Ooof: White House Reporters Body Psaki Over Biden’s ‘Genocide’ Line, Record Inflation

Hump Day marked a tough day for Jen Psaki as she reportedly careens toward the series finale of The Psaki Show as the White House press secretary faced tough questions on inflation and another off-the-cuff remark from President Biden about Russia’s unprovoked war against Ukraine, including one that questioned whether there needs to be “an asterisk next to anything that the President says.”

The first biting question came from CBS’s Nancy Cordes, noting that it was only a week ago that National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan told reporters they haven’t “seen a systemic deprivation of life” by the Russians that would classify their actions as a genocide and therefore something had to change from then to Biden’s insistence Tuesday that the war is a genocide.

 

 

Psaki added confusion: “Well, the President spoke to that twice yesterday and, of course, he’s the President and we are here to — to implement his views.”

Fox’s Jacqui Heinrich observed that “[i]t seemed like a passing remark,” so it appeared no one knew in advance. Again, Psaki didn’t try to explain it away, saying Biden’s free to “make his views known at any point he would like” since he’s “at the top” of “the totem pole.”

NBC reporter and future Psaki colleague Shannon Pettypiece wanted to know whether Biden’s opinion are “U.S. policy” or it’s another case of Biden spouting off as Joe Biden the person instead of the President. Psaki said there’s still “a…process” to determine it in a “legal” sense,” Pettypiece called out the disconnect (click “expand”):

PETTYPIECE: Is there any concern, though, that the President’s views on things, differing from what the actual policy is once it’s gone through all those legal channels, that that could confusing to world leaders when the President’s saying one thing, but the policy isn’t necessarily clear?

PSAKI: Well, how would it impact it — the outcome?

PETTYPIECE: Yeah, well, I mean, once there’s a genocide being committed in a region, other countries would treat that in a certain way if that’s — 

PSAKI: In what way?

PETTYPIECE: — indeed the policy. I guess as far as how — the way leaders would try — you know, decide how they’re going to respond to that. So, and I don’t —

PSAKI: Well, typically, a — a consideration of genocide takes years. I mean, look at — there are many past examples. And if you look at even Uighurs — right — and what we have called out happening in China. It took years to identify the problem. That hasn’t meant we’ve provided a range of military assistance. We are now trying to support and prop up the leaders of Ukraine. There are other — and the military, of course — there are other leaders who have — in the world — who have said something similar to what the President has said recently. Because they’re also seeing the atrocities on the ground. I do not know that it’s changed policy or confused anyone. I think they’re speaking all from what they are seeing with their own eyes as we look at the visuals of what’s happening on the ground.

And moments after Reuters’s Alex Alper pointed out State Department spokesman Ned Price said prior to the White House briefing that the U.S. has yet to officially call the war a genocide, CNN’s M.J. Lee engaged in a series of questioning that was akin to an out-of-body experience for most of CNN when she asked if “an asterisk” is required for what emanates from Biden’s mouth.

Psaki wasn’t pleased (click “expand”):

LEE: Jen. The President said comments on the war three times. These statements, which the White House and he later disputed, did not represent U.S. legal policy. When he called Putin a war crime, when he stated that Putin can no longer be in power and when he made the comment about Ukraine’s genocide, it was all done in America. Do you think this does not signal that anything the President may say is a red flag to the rest of the world? 

PSAKI : When the President ran for office, he said he would “shoot from the shoulder” and that is a phrase he used often. Yesterday’s remarks on war crimes were a reflection of this promise. I don’t think anybody is confused about the atrocities of what we’re seeing on the ground, the horrors of what we’re seeing on the ground and different leaders around the world describe it in different ways, but what we’re — what is unquestionable is what we’re seeing is horrific, the targeting of civilians, of hospitals, of — of even kids and the President was calling it like he sees it and that’s what he does. 

LEE: If I could ask it this way: Do you think that there is any danger to global leaders, including Vladimir Putin to Olaf Scholz if they can’t be sure when they hear words coming out of the President’s mouth whether he is stating a personal opinion versus making a statement about U.S. policy?

PSAKI: Can you give me an example of someone who’s confused? Leader? 

LEE: Well, I mean, my colleague brought up Emmanuel Macron saying — responding and saying, you know, the use of the language genocide, he sees as rhetorical escalation. 

PSAKI – President Putin is inhumanely attacking civilians and terrorizing a nation right now. The President, the President, was speaking about what these atrocities were and what he’s seeing on the ground. Many other leaders did exactly the same thing. It does not change policy in the sense that we have seen these atrocities, unfortunately, for weeks now and we’re going to see more as Russia pulls back from parts of the country, so what our focus will continue to be and the focus of leaders around the world is to continue to escalate our military assistance, our security assistance as we did today in providing a range of — of weapons that we have not even provided to them in the past and that, I think, is what the Ukrainians are most focused on and I think the global community is most focused on: how we’re responding and how we’re helping them. 

Even Washington Post writer and Team Biden member Annie Linskey was perplexed, pleading with Psaki for “tips” on how to “interpret his words as reaction versus U.S. policy.”

Things weren’t any better for Psaki on inflation. Heinrich ended her round of questions by answering these following the release of the March inflation data. “[D]oes the White House still view inflation as transitory?”

Incredibly, Psaki reiterated the same, stale answer she’s given for months: “That is the view of the Federal Reserve and outside economists and they all continue to project it will come down this year.”

Heinrich’s colleague Edward Lawrence of the Fox Business Network got down into the weeds (while still remaining effective) by citing a record Producer Price Index (PPI) measuring “the price that companies are paying for the materials that they need to make the stuff that they sell.”

Lawrence went onto ask whether the White House thinks higher numbers are in store, but Psaki wouldn’t commit other than state she’ll “let the Federal Reserve make projections” and give an explanation of the difference between the PPI and Consumer Price Index (CPI).

FBN correspondent asked whether Biden was responsible for inflation. “[D]oes the President acknowledge any responsibility for the inflation that we’re seeing now based on the decisions that he’s made when he came into office?”

Psaki stayed true to her talk points of blaming coronavirus and the war in Ukraine for the outbreak. However, when she was asked about inflation in the wake of a rash in federal spending 2021, Psaki dismissed the notion, arguing that it was necessary to prevent Americans starving.

To see the relevant transcript from April 13’s briefing (including questions about illegal immigration and one from Today News Africa’s Simon Ateba on Psaki’s rumored departure), click here.

About Post Author

Follow Us