Surely the White House has got something to say about the #FauciEmails dump, right? There was some pretty damning stuff in there, after all. Stuff that actually implicates parts of the U.S. government in an apparent coverup effort.
Surely the White House has some thoughts.
According to Jen Psaki, they just don’t think that now is a good time to share them:
The @PressSec says of Fauci's emails, "it's obviously not advantageous for me to re-litigate the substance of emails from 17 months ago."
— Philip Melanchthon Wegmann (@PhilipWegmann) June 3, 2021
Beg your pardon?
.@PressSec on Dr. Fauci's emails.
"He's been an undeniable asset in our country's pandemic response but it's obviously not that advantageous for me to re-litigate the substance of emails from 17 months ago." pic.twitter.com/VnlAyTeTt8
— Washington Examiner (@dcexaminer) June 3, 2021
Wow.
— Jerry Dunleavy (@JerryDunleavy) June 3, 2021
"Dude, that was like 17 months ago!" https://t.co/7djzmcGV9G
— Aldous Huxley's Ghost™ (@AF632) June 3, 2021
How do you re-litigate something that has never been litigated https://t.co/goEu51HxEA
— Jason Hart (@jasonahart) June 3, 2021
To "religitate" something, you have first to litigate it.
— Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) June 3, 2021
Recommended
Only when it’s advantageous, though. Try to keep up!
Cop out. Not even an original cop out.
— Will Collier (@willcollier) June 3, 2021
Good point. Anyone else feel like there’s something really familiar about Psaki’s response?
What difference, at this point, does it make? https://t.co/IxhM54Ra6g
— Karol Markowicz (@karol) June 3, 2021
tfw Hillary preps you https://t.co/WRTTuagmoc
— LB (@beyondreasdoubt) June 3, 2021
Guess Jen was paying extra-close attention during the Benghazi hearings.
Too bad she’s just as credible as Hillary Clinton was.
Re-litigate? They were just released and if he is still advising WH, they are very substantive. She knows that
— Jennifer G. Hickey (@cincyred5) June 3, 2021
Let's just circle back to the fact that regardless if it was 17 months ago, this is the guy who has almost singlehandedly shamed U.S. (and by example, worldwide) response.
And to the fact that this guy is still advising your administration on this very topic.
— Aldous Huxley's Ghost™ (@AF632) June 3, 2021
Might that have something to do with why the White House doesn’t think it’s advantageous to litigate the substance of the emails?
Well far be it from the people to ask questions that aren't advantageous to your administration. https://t.co/lI7uIYehyT
— Caleb Howe (@CalebHowe) June 3, 2021
it's really not advantageous for her to answer any critical questions at all but, yeah sure, this is fine.
— Completely Unfettered (@jerkstore159) June 3, 2021
I suppose we should credit her for saying it's not "advantageous," meaning she's tacitly admitting the Biden camp and media's approach to COVID was to encourage censorship and disinformation. https://t.co/uusvlsu6Fy
— Mark Hemingway (@Heminator) June 3, 2021
This is going to get a whole lot messier.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member