White House Press Reverts To Republican-Wired Form

 

The Republican- wired press is back.

Eagerly lapping up the bad faith of Republicans looking to retain power and leverage by invoking "unity" and "bipartisanship" to foil the Biden Administration from the get-go, several in the press secretary's briefing yesterday lobbed their loaded questions at Press Secretary Jen Psaki. 

This, from New York Effing Times reporter Mike Shear (remember that name):

Q   That's fine. So I want to push you a little bit more on that question.  Like if there’s this call for unity that the President made in his speech yesterday, but there has so far been almost no fig leaf even to the Republican Party.  You don’t have a Republican Cabinet member, like President Obama and, I think, President Clinton had.  You — you know, the executive orders that he’s come out the gate have been largely designed at erasing as much of the Trump legacy as you can with executive orders, much of which the Republican Party likes and agrees with.  You’ve put forth an immigration bill that has a path to citizenship but doesn’t do much of a nod towards the border security.  And you’ve got a 1.9-trillion-dollar COVID relief bill that has, as folks have said, already drawn all sorts of criticism.  Where is the — where is the actual action behind this idea of bipartisanship? 

And when are we going to see one of those, you know, sort of, substantial outreaches that says, “This is something that, you know, the Republicans want to do, too”?

We won't go into how much the Times needs to atone for its part in installing Mango Mussolini in office ("but her emails!").  That's well known by now, which makes this preening jackass's question even more infuriating than it otherwise might be.

Psaki's response, in part:

But, Mike, is unemployment insurance only an issue that Democrats in the country want?  Do only Democrats want their kids to go back to schools?  Do only Democrats want vaccines to be distributed across the country?  That’s — we feel that that package — he feels that package is designed for bipartisan support. [snip]

I think if you talk to Democrats — or Republicans on the Hill, which I know many of you do, they will say they’re not looking for something symbolic.  They are looking for engagement.  They’re looking to have a conversation.  They’re looking to have a dialogue.  And that’s exactly what he’s going to do.

That was a pretty deft response, though we wish she would have reminded him of the mandate President Biden won at the ballot box (81 million votes, 306 electoral college votes), and that the party of sedition needs to make amends before it's allowed to use "unity" as a cloak for its obstructionism.  But, President Biden brought some of this on himself by his liberal use of that word outside of the context of the insurrection and the long history of Republican bad faith (and, yes, we know, the narrow margins in the House and Senate yada yada).

Here's another gem, this one from NBC's Kristen Welker (remember her name, too):

Q     Jen, President Biden is reversing a number of former President Trump’s policies, and we’re seeing some of former President Trump’s staffers be placed on leave or be reassigned.  Is there an attempt to purge Trump officials?

MS. PSAKI:  Well, there’s a new administration, so obviously there are a number of new officials in place.  I know there was some reporting, for example — and I don’t know if this is who you were referencing, so you tell me if not — of the head of the NLRB.  That’s an individual who was not carrying out the — you know, anyone would tell you, not just from our administration — the objectives of the NLRB.  And so they were — they’re no longer in their position.  And we’ll — we’ll take — make those decisions as needed.

Q     So there’s not an effort writ large that you’re assessing — reassessing individuals in the administration?

MS. PSAKI:  Well, Kristen, as you know, when a new administration comes in, there’s a massive changeover in political appointees and nominees and people who will serve in a variety of roles...

We're pretty certain Welker knows how things work when a new Administration takes over from an old one, especially one as criminal and ethically challenged as the last.  So, we're not sure if "Is there an attempt to purge Trump officials?" is one of the most ignorant questions she's ever asked, or one of the most devious, designed to imply that the Biden Administration is doing something abnormal or unAmerican.  (Welker, by our unscientific measure, also seemed to be among the last of the corporate media reporters to use the word "lie" -- and then only infrequently -- to describe what was coming out of Mango Mussolini's and his various spokesliars' mouths.)

There's more in the transcript that would indicate that at least some of the White House press are going to try to prove their "independent" cred now that democracy has, for now, been saved.  So, it's back to business as usual, Republican- wired, "both sides," "what- aboutism."  Our heroes!

BONUS:  Washington Post media columnist Margaret Sullivan has a generally good take on the press and how they should comport themselves.  A snippet:

But soon, I’d guess, another norm will return: the desire to appear combative and to blow things out of proportion to demonstrate toughness. Because journalists pride themselves on being tough and objective, they like to take an adversarial-seeming approach, especially to the party in power or the candidate with whom they most identify. (And, of course, actually holding power to account is the most important job that journalists have. It’s what we’re here for.)

But there’s a difference between truly holding power to account and grandstanding. It’s the latter that gave rise to ridiculous dust-ups like the one over President Barack Obama’s wearing of a tan suit — not to mention the vast and shameful overplaying of the Hillary Clinton email scandal during the 2016 campaign.

The national media should show toughness, but of a different sort. If they’ve learned the lessons of the past four years — and I confess that I have my doubts — they’ll do things differently.

They will resist false equivalency. For example, they’ll think twice before they put a reality-denying senator like Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) or Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) on the air to promote false claims about election fraud simply because they feel they need to “balance” all the (truthful) Democratic voices.

We have our doubts, too.  So Democrats need to push back early and strongly.

BONUS II:  We're not the only ones who noticed.

 

The Media's Drift In Trump's Direction - PBS Edition

Watching "librul" PBS' "Washington Week in Review" last night, we were struck by the whole atmosphere of the show - five "insider" journalists summarizing the events of the past week ... without giving any sign that things are not normal. In fact, as you can read for yourself, there was a largely anodyne, horserace approach to the circus that's in town.

Here are just a few excerpts from the transcript (our emphasis throughout):

Nancy Cordes (CBS News) on the wealthfare tax bill:

... the fact that they said they would get it done on Friday and they did is actually a big sign of how unified this party is.  And it’s the culmination of a decades-long dream.  So it seems like, you know, the party’s really hanging together now, and looking to avoid any last-minute derailment.

Yes, super unified!  Just ask Steve "Loose Cannon" Bannon! They're only unified long enough to screw America and future generations. MAGA!

Shawna Thomas (VICE News) on the rush to pass the wealthfare bill:

... Everyone has been saying we have to pass this bill by the end of the year.  We have to pass this bill by the end of the year.  They didn’t really have to pass this bill by the end of the year.  (Laughter.)

Harhar! And, no, it wasn't because of Doug Jones' victory -- they targeted passage before Christmas long before the Alabama election -- it was because the bill is a reeking pile of regressive social and economic engineering that they don't want people to understand (too late!).

Kristen Welker (NBC News) on the involvement of nitwit know-nothing Donald "Rump" Trump:

... [H]e was really serving as an energizing force, I think, as opposed to sort of derailing the negotiations.  Today we had a chance to ask him some questions early in the morning, and I asked him if he would support increasing the child tax credit.  He indicated the answer to that was yes.  [Ed. See how piddling a deal this was below.] So it was very clear, as the day was progressing, that this was moving in a good direction for this president.  I don’t think you can overstate it.  President Trump needs a victory after the failure to repeal and replace Obamacare.  He hasn’t had a major legislative victory.  And so this was a full-court press for this president, the vice president, and his entire top staff.

Stand up and cheer for Big Boy Donnie! F*ck you average Americans who'll be losing health insurance! It's the horserace and the appearance of competence that matter most!

Cordes on the bill's repeal of the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate:

Republicans don’t want to talk about it because they’d love to be able to slide that through.  There’s another big GOP priority in this bill they don’t talk a lot about either, and that is opening up part of the Alaskan Wildlife Refuge for oil drilling... 

Hmmm. Republicans don't want to talk about it, and neither does Nancy Cordes!

Cordes again on the child tax credit:

 ... I will say that there are some changes in this final version that may help to win people over, at least in the short term.  The fact that that child tax credit is refundable up to $1,400.  That’s a pretty big chunk of change. 

No, no it's not you simpleton.  Again, as Andy Slavitt points out, it amounts to $25 a month for a family with two kids (whose daycare costs would average $2,000 a month). Do your f*cking homework!

We could go on (that's just from the first few minutes of the program), but the point is, these "elite" media types are very content to go along with the talking points Republicans have tossed over the transom, while ignoring the yuuuuge elephant in the room:  that we have an abnormal "president" and a party that is increasing its culpability in the rotting out of American values and social fabric. Isn't that newsworthy? (Rhetorical question.)

It's always helpful to keep in mind Masha Gessen's warning to all of us:

The national press is likely to be among the first institutional victims of Trumpism. There is no law that requires the presidential administration to hold daily briefings, none that guarantees media access to the White House. Many journalists may soon face a dilemma long familiar to those of us who have worked under autocracies: fall in line or forfeit access. There is no good solution (even if there is a right answer), for journalism is difficult and sometimes impossible without access to information. 

The power of the investigative press—whose adherence to fact has already been severely challenged by the conspiracy-minded, lie-spinning Trump campaign—will grow weaker. The world will grow murkier. Even in the unlikely event that some mainstream media outlets decide to declare themselves in opposition to the current government, or even simply to report its abuses and failings, the president will get to frame many issues. Coverage, and thinking, will drift in a Trumpian direction, just as it did during the campaign—when, for example, the candidates argued, in essence, whether Muslim Americans bear collective responsibility for acts of terrorism or can redeem themselves by becoming the “eyes and ears” of law enforcement. Thus was xenophobia further normalized, paving the way for Trump to make good on his promises to track American Muslims and ban Muslims from entering the United States.

These people need to be held to account for their lazy complicity in normalizing this monster, his legion of thugs and their efforts to destroy the good that America stood for just a short 13 months ago.