With much of the national media ghoulishly obsessing over fringe conspiracy theories about Hurricane Milton and Russia-related claims from Bob Woodward’s new book, Real Clear Politics’s Philip Wegmann actually did his job Wednesday in pressing White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre on claims in the Woodward book about Ukraine and President Biden reportedly regretful he made Merrick Garland Attorney General.
A few hours later, Wegmann asked President Biden about the wholly manufactured news cycle claiming Florida Republican Governor Ron DeSantis is ignoring Vice President Kamala Harris (who has no power over any aspect of the federal response).
That question came after Biden spent much of his time blaming Trump for alleged misinformation and Harris’s Fatal Attraction-like obsession with bashing DeSantis:
.@PhilipWegmann on Hurricane #Milton: “Mr. President, does Governor DeSantis need to take Vice President Harris’s calls?”
— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) October 9, 2024
Biden: “All I can tell you is I’ve talked to Governor DeSantis. He's been very gracious. He thanked me for all we've done. He knows what we're doing and —… pic.twitter.com/vORstA1omG
Rewinding to mid-afternoon’s White House briefing, AP’s Aamer Madhani, The Independent’s Andrew Feinberg used part of their question time to invoke claims from Woodward’s book that then-President Trump sent then-scarce COVID-19 tests to Russian dictator Vladimir Putin and has spoken with him numerous times since leaving the White House.
While he also went down this rabbit hole, NBC’s Gabe Gutierrez also asked about Biden allegedly having used expletives to describe Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Wegmann wasn’t having any of this.
In contrast, he wanted to know why Jean-Pierre engaged with the unsubstantiated claims about Trump and Putin when she usually doesn’t “often speculate about hypotheticals.”
Jean-Pierre mumbled this word salad:
It’s speculation, but if it’s true, because I knew — right — we all knew that you all will have — will have questions about — uh — uh — uh — for us about the national security concerns, about our thoughts about this and so, if it is indeed true — right — we’re talking about President Putin here. We see what’s happening in Ukraine — Russia’s aggression in Ukraine. That’s about democracy. That’s about Ukrainians fighting for their freedom, and we have heard the former President say and lobby against the — the funding — uh — for Ukraine. So, yeah, if it is true, it is indeed concerning because we’re talking about our national security here, so we wanted to be — wanted to be very, very clear and so, I’ll leave it there.
In Doocy-like fashion with the flattery ahead of the hook, Wegmann hit Jean-Pierre with this claim from the book: “Does President Biden regret making Merrick Garland his Attorney General, as Mr. Woodward has reported?”
Jean-Pierre was unamused, claiming that speculation was fine since it involved Putin and “national security”, but otherwise she wouldn’t because “there’s going to be many books written about an administration” and “[i]t’s not — it’s very much typical — uh — and I’m just not going to comment on every specifics every — uh — every — uh — matter that comes up or any particulars that come up.”
Wegmann shrewdly closed with a question about Ukraine since Jean-Pierre said she would speculate since the Trump-Russia claims were matters of “national security” (click “expand”):
WEGMANN: Mr. Woodward also reports that according to intelligence reports, the White House officials here believed that there was as much of a 50 percent chance that Russia would use a tactical nuclear weapon in Ukraine. I mean, is — is that 50 percent odds number — is that accurate? And if so —
JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah?
WEGMANN: — would this administration, you know, let the American public know that that kind of risk is real?
JEAN-PIERRE: Again, I’m not going to speak to everything — uh — that is in a book, every particular — uh — there’s going to be many books written and we understand that. It’s not atypical — uh — but I won’t respond to every piece in the book.
Elsewhere in the briefing, Gutierrez, CNN’s M.J. Lee, and ABC’s Selina Wang obsessed over this overblown rippling of misinformation in questions to FEMA Administrator Deana Criswell (click “expand”):
EE: The White House has been talking a lot about the threat of misinformation, disinformation as it relates to strong recovery efforts. Can you talk to us about whether there’s one piece of incorrect information that you think in your view has been most damaging that you think would be most important to clarify?
(....)
WANG: Can you give any specific examples about the real world impact that disinformation is having? Both in terms of are you seeing people who aren’t taking precautions because they don’t trust the government or FEMA or NOAA and then, in terms of the threats to FEMA workers. Have you seen any threats against some of them on the ground?
(....)
GUTIERREZ: You said before that you have dealt with misinformation in the past. Why do you think that misinformation is so rampant this time around? Is it because of the election? Is it because of certain politicians? Is it because of tech platforms? Or is it because of potentially a foreign actor?
To see the relevant transcript from the October 9 briefing, click here.
