Obama’s halo is slipping, and that’s a good thing

Barack Obama
Peter Bolton

One of the major chapters in the so-called ‘Russiagate’ saga recently came to an end, sparking the beginning of what has become known by some as ‘Obamagate’. US president Donald Trump has been reacting in his usual manner. But on this occasion, as with many others, Barack Obama and the liberal establishment are largely being given a free pass in the mainstream media. And that needs to be called out also.

Charges dropped in Flynn probe

On 7 May, the US Justice Department dropped most of its charges against former Trump administration national security advisor Michael Flynn. Flynn had been under investigation for his alleged role in possible foreign intervention in the 2016 US presidential elections. In the following days, Trump took to Twitter to gloat about how this somehow vindicates him from all charges.

He took particular aim at former president Obama. Shortly before Trump’s Twitter outburst, Obama had himself criticized the Justice Department’s decision to acquit Flynn. This has fed into a conspiracy theory peddled by Trump and his supporters that holds that Obama deliberately orchestrated the investigation in the final weeks of his presidency in order to sabotage Trump’s incoming administration.

Papering over Obama’s sordid record in office

To be sure, this kind of paranoid thinking isn’t helpful to public discourse. But corporate-owned liberal media’s treatment of Obama obscures the fact that his administration was not much better than Trump’s. Obama’s record throughout his two terms in office included:

  • Regime change in Libya and failure to end the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan.
  • A drone assassination program that included ten times as many airstrikes as that of the George W Bush administration.
  • Aiding post-coup governments in Honduras.
  • Failure to sanction Israel for its ongoing crimes including two massacres in Gaza.
  • Continuation of the Bush-era bank bailouts.
  • Failure to close the Guantanamo Bay detention center.
  • Presiding over a National Security Agency that, according to a 2013 Washington Post investigation, “[broke] privacy rules or overstepped its legal authority thousands of times each year since Congress granted the agency broad new powers in 2008”.
  • Renewing the ‘Patriot Act’, which seriously curtails civil liberties.
  • Failure to implement a system of public universal healthcare.
  • Signing ‘free’ trade agreements that give undue power to multinational corporations via investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms.
Setting the stage for Trumpian right-wing faux-populism

Not only did these policies cause huge harm in-and-of-themselves; they also set the stage for a right-wing faux-populist like Trump to triumph in the 2016 election. Trump won the electoral college vote, in spite of being clearly unfit to serve as president, by successfully tapping into the legitimate anger of many who felt let down by the Obama administration.

He argued (correctly) that for decades the establishment wing of the Democratic Party has been beholden to special interests rather than its historic working- and middle-class base. Trump even ran to the left of both his own party and Democratic rival Hillary Clinton on issues like foreign policy and trade. For instance, he (dubiously) claimed that he had always opposed the Iraq War and pledged to pull the US out of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

Feeble opposition in the age of Trump

Since Trump’s election, meanwhile, establishment Democrats have largely failed to oppose some of his worst policies. From his recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital to ‘regime change’ in Venezuela, party leadership figures such as Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer have been walking in lockstep with Trump’s administration. But given widespread disapproval of his administration by large sections of the US public, they nonetheless have had to conjure the image that they are opposing him.

This has largely taken the form of petty sectarian squabbles such as the alleged Russian interference in the 2016 election. As Noam Chomsky has pointed out, even if the worst charges are true (which is itself unclear) this interference would be “not even a joke” compared to what the US consistently does to other countries around the world. The Intercept‘s Glenn Greenwald, meanwhile, has described the coverage of the Russian interference investigation as “the saddest media spectacle I’ve ever seen”.

Clearly, Trump is not really an aberration. Like other right-wing faux-populists, his is rather a natural consequence of the failure by traditional center-left parties to offer a genuine alternative to the neoliberal / imperialist status quo.

Featured image via pixabay

We need your help ...

The coronavirus pandemic is changing our world, fast. And we will do all we can to keep bringing you news and analysis throughout. But we are worried about maintaining enough income to pay our staff and minimal overheads.

Now, more than ever, we need a vibrant, independent media that holds the government to account and calls it out when it puts vested economic interests above human lives. We need a media that shows solidarity with the people most affected by the crisis – and one that can help to build a world based on collaboration and compassion.

We have been fighting against an establishment that is trying to shut us down. And like most independent media, we don’t have the deep pockets of investors to call on to bail us out.

Can you help by chipping in a few pounds each month?

The Canary Support us
  • Show Comments
    1. Two other things come to mind:
      His failure to act over the breach of his red line over chemical weapons
      His appalling ‘dear colleague’, letter based on appalling research, which has led to the principles of innocent until proved guilty and due process being cast aside in US Universities.

      1. You mean he failed to start WW3 with Russia over a chemical attack the SAUDIS and their AQ allies conspired to commit in Syria? That might well have been one of the few GOOD choices he made.

        1. The good choice would have been not stating a red line if he was not willing to stick to it. Threats that are not followed up make leaders look weak. Its best not to paint yourself into a corner.

    2. It was actually the persecution of Flynn that began to add flesh to the bareboned Deep State claims. Not that he’s a saint, by any means.

      Obama fired him because he was angry at State/CIA’s support of radical Jihadis – AQ & IS -and wouldn’t let the policy rest. Potential whistleblower territory.

      So that’s when he joined the Trump Campaign.

      And Obama used illegal surveillance on his POLITICAL RIVALS far beyond what Nixon did.

      The fake “Russiagate” conspiracy has been an extremely useful memory black hole to drop innumerable crimes into – and now of course Rachel Madcow is using it to defend the disgusting coup attempts in Venezuela. Because any crime is ‘fair game’ if you can say it annoys President Putin.

      With any luck she’ll be touring a nuclear power plant when it explodes, so she can experience personally what she is apparently desperately trying to do to the rest of us. Hopefully ‘Citizen Clinton’ and V Nuland would be in the tour group too.

      Time and past for a genuine “reset” of superpower struggle, and not one where the button is actually called “Overheat”.

    Leave a Reply

    Join the conversation

    Please read our comment moderation policy here.