After days of heated demonstrations washed over the streets of Egypt, the Egyptian military removed Muslim Brotherhood-backed President Mohamed Morsi on Wednesday.
Since Morsi's election in June, 2012, the Obama administration has been strangely supportive of Islamist leader, forking over $1.3 billion in military funding to Egypt annually. It's the Morsi conspiracy.
I say "strangely supportive," because conspicuous red flags dot Morsi's political career.
A few years prior to his presidency, Morsi delivered a speech urging Egyptians to "nurse our children and our grandchildren on hatred" of Jewish people. A few months later, he described Zionists as "descendants of apes and pigs" in a television interview.
The US is, of course, the closest ally of Israel.
But ostensibly, the Obama administration has been throwing so much monetary and PR support Morsi's way in order to show our backing of a democratically elected government in Egypt.
Morsi was democratically elected in a tight presidential race last year, and maintains that he is the country's legitimate leader.
But Egypt's highest-ranking military officer, General Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi, said that Morsi "did not achieve the goals of the people" as he became increasingly authoritarian and non-democratic.
Although Morsi hasn't been in power long, he already has quite the history of "removing" his opposition.
Morsi forcibly retired the chairman of the Supreme Council of Armed Forces, who had been Egypt's de facto ruler in between Mubarak's fall and Morsi's election.
In November 2012, Morsi issued an edict declaring his decisions to be immune from judicial review until the holding of a constitutional referendum.
An elected parliament was dissolved by court order, and then Morsi converted the Shura Council, a ceremonial upper house that only 7% of Egyptians voted for, into a legislature.
Naturally, a legislature which does whatever Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood asks of it.
In December 2012, the rushed completion of a constitution by Morsi and his aides led to mass protests and at least 5 deaths.
Obama responded by placing a phone call with Morsi to express his "deep concern" and stressed how violence against the opposition is unacceptable.
In March, US Secretary of State John Kerry pledged to release $250 million in American aid to Morsi to support Egypt's "future as a democracy."
(AP) US Secretary of State John Kerry and Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi in March.
In May, the Obama administration issued a waiver on military funding to Egypt, sidestepping Congress' instruction to condition delivery of the $1.3 billion on progress with human rights and democracy.
In fact, John Kerry signed the waiver so quietly it was not even announced. Human rights groups have been justifiably vocal about how such waivers hurt the progression of democracy in Egypt.
Choosing to sidestep Congress directly flies in the face of the Obama administration's claims that our U.S. billions are going to Egypt to further human rights and democracy.
Then in June, 43 Egyptian and foreign non-governmental organization (NGO) employees were given jail sentences ranging from 1 to 5 years, as a result of a case against foreign-funded pro-democracy groups.
That's right: a case *against* foreign-funded pro-democracy groups. And 16 of the 43 employees were Americans.
Suspiciously, the ruling came at a time when the Egyptian parliament was considering a bill proposed by Morsi that would profoundly restrict NGO activities in the country.
International outrage deepened over these events. Three Republican senators - John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Kelly Ayotte, warned:
"It is increasingly impossible to argue that the Egyptian government is safeguarding and advancing the democratic values that inspired the Egyptian revolution of 2011."
Later in June, Anne Patterson, the US Ambassador to Egypt, delivered a speech with the purpose of "setting the record straight" on America's relationship with Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood.
Specifically, Patterson wished to denounce the popular Morsi conspiracy theory that the U.S. concocted Morsi's rise to power.
Clearly, the speech had little effect. The following photos were taken throughout this past week's protests:
Since Morsi was overthrown on Wednesday, Obama has noticeably avoided referring to the military removal as a "coup."
That is because if the events are deemed a coup, it would mean the U.S. can no longer legally provide billions of dollars in aid to Egypt.
But why is Obama interested in continuing to send billions to Egypt?
Obama has stated numerous times that he is sending billions to Egypt for the furtherance of democracy.
If that truly is the goal, then surely the Obama administration should have actively monitored Morsi's leadership in Egypt to make sure that the goal was being met.
It wasn't met. Obama knew it wasn't met, but continued to send the money and even sidestepped Congress to do so.
Even if you are uncomfortable with "should-haves", you must certainly agree that recent events are evidence that democracy in Egypt is, at best, a work in progress.
Thus, providing funding to Egypt should in the least be closely monitored from here on out.
So then why does Obama want to keep the door open to provide funding to Egypt, and is the Morsi conspiracy at play?
Please let me know, one way or another, what you think by commenting below.
Mass demonstration jitters also have hit what was once the darling of emerging market investor. Check out our take on Brazil.