During Monday’s White House press briefing, the ever-inept Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre had quite the day as she ended what had been a petty, 187-day blackout against the New York Post’s Steven Nelson, hilariously ended the briefing after a question from Real Clear Politics’s Philip Wegmann about the new twist in the Biden corruption saga, and was caught in a double standard by Fox’s Jacqui Heinrich over voting access.
With the penultimate slot in the briefing, Jean-Pierre surprisingly called out to Nelson, who thanked her and added that while “[i]t’s been awhile,” he’s “hop[ing] we can do more.” Jean-Pierre chuckled in annoyance, saying he took it “one step too far.” Bizarre.
After 187 days of being iced out in the WH Briefing Room, KJP FINALLY called on @NYPost's @StevenNelson10.
— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) December 4, 2023
Nelson: Section 702 of FISA is expiring this month and, against this debate, Senator Wyden just this past month released a letter saying that the White House is secretly… pic.twitter.com/sTBAcT9OoB
Nelson cut to his first question:
Section 702 of FISA is expiring this month and, against this debate, Senator Wyden just this past month released a letter saying that the White House is secretly funding a domestic court record dragnet administered by AT&T. Apparently, according to Wired, the White House altered funding for this program in 2021 and resumed at last year, and I was wondering what you could tell us about this program and the reason that it was paused and then resumed by the White House.
As Jean-Pierre often does with reporters she regularly calls on, she played dumb and said she’d “have to check with the team.”
Nelson pivoted to his second question, which concerned allegations of collusion between the administration and Big Tech (such as here):
Last week, the House Judiciary Committee subpoenaed Rob Flaherty about the efforts to influence social media moderation. Is the White House going to seek to block that testimony? And is there any reconsideration by the White House or regrets about the past flagging of social media content for removal?
Jean-Pierre unsurprisingly punted, referring him to the White House counsel’s office.
After Nelson, Wegmann served up a question about the revelation from House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) that one of Hunter Biden’s business venture Owasco PC sent a direct payment to his father, Joe, which ran counter to “[t]he White House ha[ving] said repeatedly that the President and his son were never in business together.”
“Did the President accept payment? And why would there be such an arrangement if they were never business together? Or, if there was a wall of separation, as the President has previously said,” he asked.
.@PhilipWegmann: The WH has said repeatedly that the President and his son were never in business together. They’ve said that repeatedly also in this room. According to bank records obtained by the House Oversight Committee, though, one of Hunter Biden businesses of Owasco PC set… pic.twitter.com/IyltONFZfN
— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) December 4, 2023
Jean-Pierre brushed it aside and walked away from the podium, claiming she had “not seen that report, so I would have to refer you to my colleagues over at the White House counsel’s office on that particular question.”
Prior to Nelson and Wegmann, Fox’s Jacqui Heinrich channeled her colleague Peter Doocy by laying a trap for Jean-Pierre in asking if “the White House still believe[s]” that Georgia’s voting laws are un-American and promote voter suppression even though “Georgia did have record turnout” in 2022.
Heinrich used that answer to pivot to Florida’s Democratic Party cancelling its 2024 presidential primary (click “expand”):
HEINRICH: So, does the Florida Party, then effectively canceling the Democratic primary also constitute voter suppression?
JEAN-PIERRE: I can’t speak to that.
HEINRICH: Why not?
JEAN-PIERRE: You have to speak to the campaign or the DNC.
HEINRICH: Does — does the White House have thoughts on — on —
JEAN-PIERRE: I can’t —
HEINRICH: — those voters being —
JEAN-PIERRE: — I can’t — I — I can’t speak to that.
HEINRICH: — is it because of the Hatch Act or —
JEAN-PIERRE: I just — this is — you’re talking about 2024 election. You’re talking about a primary. I’m just not gonna speak to that from here.
HEINRICH: Okay.
Heinrich also pressed her on Congresswoman Pramilia Jayapal’s (D-WA) disgusting comments downplaying violence against Jewish women on October 7 by Hamas terrorists, but Jean-Pierre refused to condemn the Washington congresswoman directly.
To see the relevant transcript from the December 4 briefing, click “expand.”
White House press briefing [via ABC News Live subfeed]
December 4, 2023
2:59 p.m. EasternJACQUI HEINRICH: In 2021, President Biden called Georgia’s election law changes New Jim Crow laws that were antithetical to who we are. They imposed voter identification requirements, limited use of drop boxes and gave state officials more power over local elections and then in 2022, Georgia did have record turnout. But you had argued from the podium that there was voters suppression. Does the White House still believe that that was true?
KARINE JEAN-PIERRE: I don’t have anything else to add from what I stated last time.
HEINRICH: So, does the Florida Party, then effectively canceling the Democratic primary also constitute voter suppression?
JEAN-PIERRE: I can’t speak to that.
HEINRICH: Why not?
JEAN-PIERRE: You have to speak to the campaign or the DNC.
HEINRICH: Does — does the White House have thoughts on — on —
JEAN-PIERRE: I can’t —
HEINRICH: — those voters being —
JEAN-PIERRE: — I can’t — I — I can’t speak to that.
HEINRICH: — is it because of the Hatch Act or —
JEAN-PIERRE: I just — this is — you’re talking about 2024 election. You’re talking about a primary. I’m just not gonna speak to that from here.
HEINRICH: Okay. And then, can I get the White House’s response to Congresswoman Jayapal’s comments over the weekend. In her interview, she said that sexual violence should be condemned, but that we have to be balanced in our condemnation. Was that an appropriate comment?
JEAN-PIERRE: So, we’ve been very, very clear. You heard a little bit from — from Jake Sullivan about this. I can only speak for — for the President. Uh, that’s who I can speak for, and we’ve been clear what Hamas did is absolutely reprehensible and — full stop. We’re going to continue to be clear about that. And we think about — you know, rape and the use of rape as being used as a — as a weapon, that is also reprehensible and that’s full stop, and I’ll just leave it there and I’m speaking for the President of the United States. I think there’s been very clear on that.
HEINRICH: Any comment, though —
JEAN-PIERRE: I just —
HEINRICH: — for Congresswoman Jayapal?
JEAN-PIERRE: — I just commented on. I just laid out what we believe is unacceptable.
(....)
3:06 p.m. Eastern
JEAN-PIERRE [TO NELSON]: Go ahead, Steve.
STEVEN NELSON: Oh, thank you, Karine.
JEAN-PIERRE: Sure.
NELSON: It’s been awhile. Hoping we can do more. I — I’ve got one —
JEAN-PIERRE [LAUGHING]: See, you’re taking it one — one step too far, my friend. Just ask your question.
NELSON: — well, thank you again. I’ve got a question about domestic surveillance then one about online censorship. On domestic surveillance, Section 702 of FISA is expiring this month and, against this debate, Senator Wyden just this past month released a letter saying that the White House is secretly funding a domestic court record dragnet administered by AT&T. Apparently, according to Wired, the White House altered funding for this program in 2021 and resumed at last year, and I was wondering what you could tell us about this program and the reason that it was paused and then resumed by the White House.
JEAN-PIERRE: So, I would have to check with the team. I don’t have anything specific to tell you about 702. Is it — that’s what you’re asking me about? I just don’t have anything to share on that particular question.
NELSON: Hence my online censorship question. Last week, the House Judiciary Committee subpoenaed Rob Flaherty about the efforts to influence social media moderation. Is the White House going to seek to block that testimony? And is there any reconsideration by the White House or regrets about the past flagging of social media content for removal?
JEAN-PIERRE: So, I’m just gonna be — um, be very clear here. My colleagues at the White House counsel’s office has already addressed this, so I would have to refer you to them. I’m just not. I don’t have anything to add specifically on this.
(....)
3:07 p.m. Eastern
PHILIP WEGMANN: The White House has said repeatedly that the President and his son were never in business together. They’ve said that repeatedly also in this room. According to bank records obtained by the House Oversight Committee, though, one of Hunter Biden businesses of Owasco PC set up direct payments to the President. Did the President accept payment? And why would there be such an arrangement if they were never business together? Or, if there was a wall of separation, as the President has previously said?
JEAN-PIERRE: So, I have to be clear with you. I have not seen that report, so I would have to refer you to my colleagues over at the White House counsel’s office on that particular question.
