In context, the discussion of power is aimed at Trump, but the prosecution example points out that, even in context, her discussion of power applies to her actions even more than to her alleged fears re Trump.

He’s talking about the tools a president can use if Congress isn’t giving him what he wants: executive actions and calling people together. It’s another avenue the president is using to pursue his economic agenda.
…
While Republicans see this as another example of executive overreach, progressive Democrats like Minnesota’s Rep. Keith Ellison see opportunity. He’s been pushing for the president to sign an executive order raising the minimum wage for employees of federal contractors.

https://reason.com/2016/11/14/ive-got-a-pen-and-ive-got-a-phone-obamas/
“The dangers of unchecked executive power: ‘I’ve Got a Pen and I’ve Got a Phone’: Obama’s Executive Overreach Becomes Trump’s Executive Overreach”

In December 2007 presidential candidate Barack Obama told The Boston Globe that if he won the 2008 election, he would enter the White House committed to rolling back the sort of overreaching executive power that had characterized the presidency of George W. Bush. “The President is not above the law,” Obama insisted.

Once elected, however, President Obama began to sing a different sort of tune. “We’re not just going to be waiting for legislation,” Obama announced. “I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone…and I can use that pen to sign executive orders and take executive actions and administrative actions.”
…
To make matters worse, many of Obama’s fervent liberal supporters pretended to see nothing wrong with such obvious abuses of executive power. For example, consider the behavior of the prestigious editorial board of The New York Times. Back in 2006, when George W. Bush had the reins, the Times published an unsigned editorial lambasting Bush for his “grandiose vision of executive power” and his foul scheme to sidestep the Senate and unilaterally install his nominees in high office. “Seizing the opportunity presented by the Congressional holiday break,” the Times complained, “Mr. Bush announced 17 recess appointments—a constitutional gimmick.”

But guess what the Times had to say a few years later when President Obama had the reins and he utilized the exact same gimmick? “Mr. Obama was entirely justified in using his executive power to keep federal agencies operating,” the Times declared in defense of Obama’s three illegal appointments to the National Labor Relations Board. (Those three NLRB appointments, incidentally, were ruled unconstitutional by a 9-0 Supreme Court.)

Perhaps you can see where I’m going with this. Once President-elect Donald Trump takes the oath of office in January 2017, he too will have a pen and a phone at his presidential fingertips. Should Trump grow weary of the constitutional limits placed upon him, and decide instead to ignore the Constitution and wield unilateral executive power, he won’t exactly have far to look if he wants to find a recent presidential role model to emulate.

Except he didn’t. Their panicked present tense headline “becomes” instead of the proper future tense “could become” was a bit of predictive over-reach.
Biden Inc, however, deserves their appellation as Obama’s Third Term for using weapons-grade pens.

And surely Neo’s remark about “Their argument – and whether or not you or I buy it, I believe a lot of Democrats do – is that this is Trump’s 2nd term and he is “unleashed” to be the Nazi/tyrant he really wants to be” is a projection based on Obama’s past propensities.

Lots of articles are still available on Google (a censorial oversight, or just old news?).
I chose this one, from before the TDS of National Review’s writers, because it showcases why some Republicans were gobsmacked that the Democrats went after Trump in 2016 for being a Russian puppet.
We still remembered 2012.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2012/03/obamas-flexibility-doctrine-charles-krauthammer/

“On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it’s important for him to give me space. . . . This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility.” — Barack Obama to Dmitry Medvedev, March 26

You don’t often hear an American president secretly (he thinks) assuring foreign leaders that concessions are coming their way, but that they must wait because he’s seeking reelection and he dare not tell his own people.

Not at all, spun a White House aide in major gaffe-control mode. The president was merely explaining that arms control is too complicated to be dealt with in a year in which both Russia and the U.S. hold presidential elections.

Rubbish. First of all, to speak of Russian elections in the same breath as ours is a travesty. Theirs was a rigged, predetermined farce. Putin ruled before. Putin rules after.

Obama spoke of the difficulties of the Russian presidential “transition.” What transition? It’s a joke. It had no effect on Putin’s ability to negotiate anything.

As for the U.S. election, the problem is not that the issue is too complicated, but that if people knew Obama’s intentions of “flexibly” caving on missile defenses, they might think twice about giving him a second term.
…
Nonetheless, Obama is telling the Russians not to worry, that once past “my last election” and no longer subject to any electoral accountability, he’ll show “more flexibility” on missile defense. It’s yet another accommodation to advance his cherished Russia “reset” policy.

Why? Hasn’t reset been failure enough?

Let’s do the accounting.
…
On which of “all these issues” — Syria, Iran, Eastern Europe, Georgia, human rights — is Obama ready to offer Putin yet more flexibility as soon as he gets past his last election? Where else will he show U.S. adversaries more flexibility? Yet more aid to North Korea? More weakening of tough Senate sanctions against Iran?

Can you imagine the kind of pressure a reelected Obama will put on Israel, the kind of anxiety he will induce from Georgia to the Persian Gulf, the nervousness among our most loyal eastern European friends who, having already once been left out on a limb by Obama, are now wondering what new flexibility Obama will show Putin — the man who famously proclaimed that the “greatest geopolitical catastrophe” of the 20th century was Russia’s loss of its Soviet empire.

They don’t know. We don’t know. We didn’t even know this was coming — until the mike was left on. Only Putin was to know. “I will transmit this information to Vladimir,” Medvedev assured Obama.

Added Medvedev: “I stand with you.” A nice endorsement from Putin’s puppet, enough to chill friends and allies, democrats and dissidents, all over the world.

And yet, so many of the pundits who saw this so clearly from 2012-2015 still readily jumped on the Democrats’ Never Trump bandwagon in 2016 (and are still on board).

That’s what gobsmacked me.

Yeah, I’m not saying both sides have lied the same or making any kind of moral equivalence argument. I’m making a pragmatic argument that lying can backfire and destroy the reputation of the liar. This is why trust in media has collapsed; they’ve been caught lying too many times. Even Bezos has come out to say most people don’t trust the WaPo so they have to start doing things differently.

+ Bonus:
NYC Mayor Adams shows why “Biden” has decided that Adams MUST be kneecapped…
“Mayor Adams scolds media for asking about Trump-Hitler comparisons: ‘Enough of this’”—
https://www.foxnews.com/video/6363944990112

Their argument – and whether or not you or I buy it, I believe a lot of Democrats do – is that this is Trump’s 2nd term and he is “unleashed” to be the Nazi/tyrant he really wants to be. Plus, because of what THEY did to him (although they leave that part out), he’s out for revenge.

While the timing may matter to a degree in the ad, I think my question still stands.

Donald Trump was President for four years if I am not mistaken (Harris at times seems think he’s been President far longer). Plenty of time for him to have abused his power in the White House. Why is she using a power that she evidently abused as an example of what *might happen* if Donald Trump is *reelected* rather than identifying an instance where *he* abused his power?

Sounds like the trailer for a horror/thriller movie – that should send chills down anyone’s spine.

And, who among us was incapable of heading out the door to” go to school” and making a detour to join our ner-do-well friends down at the beach, the park, the pool hall or bowling alley?

Oft repeated anecdote: Friend, petite single mom, finds out 200 pound high school athlete son has skipped school, yells at him, slaps him a couple of times.

Son is overheard by teacher at school laughingly telling his friends about it.
CPS called, mom ends up forced to attend anger management classes and gets occasional surprise visits from CPS.