Below, nearly word for word, is today’s NYT Editorial Board editorial on the sins of Chris Christie – with Obama’s name & crimes inserted.  Except for the original’s second paragraph being entirely removed, it is, in full, with the insertions as indicated.

IT ABSOLUTELY WORKS for Obama.  It’s 90% IN TACT, as NYT ORIGINALLY wrote it, but as it applies to OBAMA.  The original, for comparison purposes, is cut & pasted below my revision.

Enjoy!

~~~

After Barack Obama’s Performance

President Obama issued repeated apologies Thursday for the abuse of office that now threatens to undermine his political future. Though he sounded remorseful — and clearly sorry that this scandal might sink his ambitions for a durable legacy — he blamed his staff for making him a victim. Unbeknown to him, he said, the IRS targeted Tea Party groups.

Through his 108-minute news conference, Mr. Obama insisted over and over that he knew absolutely nothing about this illegal scheme. He was “blindsided” with the news on Wednesday morning, he said. That was the first time he said he saw news showing how his aides gleefully plotted to shut down speech to “punish his enemies.” For that reason, he said he is “embarrassed and humiliated.” This version of reality simply does not add up.

It’s good news that a Special Prosecutor has opened an inquiry into the matter and can make certain that all parties testify under oath. While the Attorney General, Eric Holder, has done a good job of investigating, it is important that the case be examined by a prosecutor’s office.

There are plenty of questions that Mr. Obama and his aides, current and former, need to answer.

First, is it plausible that officials as high up as Ms. Lerner and Mr. Obama’s top attorney in the White House, would decide to seek revenge and create this chaos on their own?

Did Mr. Obama know in April, when his WH attorney was given a heads-up, that his inner circle had taken part in the scheme? Did he ever ask them what happened?

The documents released on Wednesday were heavily redacted. Why? And when will the full documents be made public?

Why did Mr. Obama insist that the scheme was connected to a normal “BOLO” list even after IRS officials confessed, unprompted, to wrong-doing specifically toward the Tea Party? Did he try to get the IRS to stop its own internal investigation of the problem?

As President for the last five years, Mr. Obama has earned a reputation for running a very tight operation and is known as a top-down, hands-on leader. If he cannot control his top aides, can he be trusted to manage the entire country?

What makes Mr. Obama’s claim of victimhood hard to accept is his own history of vindictive behavior. For instance, he told a hispanic audience to “punish their enemies” by their vote prior to the 2012 election. He has, publicly, regularly, set a tone that makes abusive actions acceptable.

Mr. Obama has promised to cooperate with investigators — a vow he and his staff must honor. At this point, the President has zero credibility. His office has abused its power, and only a full and conclusive investigation can restore public trust in his administration.

======================
ORIGINAL:

After Chris Christie’s Performance

Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey issued repeated apologies Thursday for the abuse of office that now threatens to undermine his political future. Though he sounded remorseful — and clearly sorry that this scandal might sink his ambitions for national office — he blamed his staff for making him a victim. Unbeknown to him, he said, they shut down lanes to the George Washington Bridge to create a four-day traffic jam to punish a local mayor who failed to endorse him in last year’s election.

He said he fired his “stupid” and “deceitful” deputy chief of staff, Bridget Anne Kelly, “because she lied to me” about the gridlock scheme. Mr. Christie has also asked a Republican operative and former campaign adviser, Bill Stepien, to withdraw as a candidate to take over the state Republican Party. He, too, was on the email chain. Two of Mr. Christie’s appointees to the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, David Wildstein and Bill Baroni, resigned in December as news of the traffic vendetta became public.

Through his 108-minute news conference, Mr. Christie insisted over and over that he knew absolutely nothing about this illegal scheme. He was “blindsided” with the news on Wednesday morning, he said. That was the first time he said he saw emails showing how his aides gleefully plotted to shut down traffic lanes to punish Mayor Mark Sokolich of Fort Lee, N.J. For that reason, he said he is “embarrassed and humiliated.” This version of reality simply does not add up.

It’s good news that the United States attorney for New Jersey, Paul Fishman, has opened an inquiry into the matter and can make certain that all parties testify under oath. While the State Assembly has done a good job of investigating the Fort Lee scandal, it is important that the case be examined by a prosecutor’s office.

There are plenty of questions that Mr. Christie and his aides, current and former, need to answer.

First, is it plausible that officials as high up as Ms. Kelly and Mr. Christie’s top appointees at the Port Authority, which controls the bridge, would decide to seek revenge and create this traffic chaos on their own?

Did Mr. Christie know in December, when Mr. Baroni and Mr. Wildstein resigned, that these two members of his inner circle had taken part in the scheme? Did he ever ask them what happened?

The email documents released on Wednesday were heavily redacted. Why? And when will the full emails be made public?

Why did Mr. Christie insist that the traffic snarl was connected to a “traffic study,” even after Port Authority officials denied there was any such study? Did he try to get the Port Authority to stop its own internal investigation of the problem?

As governor for the last four years, Mr. Christie has earned a reputation for running a very tight operation and is known as a top-down, hands-on leader. If he cannot control his top aides, can he be trusted to manage the entire state?

What makes Mr. Christie’s claim of victimhood hard to accept is his own history of vindictive behavior. For instance, a Rutgers professor lost financing for a project because he voted against the governor on a redistricting commission. A Republican colleague who had a disagreement with Mr. Christie was disinvited to an event in his own district. Mr. Christie has denied that he sent signals to his staff to punish anyone who crossed him. “I am who I am, but I am not a bully,” he said Thursday. But he has set a tone that makes abusive actions acceptable.

Mr. Christie has promised to cooperate with investigators — a vow he and his staff must honor. At this point, the governor has zero credibility. His office has abused its power, and only a full and conclusive investigation can restore public trust in his administration.