Hours after Axios’s Sara Fischer broke news that White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki would be joining MSNBC, Psaki faced a slew of questions in Friday’s briefing about the ethics behind such a swift move and negotiating a job while still in government. CBS’s Ed O’Keefe broke the ice, but he was followed by future Psaki colleague Kristen Welker of NBC, who questioned whether she should be allowed to stay at her post.
O’Keefe stepped up after most of the briefing had been dominated by the March jobs report, gas prices, and Russia’s war against Ukraine: “[O]ne little bit of housekeeping. Is it true that you are leaving the White House to work for MSNBC?”
Psaki tried to get away by quipping that “you can’t rid of me yet,” but that fell on deaf ears as she went onto say she couldn’t “confirm” anything “about my length of public service or planned service or anything about consideration about next plans.”
Explaining that she’s “very happy to be standing with all of you here today” following a bout with COVID-19, her “focus everyday continues to be speaking on behalf of the President, answering your questions” and “hop[ing]” to “meet my own bar of treating everybody with fairness and being equitable.”
O’Keefe continued to press with an important follow-up: “[B]ecause this has been raised by our colleagues, but people who are observing this process, is it ethical for you to continue conducting this job while negotiating with a media outlet?”
Psaki insisted she’s “always gone over and above the stringent ethical and legal requirements...and I take that very seriously,” including the accepting of “ethics counseling.”
In an attempt to have reporters give her a break, she said that she “hope[s] that all of you...would,” based of off knowing her as a person, “judge me for my record and how I treat all of you, both in the briefing room and otherwise and I try to answer questions from everybody across the board.”
Despite the soft talking, it didn’t cause the questions to stop. And most awkwardly, they came from a future colleague of Psaki’s in Welker.
Hilariously, Welker never acknowledged her own network as being Psaki’s future destination, only referring to it as “a media outlet” in her question about whether Psaki could still “be an effective briefer” (click “expand”):
WELKER: Jen, given the reports which have now been confirmed by multiple media outlets, how can you continue to be an effective briefer if you do, in fact, have plans to join a media outlet?
PSAKI: Well, I have nothing, again, to announce about any conversations or any future plans. And at whatever time I leave the White House, I can promise you the first thing I am going to do is sleep and spend time with my three and six-year-old, who are my most important audiences of all. But I would say, Kristen, that again, I have done — have the ethics, legal requirements to the highest very seriously, and any discussions and any considerations about future employment just as any White House official would and I have taken steps beyond that to make sure there’s no conflicts.
As Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) correctly noted, it’s all but certain “[e]very reporter in that room knew that Psaki was negotiating with several networks,” so it’s worth pondering a question he raised: “They all just went on with the charade of asking and answering questions from a known future colleague.”
Charade or not, Welker pushed back on Psaki’s insistence about first taking time to sleep and have family time: “I understand what you’re saying, but I guess the question is: How is it ethical to have these conversations with media outlets while you continue to have a job standing behind that podium?”
Psaki largely restated her initial points about following the administration’s “stringent ethical and legal requirements,” so Welker closed with a question that’d be better suited for her bosses as, in all likelihood, she and Psaki will soon be yuking it up on-camera: “[I]s it the policy of this White House to allow staffers to have discussions even indirectly with institutions that impact and affect their jobs and your job here?”
As she’s done since January 2021, Psaki didn’t move off her talking points about White House policy requiring anyone considering outside employment to speak “with the White House counsel's office and ensuring they abide by any ethics and legal requirements.”
“[T]hose are conversations that I have taken very seriously and abided by every component of,” she concluded.
To see the relevant transcript from March 1’s briefing (including questions about inflation from Fox’s Jacqui Heinrich), click “expand.”
White House press briefing [via CBSN]
April 1, 2022
3:16 p.m. EasternED O’KEEFE: Lots of urgent issues discussed here, but with the helicopter approaching, one little bit of housekeeping. Is it true that you are leaving the White House to work for MSNBC?
JEN PSAKI: Well, you can't get rid of me yet, Ed. I have nothing to confirm about my length of public service or planned service or anything about consideration about next plans. I am very happy to be standing with all of you here today after it felt like a never -ending, endless time in my basement, quarantining away from my family and, believe it or not, I missed you all a lot. And my focus everyday continues to be speaking on behalf of the President, answering your questions as tough as they may be at many times, as difficult as they may be to answer at many times and I hope that I meet my own bar of treating everybody with fairness and being equitable.
O’KEEFE: And — and just because this has been raised by our colleagues, but people who are observing this process, is it ethical for you to continue conducting this job while negotiating with a media outlet?
PSAKI: Well, I have always gone over and above the stringent ethical and legal requirements of the Biden administration and I take that very seriously. And, as is standard for every employee of the White House, I have had ethics counseling, including as it relates to any future employment. I have complied with all ethics requirements and gone beyond and taken steps to recuse myself from decisions as appropriate. And so, I hope that all of you — I’ve been working with all of you some time, would judge me for my record and how I treat all of you, both in the briefing room and otherwise and I try to answer questions from everybody across the board. I know everybody in the back of the room may not always be pleased with me, but I do my best and I will continue to do that.
KRISTEN WELKER: Jen, follow-up on that?
O’KEEFE: Thanks. I — [INAUDIBLE] — had to ask.
PSAKI: Okay. [TO WELKER] Go ahead.
WELKER [TO O’KEEFE]: Are you finished?
O’KEEFE: Yes.
WELKER: A follow-up?
O’KEEFE: Go ahead, Kristen.
WELKER: Jen, given the reports which have now been confirmed by multiple media outlets, how can you continue to be an effective briefer if you do, in fact, have plans to join a media outlet?
PSAKI: Well, I have nothing, again, to announce about any conversations or any future plans. And at whatever time I leave the White House, I can promise you the first thing I am going to do is sleep and spend time with my three and six-year-old, who are my most important audiences of all. But I would say, Kristen, that again, I have done — have the ethics, legal requirements to the highest very seriously, and any discussions and any considerations about future employment just as any White House official would and I have taken steps beyond that to make sure there’s no conflicts.
WELKER: And I understand what you're saying, but I guess the question is: How is it ethical to have these conversations with media outlets while you continue to have a job standing behind that podium?
PSAKI: Well, there are a range of stringent ethical and legal requirements that are imposed on everybody in this administration and many administrations past about any conversations you're having with future employers. That is true of any industry you're working in and I have abided by those and tried to take steps to go beyond that as well.
WELKER: And, broadly speaking, is it the policy of this White House to allow staffers to have discussions even indirectly with institutions that impact and affect their jobs and your job here?
PSAKI: Well, it is the policy of this White House to ensure anyone having conversation about future employment does so through consultation with the White House counsel's office and ensuring they abide by any ethics and legal requirements and those are conversations that I have taken very seriously and abided by every component of.
(....)
3:22 p.m. Eastern
JACQUI HEINRICH: Jen, a question on inflation.
PSAKI: Sure.
HEINRICH: Real quick. Today, the President blamed Putin’s invasion of Ukraine for not just higher gas prices, but higher food prices. Inflation was at 7.4 percent in January before the invasion. In February, it went up to 7.9 percent. Vladimir Putin didn't invade until the 24th, so March is really going to show the impact of the invasion and that report doesn't even come out until April 12th. So how are people supposed to believe the Vladimir Putin price hike is for food prices going up when the timeline doesn't add up?
PSAKI: Well, here’s what the President is reflecting on. One, the price of gas has gone up by approximately a dollar or more since Putin started lining up troops at the border. This is something that outside economists have spoken to as well, not just the administration and those are just factual details about how much the price of gas has gone up. We know that’s a huge impact and when you say inflation, people think the cost in their pocketbook and the impact on their budgets. The second piece on the availability of food, we know that different markets around the world are impacted by — by the lack of production in Ukraine and other because of the war and we know that that could impact global food prices.
HEINRICH: But it hasn’t happened yet. This is the first time we’ve heard the President blame Vladimir Putin for higher food prices.
PSAKI: I think what the President’s looking at is what the impact has been in a lot of areas that are leading to price increases on people's pocketbooks and where we could see it increasing over the course of time. I’m here in my office. I’ll see you all. Thank you, everyone.
[REPORTERS SHOUTING]
SIMON ATEBA: Who is going to replace you?
