As usual, Fox News Peter Doocy asked an uninformed question. While Jen Psaki gave the perfect answer, did, she missed an important dig she would normally have given?
Even when exhausted, Jen Psaki is good, but …
It was clear that Jen Psaki was under a lot of stress. She is handling a lot of fires the Biden administration is fighting. Of course, one of the fights is always the relentless attack from the right added to the unjustified attacks from the left. There are reasons to put pressure on the Biden administration. An ugly exit from Afghanistan, given the much larger national issues, pale in comparison. Democracy and existentialism are.
Fox News’ Doocy asked a question whose complete answer would have let the side he is a stooge far seem like who they are, those who pal around with terrorists.
“Just as these negotiations about safe passage for Americans and SIV holders continue,” Peter Doocy said. “Why haven’t we heard the president say the United States does not negotiate with terrorists? Is that still the U.S. policy well?”
Psaki shines but I wish …
Jen Psaki came back with the perfect answer.
“Of course, it is Peter,” Psaki replied. “But I would also say that there’s a reality that the Taliban is currently controlling large swaths of Afghanistan. That is a reality on the ground, and right now, our focus and our priority are getting American citizens evacuated and our Afghan partners evacuated. And I would say, given the numbers that we’ve outlined in brief for you, that we’ve had made a great deal of progress in doing exactly that.”
I wish Jen Psaki had added the following statement.
Peter, do remember that Donald Trump is the one who negotiated with the ones you are calling terrorist, and there are pictures of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo with them. Moreover, make sure that you report that your Trump almighty got 5,000 of those you call terrorists released with the agreement his administration signed with the Taliban. Even his former National Security advisor called what the previous administration did a “surrender agreement.”
That may have attenuated that line of questions as we advance. Your thoughts?