Our Deranged White House Press Corps

Today Sarah Sanders conducted a press briefing. What transpired illustrates Michael Ramirez’s point that there is no difference between the crazed comic Michelle Wolf and the crazed reporters who cover the White House for their various liberal outlets.

Ms. Sanders opened, as usual, by talking about some of the things going on in the White House and around the country:

Today in the Rose Garden, President Trump continued the tradition of celebrating the National Day of Prayer. The President also signed an executive order to ensure that all faith-based communities have strong advocates throughout his administration. …

In that same light, President Trump extends his thoughts and prayers to the nine victims and their families of yesterday’s military plane crash in Savannah, Georgia. …

As you all know, President Trump’s nominee to lead the CIA, Gina Haspel, is scheduled to appear before the Senate Intelligence Committee next week.

In her 33 years at the agency, Acting Director Haspel has held senior positions around the globe, overseeing covert operations and counterterrorism efforts to protect the homeland.

She’s one of the most qualified, most capable individuals ever nominated to lead the CIA. …

With planning and preparations underway for the summit with North Korea, and with Secretary Pompeo now engaged from the State Department, Republicans and Democrats should come together and confirm Gina Haspel as the Director of the CIA.

Today, we also mark World Press Freedom Day. This comes after a recent suicide bombing in Afghanistan claiming the lives of at least 10 journalists.

Do you think the reporters who cover the White House were interested in any of those topics? Of course not! Stormy Daniels is, apparently, the great issue facing the Republic. Here are the questions the reporters asked Ms. Sanders, with only a handful of relevant ones omitted:

Q Can you explain why the President, when he spoke — when he answered questions from reporters a few weeks ago about the $130,000 payment from Michael Cohen to Stormy Daniels, why the President was not truthful with the American people and with the people in this room?

Q If I could take a broader view on this, because I know you can’t talk about the details. But can I ask you, when the President so often says things that turn out not to be true, when the President and the White House show what appears to be a blatant disregard for the truth, how are the American people to trust or believe what is said here and what is said by the President?

Q But the President — I mean, when the story first happened came out that Ty Cobb would be leaving and Emmet Flood would be coming in, the President said, “fake news,” said it was not true. When he talked about the prisoners in North Korea, he said the previous administration had failed to get them out. At least two of them were taken prisoner while Donald Trump was President. And obviously, the totally conflicting statements on the Stormy Daniels claim. I mean, these are statements that are just not true.

Q He started paying back Michael Cohen back in February of last year. I mean, the reimbursement was happening long before the President was asked about this.

Q But I’m saying, I mean, how could he not have known? He was paying him back. He was paying him back —

Q Just to follow up on that — the President did talk about monthly retainers in his tweet, and then Rudy Giuliani said that the President only knew about this 10 days to 2 weeks ago. How can you only be aware of something 10 days to 2 weeks ago, but at the same time be in the process of paying monthly retainers that apparently covered this reimbursement to Michael Cohen?

Q If I could just follow up on — you said, on March 7th, “There was no knowledge of any payments from the President, and he’s denied all of these allegations.” Were you lying to us at the time, or were you in the dark?

Q That means you were in the dark. You didn’t know. You didn’t know at the time.

Q Thanks a lot, Sarah. Were you caught off guard by Major Giuliani’s comments on Fox News last night?

Q So is the administration — is the President, is he pleased with the job that Mayor Giuliani is doing right now? It seems as if he has opened the President up to some sort of criminal liability as it relates to federal election campaign violations.

Q Thank you, Sarah. When was the last time that the President talked to Michael Cohen? And is Michael Cohen still his attorney? And also, is the White House concerned or is the President concerned that any conversations he would have had with Michael Cohen would have been picked up by the wiretap that we learned about today?

Q And just to clarify, when did you specifically know that the President repaid Mr. Cohen for the $130,000? You personally.

Q Sarah, you said earlier that, when you’ve given answers around this general topic, you gave us the best information you had at the time. Now it appears that your position is you’re not going to comment because it’s ongoing litigation. Have you been advised not to wade into this to protect yourself from any potential legal exposure by giving either false information or information that proves later not to be able to be withstood in court?

Q But the point of Jonathan’s question earlier — when you say, before, that you gave the best information you had at the time, and —

MS. SANDERS: And I continue to do that today.

Q — but it turns out not to be correct, or accurate, are you then trying to limit the liability that you may encounter by not dealing with any of those questions now, and pushing them all off because you say it’s ongoing litigation?

Q Let me ask you something that the Mayor said last night, not related to the questions you’ve gotten so far. He said, he — being the President — “fired Comey because Comey would not, among other things, say that he wasn’t a target of the investigation.” Is that the White House position now, explaining why James Comey was fired?

Q He said it’s a completely tainted investigation. Do you agree with that?

Q Can you clear up this timeline a bit, back to Jim’s question, about when exactly did the President learn that the payments were going to Michael Cohen to cover the Stormy Daniels —

Q And did the President know that Mr. Giuliani would specifically be talking about these payments on Hannity last night? Was he aware of the time and the message —

Q Was the President concerned when he learned the reporting that Michael Cohen’s phones were wiretapped several days before the raid?

Q And just going back to the payments question, how many payments did the President make to Michael Cohen after the election?

Q Can I just ask you about Rudy Giuliani’s comments? Rudy Giuliani said, this morning, “Imagine if that came out on October 15, 2016, in the middle of the last debate with Hillary Clinton” — a reference to the payment. So does the White House now acknowledge that that payment was made with politics in mind?

Q Was Giuliani correct in saying that he was fired in part because he wouldn’t tell the President that he wasn’t part of the investigation?

Q Sarah, did the President file a fraudulent personal financial disclosure last year when he filed a report that did not include a loan from Michael Cohen or any company affiliated with him? I mean, if there was no loan, then what would he have been reimbursing?

Q So a couple of quick questions. Does the President believe he’s above the law?

Q Thank you. And then does he prefer to sit down with Kim Jong-un versus Bob Mueller?

Q So, Sarah, at this point, can you tell us definitively if the President plans to answer any questions from Bob Mueller? And if not, what is now in place here at the White House to go through that process of a subpoena, a possible indictment, a possible grand jury?

The White House press corps is utterly deranged by its hatred for President Trump and its determination to help its party crush his administration. A lot of people, sadly, aren’t very good at their jobs. But I doubt that you could find, anywhere in our vast country, a group of people who are as terrible at their jobs as the members of the White House press corps.

Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.