On Super Bowl Sunday Fox News journalist Bill O'Reilly was granted a 9 minute and 56 second interview with the most powerful person on the planet and recognized leader of the free world...President Barack Obama. The conversation was viewed by multi-millions, perhaps billions worldwide. Mr.O'Reilly had that short amount of time to try and touch on as many topics that still fester on the minds of Americans over the last six years of this President's administrative reign of executive power. The questions O'Reilly asked were the same ones a lot of voters in America are asking themselves, discussing around the water cooler at work and over the dinner table each night. The President may not like this fact, but it is still the facts and Mr.O'Reilly was trying to get some answers from the man who should have had them for those American voters and taxpayers.
How did the President respond to several of those questions? The image attached to this article about sums up exactly how President Obama chose to deal with these troubling events that have occurred during his tenure in the White House. He implies nothing is wrong, nothing untoward has happened and the real heart of these matters is Fox News' insistence on their continuing effort to uncover a conspiracy where none exists. The President implies by his brush-off to O'Reilly and Fox News, and thereby, all those watching - that, like a magician - there is nothing up his sleeve and nothing to see here.
After the interview the internet blogs, left-leaning talk shows and certain overt Obama supporting news agencies were quick to pick up on the President's slight at Fox News and asked the question - Yes, why is Fox still talking about all these things that the President says are nothing to be concerned about? I would remind those asking this question that if an Edward R. Murrow, a Walter Cronkite, a Chet Huntley or David Brinkley were still alive today would they have stopped their news investigative reporting on any of the supposed scandals of this presidency just because the Commander and Chief said there is nothing to see here? Of course not because they were journalists in the truest sense of the word, not just talking heads for whatever administration was occupying the center seat of power.
The President told O'Reilly that as far as the IRS targeting certain conservative groups not supportive of his policies there was not a "smidgen" of unlawfulness, impropriety, or foul intent on the part of anyone in that agency but this and other problems that have occurred in his administration were the result of some "bone-head decisions" made on the part of some of his underlyings. How could he say that and why haven't the other news agencies jumped on that preposterous statement? How can the President make such a sweeping judgment about subjects that are either still under investigation by legal government appointed bodies or have been reported on in released statements that show definite and serious missteps from this administration?
For example: The IRS' involvement in targeting certain conservative (and even some liberal) organizations not supporting him or his policies. For the President to make a statement that there was not a smidge of wrongdoing on the part of anyone in this agency is ludicrous at best and outright lying at worse. First, the House investigation into the IRS activity is still on going, still have forty-one witness to the scandal to question, and as a result of their bipartisan investigation a series of emails between the White House and the IRS have confirmed the suspicion by many that there was a coordinated effort between members of the Obama Administration and certain parties in the IRS to go after said organizations that were applying for their 501(C) status under the tax code. Secondly, the fact that Lois Lerner, former Director of the IRS Exempt Organizations division pleaded the 5th Amendment when questioned by members of Congress over her part in the Obama/IRS plan to treat these organizations differently from those that support the President and his policies. She has since resigned her post but during her tenure emails between her and members of the Obama Administration were uncovered which revealed a concerted and coordinated effort on the part of all involved to devise and implement new IRS rules for these particular organizations, but they did so "off plan" which meant those plans would never be part of the publicly disclosed 2012 schedule. These "new IRS rules" would only affect the targeted groups and not those such as Organizing for America and other groups strongly supportive of the Obama progressive agenda.
So, while some are asking "Why is Fox News continuing to go after these scandals?" The bigger question is - Why aren't the other so-called "news agencies" still working on these? Not - Why is Fox still harping on all the still unanswered questions about Benghazi, IRS, NSA, Fast and Furious, Obamacare, etc." That's the real question here.
In this interview with Bill O'Reilly President Obama simply did what he has always done when interviewed by someone with real hard hitting questions (which tends to only happen on Fox News) - deflect, change focus and blame anyone but himself or his administration. In this case his blame escapes George W. Bush and he places it into the lap of Fox News. It has worked for 6 years -- why stop now?