ShareThis Page

So many scandals, it's hard to keep track

| Saturday, June 1, 2013, 9:00 p.m.

Michelle Malkin is a best-selling author, nationally syndicated columnist and political commentator who has appeared on the Fox News Channel, MSNBC and C-SPAN. She spoke to the Trib regarding the tumult and turmoil plaguing the Obama administration.

Q: In your estimation, what has been this administration's worst scandal?

A: Because national security is so paramount in the work that I've done for the last 20 years, Benghazi and Fast and Furious have to be at the top of my list. Those two are the bloodiest scandals on the Obama administration's hands and the security implications for all of us are chilling. Domestically, I think what has had the most mainstream lift, if you will, are the snooping scandals — the Justice Department's snooping into journalists' lives and records, along with the IRS scandals. I think the synergy of those two things has really shaken the more widespread perception of this president as “No-Drama Obama.”

Q: What are your thoughts on Justice investigating whether Justice acted appropriately in seizing reporters' phone records?

A: It's a clown-car pileup. I've been watching this traffic flow since before these guys took office. You have to shake your head at the absurdity of it all. One of the themes I've emphasized over the years is that while this administration has had a lot of high-profile targets — Fox newsies, the Koch brothers and a lot of private corporations and big-business men — it also is so willing to use and abuse and exploit its power to crush even the smallest of its political enemies. When you look at the list and the targets in the Inspector General's report and the IRS witch hunt, it really does underscore the length and the depth (to which) these corruptocrats are willing to go.

Q: You're one of the few people shining a spotlight on what could be considered a case of ObamaCare-related cronyism regarding the federal mandate requiring hospitals and medical professionals to use electronic medical records. Do you feel this situation is getting the attention it merits?

A: It's only starting to bubble up. I wrote about Judy Faulkner of (health care software company) Epic Systems, which is going to pretty much control at least half of ... America's private medical records. This is somebody who is a top donor to the Obama administration and whose business otherwise would not thrive without the favoritism and stimulus money.

Q: Do you believe these scandals and controversies will prematurely render Obama a lame duck?

A: I wish. The Teflon coating that this man has is the highest industrial strength I've ever seen. Unfortunately, he's often aided and abetted by GOP incompetence. In the past, he also could rely on the lapdogs of the White House press corps to provide an extra layer of insulation, (although) that's staring to wear thin. But these (scandals) are a double-edged sword. The fact that there are so many of them is what has allowed this to break into the mainstream. On the other hand, it's hard to keep track of them all.

Q: You almost need index cards?

A: I hear frequently from a lot of readers. If I'm covering one of the IRS hearings, (they say), “Don't forget about Benghazi. Don't forget about Fast and Furious.” I'm not forgetting about them. But with daily stories, you have to strike while the iron is hot.

Eric Heyl is a staff writer for Trib Total Media (412-320-7857 or

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.