limbaugh is a writer, author and attorney. His latest book is "The True Jesus: Uncovering the Divinity of Christ in the Gospels." Follow him on Twitter @davidlimbaugh and his website at www.davidlimbaugh.com. To read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate webpage at www.creators.com.

https://www.thespectrum.com/story/opinion/editorials/2018/03/02/president-barack-obama-scandal-free-delusion/387301002/

There you have it Obama hailers

Obama this,obama that.
He is no longer in office,all focus should be on Trump right now, coronavirus deaths in US has gotten to over 100,000.
All this diversionary tactics won't work.

Obama Was The Greatest Mistake the USA made!

That guy together with some demonrats radicalized The USA , and are still bent on Burying the USA..

Thanks to GOD for Someone like President Donald Trump!

If Hilary had won that Election, The World Today could be Fire!

Heaven would have Dissolved the world!

The devil called obummer

Righteousness89:
Obama Was The Greatest Mistake the USA made!

That guy together with some demonrats radicalized The USA , and are still bent on Burying the USA..

Thanks to GOD for Someone like President Donald Trump!

If Hilary had won that Election, The World Today could be Fire!

Heaven would have Dissolved the world!

I concur

Summary pls

Righteousness89:
Obama Was The Greatest Mistake the USA made!

That guy together with some demonrats radicalized The USA , and are still bent on Burying the USA..

Thanks to GOD for Someone like President Donald Trump!

If Hilary had won that Election, The World Today could be Fire!

Heaven would have Dissolved the world!

Totally agree with you

Including Donald Trump.

Righteousness89:
Obama Was The Greatest Mistake the USA made!

That guy together with some demonrats radicalized The USA , and are still bent on Burying the USA..

Thanks to GOD for Someone like President Donald Trump!

If Hilary had won that Election, The World Today could be Fire!

Heaven would have Dissolved the world!

Nonsense...!!like someone sensibly said..Obama is no longer president..Trump is..!and people are dying in America...It's his problem,not Obama's.
So stuff all this ur silliness abt Trump being God's gift where the sun don't shine...he's not!!..in fact he is turning into a curse...!!

Tonitelli:




Nonsense...!!like someone sensibly said..Obama is no longer president..Trump is..!and people are dying in America...It's his problem,not Obama's.
So stuff all this ur silliness abt Trump being God's gift where the sun don't shine...he's not!!..in fact he is turning into a curse...!!

Trump is a con man

The crimes of U.S Presidents. Very interesting


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BXtgq0Nhsc...

Righteousness89:
Obama Was The Greatest Mistake the USA made!

That guy together with some demonrats radicalized The USA , and are still bent on Burying the USA..

Thanks to GOD for Someone like President Donald Trump!

If Hilary had won that Election, The World Today could be Fire!

Heaven would have Dissolved the world!

While doing my research work on that rabble rouser, I stumbled on this;

Those who want to know what Obama really did with American economy can visit this page to buy this loaded book;

https://www.amazon.com/examples-lawbreaking-corruption-cronyism-hypocrisy-ebook/dp/B01E4U36NE

It is a matter of urgency in search of justice.

Cato Institute home


January 19, 2017
Commentary
Top 10 Ways Obama Violated the Constitution during His Presidency
By Ilya Shapiro
This article appeared in The Federalist on January 19, 2017.
Related Content
The Obama administration has been the most lawless in U.S. history. I don’t mean that in the Nixonian sense of personal corruption, whereby the president is personally above the law, although the idea that Barack Obama’s tenure has been ethically pure is laughable.

No, my accusation rests on the 44th president’s seeing himself as professionally above the law, ignoring the executive branch’s legal limits and disrespecting constitutional bounds like federalism and the separation of powers.

But don’t just take it from me. Liberal law professor Garrett Epps (a professional acquaintance) admits that “even for those like me who admire Barack Obama, the constitutional record is disturbingly mixed. Obama leaves the Constitution weaker than at the beginning of his terms.” Epps labels Obama’s posture to be one of “aggressive compliance,” torturing statutory language as far as it can go in order to avoid constitutional claims.

Obama Only Furthered the Imperial Presidency

He points first to the 2011 Libya intervention. It involved neither a congressional authorization of the use of force, nor compliance with the 1973 War Powers Act, which requires at least congressional notification of troop commitments and affirmative permission after 60 days. Every president since the WPA’s enactment has claimed that it’s an unconstitutional limit on inherent executive authority over military power. Obama instead claimed that hundreds of missile strikes and dozens of air missions didn’t trigger the WPA because they only constituted “kinetic military action” rather than war.

It just doesn’t pass the smell test. Neither does at least some of the National Security Agency’s robust program of domestic surveillance, about which Director of National Intelligence James Clapper has lied to Congress. And then there’s the aggressive posture towards and persecution of journalists. It’s as if the goal was to show Donald Trump how it’s done.

The Obama administration has been the most lawless in U.S. history. Here are just a few examples to prove it.
This is all a world away from candidate Obama, who said this on the campaign trail in 2008: “The biggest problems that we’re facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all. And that’s what I intend to reverse when I’m president.” As George Mason law professor David Bernstein quipped, foolish voters thought that Obama was taking issue with the imperial presidency, when really he was only complaining that the wrong man occupied the throne.

How Obama Ignored Constitutional Checks and Balances

Indeed, once he lost the congressional majority that allowed him to sign breathtakingly unconstitutional legislation like Obamacare and Dodd‐​Frank, Obama began using his pen in other ways. Hearkening to Woodrow Wilson’s progressive view of the administrative state, President Obama steadily took out his frustrations with the checks and balances that inhibited his ability to “fundamentally transform” the country.

A lack of congressional acquiescence didn’t stop this president. Even in Obama’s first term, the administration launched a “We Can’t Wait” initiative, with senior aide Dan Pfeiffer explaining that “when Congress won’t act, this president will.” And when the reelected President Obama announced his second‐​term economic plans, he said that “I will not allow gridlock, or inaction, or willful indifference to get in our way.”

But no matter how much you hold it up to the light—and no matter what textual penumbras you induce—there’s no “gridlock clause” in the Constitution by which the president’s power increases to the extent Congress doesn’t support him. Indeed, gridlock is a feature of our system, not a bug, meant to check executive abuse and majoritarian populism both.

As we mark another peaceful transfer of power, let’s pause to note the 10 most significant ways in which Barack Obama violated the Constitution, in rough chronological order.

1. The Chrysler Bailout

Building on the Bush administration’s illegal use of TARP funds to bail out the auto industry, the Obama administration in 2009 bullied Chrysler’s secured creditors—who were entitled to “absolute priority”—into accepting 30 cents on the dollar, while junior creditors such as labor unions received much more. This subversion of creditor rights violates not just bankruptcy law, but also the Constitution’s Takings and Due Process Clauses.

This blatant crony capitalism—government-directed industrial policy to help political insiders—discourages investors and generally undermines confidence in American rule of law. The Supreme Court ultimately vacated the Second Circuit ruling that allowed this farce to proceed; Chrysler’s creditors are still out of luck, but there’s no legal precedent.

2. Obamacare Implementation

One can, and many have, written whole articles about how the Affordable Care Act is such an affront to the rule of law that its individual mandate and Medicaid coercion—both of which Chief Justice John Roberts rewrote—are just the tip of the lawless iceberg. On implementation, we can’t blame Congress or courts. Here’s a sample:

The Labor Department announced in February 2013 that it was delaying for a year the part of the law that limits how much people have to spend on their own insurance. This may have been sensible, but changing a law requires actual legislation.
Later that year, the administration announced via blogpost on the eve of the July 4 holiday that it was delaying the requirement that employers of at least 50 people provide complying insurance or pay a fine. This time it cited statutory authority, but the cited provisions allow the delay of reporting requirements, not the mandate itself.
The famous pledge that “if you like your plan, you can keep it” backfired when insurers started cancelling millions of plans that didn’t comply with Obamacare. So Obama called a press conference to proclaim that people could continue buying non‐​complying plans for another year—despite the ACA’s language to the contrary. He then refused to consider a House‐​passed bill that would’ve made this action legal.
A little‐​known part of Obamacare requires congressional staff to get insurance from health exchanges, rather than a taxpayer‐​funded program. Obama directed the Office of Personnel Management to interpret the law to maintain the generous benefits.
Obamacare grants tax credits to people whose employers don’t provide coverage if they buy a plan “through an Exchange established by the State”—and then fines employers for each employee receiving such a subsidy. No tax credits are authorized for residents of states where the exchanges are established by the federal government, as an incentive for states to create exchanges themselves. Because so few (16) states did, however, the IRS issued a rule allowing subsidies (and fines) for plans coming from “a State Exchange, regional Exchange, subsidiary Exchange, and federally‐​facilitated Exchange.” Yes, we can also blame the Supreme Court for upholding this.
The Department of Health and Human Services granted more than 2,000 waivers to employers seeking relief from Obamacare’s regulations. Nearly 20 percent of them went to gourmet restaurants and other businesses in former Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s San Francisco district. Nevada, home to former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, got a blanket waiver, while GOP‐​controlled states like Indiana and Louisiana were denied. Beyond political favoritism, such dispensations violate a host of constitutional and administrative law provisions like equal protection and the “intelligible principle” needed for congressional delegation of authority to cabinet agencies.
HHS also continues paying insurance companies to compensate them for losses caused by Obamacare’s ignorance of basic economics. Alas, Congress never appropriated these funds, so the House of Representatives is suing the administration and won in the district court. Now on appeal, House v. Burwell is stayed until the D.C. Circuit hears from the incoming Trump administration. (Full disclosure: My wife joined the House general counsel’s office last month and is litigating the appeal.)
3. Political Profiling by the IRS

After seeing a rise in the number of applications for tax‐​exempt status, the IRS in 2010 compiled a “be on the lookout” (“BOLO”) list to identify organizations engaged in political activities. The list included words such as “Tea Party,” “Patriots,” and “Israel”; subjects such as government spending, debt, or taxes; and activities such as criticizing the government, educating about the Constitution, or challenging Obamacare. The targeting continued through May 2013, with no consequences other than Lois Lerner, the chief of the exempt‐​organizations unit, being held in contempt of Congress—and then being allowed to peacefully retire despite erased records and other cover‐​ups. Okay, this one qualifies as Nixonian.

4. Recess Appointments

In January 2012, President Obama appointed three members of the National Labor Relations Board, as well as the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, during what he considered to be a Senate recess. But the Senate was still holding “pro forma” sessions every three days—a technique developed by Sen. Harry Reid to thwart Bush recess appointments. (Meanwhile, the Dodd‐​Frank Act, which created the CFPB, provides that authority remains with the Treasury Secretary until a director is “confirmed by the Senate.”) In 2014, Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the NLRB appointments were illegal, while last year the D.C. Circuit found the CFPB’s structure to be unconstitutional.

5. DACA and DAPA

Congress has shamelessly failed to pass any sort of immigration reform, including for the most sympathetic victims of the current non‐​system, young people who were brought into the country illegally as children. Nonetheless, during his 2012 reelection campaign, President Obama directed the Department of Homeland Security to issue work and residence permits (Deferred Action to Childhood Arrivals) to the so‐​called Dreamers.

Then, after the 2014 midterms, the president decided that he had been wrong 22 times in saying he couldn’t give temporary legal status to illegal immigrants. The administration engineered this Deferred Action for Parents of Americans in the wake of Congress’s rejection of the same policies, in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act, immigration law, and the Constitution’s Take Care Clause. A district court enjoined DAPA in February 2015, which action the Fifth Circuit twice affirmed, as did the Supreme Court by a 4–4 vote.

6. Assault On Free Speech and Due Process On College Campuses

In 2013 the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights, in conjunction with the Justice Department, sent the University of Montana a letter that became a national “blueprint” for tackling sexual harassment. The letter urged a crackdown on “unwelcome” speech and requires complaints to be heard in quasi‐​judicial procedures that deny legal representation, encourage punishment before trial, and convict based on a mere “more likely than not” standard.

As noted civil libertarian Harvey Silverglate explained this week, the administration construed Title IX—the federal law barring sex discrimination by federally funded schools—as a mandate to punish students and faculty accused of sexual misconduct using procedures that make it extraordinarily difficult for innocent people to defend themselves.

7. The Clean Power Plan

In June 2014, the Environmental Protection Agency proposed a new rule for regulating power‐​plant emissions. Despite significant criticism, it finalized the rule in August 2015, giving states until 2018 to develop plans to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, with mandatory compliance beginning in 2022.

The EPA cites Section 111 of the Clean Air Act as justification for this Clean Power Plan, but that section can’t give the agency such authority. Section 111 doesn’t permit the government to require states to regulate pollutants from existing sources when those pollutants are already being regulated under Section 112, like those deriving from coal‐​fired plants. The late Justice Scalia’s last public act was to join an order staying the rule pending further litigation (or, as is likely, a rescinding of the rule).

8. The WOTUS Rule

In May 2015, the EPA announced its new Clean Water Rule, which aims to protect streams and wetlands from pollution. The agency insists that the rule doesn’t affect bodies of water not previously regulated, but several groups have sued on the basis that the rule’s definitions of regulated waters greatly exceed the EPA’s authority under the Clean Water Act to regulate “waters of the United States” (WOTUS).

The Supreme Court has thrice addressed the meaning of that phrase, making clear that, for the EPA to have regulatory authority, a sufficient nexus must exist between the location regulated and “navigable waters.” The Clean Water Rule, however, purports to give EPA power far beyond waters that are “navigable” by any stretch of the word’s definition. Litigation is ongoing.

9. Net Neutrality

In the works throughout the Obama presidency, the Open Internet Rule was adopted in February 2015 and went into effect that June, forbidding internet‐​service providers (ISPs) from prioritizing different kinds of internet traffic.

The real issue, beyond this “net neutrality,” is the Federal Communications Commission’s manufacture of authority to regulate the internet despite clear congressional instruction that the internet remain unregulated. In 2014, courts struck down the FCC’s 2010 self‐​aggrandizement under the 1934 Communications Act and 1996 Telecommunications Act, so the agency doubled down by writing a new rule that equated the internet with telephony.

That creative interpretation allowed the FCC to claim the sweeping discretion it had used to manage the AT&T phone monopoly throughout the 20th century. Moreover, while the FCC touts the regulation as ensuring that the internet remains free of censorship, the rule impinges on the First Amendment rights of internet‐​service providers.

10. EPA’s Cap‐​And‐​Trade

In October 2015, the EPA issued a carbon‐​emissions cap‐​and‐​trade regulation, establishing for each state limits on carbon dioxide emission, with four interim steps on the way to the final goal. EPA says that this rule, too, is authorized by Section 111 of the Clean Air Act, but Congress considered and rejected such a cap‐​and‐​trade program in 2009. Far from being authorized by the Clean Air Act or lying in some zone of statutory ambiguity, this massive new regulatory scheme contradicts the express will of Congress.

That’s Only The Beginning

It was obviously difficult to narrow that enumeration to just 10—and I cheated by putting all the Obamacare shenanigans under one item. Some may complain that I should’ve prioritized other kinds of executive actions, whether regarding guns or transgender bathroom access or electricity regulation. Others may prefer to invoke President Obama’s decision not to subject the Iran nuclear treaty to a Senate vote—aided by Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker’s naïve complicity—or engaging in the Bowe Bergdahl prisoner swap without notifying Congress. Sadly, the possibilities for this parlor game are nearly endless.

Then, of course, there’s the administration’s abysmal performance before the Supreme Court, where its win percentage hovers around 45 percent (as against a historical norm of 60–70 percent). The Justice Department has even suffered nearly 50 unanimous losses, half again as many as under George W. Bush or Bill Clinton. These cases have come in such disparate areas as criminal procedure, religious liberty, property rights, immigration, securities regulation, tax law, and the separation of powers. They have nothing in common other than incredible assertions of federal power. The government’s arguments across this wide variety of cases would essentially allow the executive branch to do whatever it wants without constitutional restraint.

Are these really the kind of powers President Obama and his progressive enablers would want their worst enemies to have? As my colleague Gene Healy writes in the latest issue of Reason, “the very idea of ‘President Trump’ seemed like a thought experiment a libertarian might have invented to get a liberal friend to focus on the dangers of concentrated power. Now it’s an experiment we’re going to run in real life, starting January 20, 2017.”

If you live by executive action, you die by executive action—whether that means reversing President Obama’s policies or pocketing his constitutional excesses for future use.

Media Name: shapiro.jpg
ILYA SHAPIRO
Ilya Shapiro is a senior contributor to The Federalist. He is a senior fellow in Constitutional Studies at the Cato Institute and Editor‐​in‐​Chief of the Cato Supreme Court Review.

Obama the gay man

@OP, what about Obamagate? E be like say you miss that one.

Shameless things. To come up with a laughably short list of socalled misdemeanors you had to spend days researching.

Do we DARE do a litany of Trump's CONSISTENT AND UNYIELDING ABUSE OF POWER (and possibly risk overwhelming NL servers?)

Or do we just ignore the latest ramblings his acolytes, aimed primarily at deflecting attention (as usual) from his pathetic handling of the covid response, deemed one of the most colossal failings in US history?

Hmmm. I think I'll go with the latter.

Tada.

alezzy13:
@OP, what about Obamagate? E be like say you miss that one.

Shameless things. To come up with a laughably short list of socalled misdemeanors you had to spend days researching.

Do we DARE do a litany of Trump's CONSISTENT AND UNYIELDING ABUSE OF POWER (and possibly risk overwhelming NL servers?)

Or do we just ignore the latest ramblings his acolytes, aimed primarily at deflecting attention (as usual) from his pathetic handling of the covid response, deemed one of the most colossal failings in US history?

Hmmm. I think I'll go with the latter.

Tada.

You may likely run out of steam if you tread that path

Obamagate: All you need to know about the Obama's wiretapping scandal together with Hillary and General Flynn and the Russian intelligence etc are revealed in this video. Harder times ahead for Obama and his cronies as the days move on. Visit this link to watch the video;

https://www.facebook.com/ProphetUebertAngel/videos/565620894333226/

Still don’t understand the sentiment black people has for Obama, they didn’t even benefit from his administration, but act like they are related to him. Obama that gave Iran money, same Obama that empowered Saudi with warfare to bully Yemen, same Obama that during his time all major companies moved their production to China.

‘Obamagate’ is here to stay

By Hugh Hewitt

May 18, 2020 at 7:56 p.m. GMT+1

Al Sharpton asked me this on his Saturday cable news show: “What is ‘Obamagate?’ ”
“The intentional interference with the peaceful transition of power,” I responded.
I explained that the American tradition of peaceful transition of power is the “glory of the Republic.” The central charge of the many for which “Obamagate” is shorthand: Senior members of the administration of President Barack Obama made efforts to cripple President Trump’s ability to govern via unconstitutional methods throughout the transition and even into the first three years of his term.
Zerlina Maxwell, opposite me on Sharpton’s virtual set, characterized the term “Obamagate” as a racist talking point.

Those on the left who seek to diminish Obamagate should know that what they are doing is attempted censorship, an obvious effort to delegitimize the most legitimate of inquiries: Did Obama or any of his senior team — in the White House, the FBI or Justice Department or any of the intelligence agencies, with or without his knowledge — act to sabotage Trump’s assumption of power and effective administration of the executive branch? This question haunts the left; they fear it and assert without any evidence that those who demand answers are birthers. Like Joe McCarthy branding liberals “communists,” the new McCarthyists on the left are trying use a label to defame opponents rather than study the record.
I don’t know why they won’t confront the mountain of evidence of abuse of power. Much of Trump Derangement Syndrome (the disease that afflicts the left and the media and causes them to see evil in all that Trump does) manifests itself in “attributing motive” to opponents. It’s a cheap debating trick. They should know better, but I don’t know if they do or don’t.
But I know McCarthyism when I see it. To define anyone who uses Obamagate as either a racist or conspiracy theorist is outside the norms of acceptable American political dialogue. McCarthyism of the Left will not work outside of progressive cloisters. Obamagate is here to stay because the abuse of power is already obvious and cannot be erased. Only it’s scale and scope need to be determined.

Serious conservatives see in the coming inquiry over Obamagate a debate that would have rallied Abe Lincoln, the first president to represent the Republican Party, because it turns on preserving the constitutional order. Now we are engaged in a great political conflict over whether the Constitution, as amended and interpreted through to today, will be preserved. Many on the left want it so altered as to be unrecognizable. They do not value federalism, the electoral college, the Senate or indeed, increasingly, the first freedoms of religious liberty, press, assembly and petition. Their understanding of “freedom” is very different from that of conservatives.
“The secret to happiness is freedom,” wrote Thucydides. “And the secret to freedom is courage.” The left intends to protect whatever was done by Obama era appointees at whatever the cost. They are willing to sacrifice former national security adviser Michael Flynn and turn their backs on the vast body of evidence that he was railroaded and even today is being denied his basic due process rights.
This censorship works only within the blue bubble. Far beyond the Manhattan-Beltway media elites, millions of Americans who are no more racist than they are astronauts are awake to the deep wrong done to Flynn, and to far more than that.

They are awake to the peril posed by allowing everyone involved anywhere near power again. The good news is that those in charge of the investigation are people of courage. The left will not stop Attorney General William P. Barr or U.S. Attorney John Durham from their work. Durham’s findings on Obamagate will be the final word. If he finds no interference, that will be the end of Obamagate, not the declarations of progressives eager to change the subject, no matter how many or how loud.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/05/18/obamagate-is-all-about-your-definition-freedom/

Obamanians can read this to understand!

How did you make this list and forget opperstion fast and furious and National defense authorization act.