Read time: 4 minutes

White House Spokeswoman Can't Explain Why Op-Ed Writer Is Security Threat

Mercedes Schlapp proved the whole "national security" threat claim is bogus nonsense intended to justify stepping on the First Amendment.
Views:

On Friday, Donald Trump called for the Department of Justice to investigate the person who posted the op-ed criticizing his administration and reassuring people there were "adults" in the White House as a national security threat.

At some point, he even mentioned administering lie detector tests to people, as if he isn't the biggest liar of them all.

While Sarah Huckabee Sanders just shrugged it off as another one of Trump's "suggestions," White House Senior Communications official Mercedes "Mercy" Schlapp went straight to Fox News to make sure not to explain how this person is a national security threat at all.

They are a lot of things, none of them good. I hate agreeing with Trump that he or she is a coward, but they are. However, national security threat is not something that person is.

Here's the transcript if you don't want to watch Mercy hem and haw, via The Marvelous Heather. Heads-up to "Mercy" -- Your whataboutism with regard to President Obama is bull. He had no "enemies list." Maybe if he did, Merrick Effing Garland would be sitting on the Supreme Court today. You can take your whataboutist BS and shove it.

FAULKNER: Alright Mercedes, I'm going to look down now because I want to be able to say with the president said just moments ago aboard Air Force One. He called on Jeff Sessions of the DOJ to investigate The New York Times column after, as we know, the Times had that op-ed by an unnamed source. He says “it is a matter of national security.” Why is it a matter of national security to find out who wrote that op-ed?

SCHLAPP: Well, it's very clear that this apparent senior administration official is doing what he or she can to basically be deceitful, to ensure that they basically resist or obstruct what the president's agenda is.

That is outright not only cowardly, but dangerous because of the mere fact that what you want in your team is making sure that individuals are able to support the president's agenda.

I have to tell you Harris, I worked for two presidents. It's an honor to serve the president of the United States. It's an honor to serve this country. The mere fact that this individual, this anonymous source, has decided to put his or her interests before the country's interest is very disturbing.

And so I would say, go get a job with Senator Warren, I think, and, you know, resign from your current position because, I mean, I've even talked to Democrats who have told me Harris, that they're like, that is so disturbing. The mere thought that you have someone in your administration that is willing to betray and really stand against this president, and to be anonymous about it.

FAULKNER: Yes. It's a betrayal (crosstalk) and we've seen other presidents, and in fact it's ironic that we're hearing from Barack Obama, because he's one of those who went after his enemies and there were prosecutions and he went after those people who were talking, and whispers and working against him.

The president was very patient early in his presidency. We've talked about it on Outnumbered. It sounds like the president's patience has run out. And again, I want to double down on this, because I really want to understand it. How does it put national security at risk to have an op-ed person not be named?

SCHLAPP: Look, I can't comment on any of the internal deliberation or any part of a future investigation. What i can tell you is what this anonymous source has done is really just... it's really unfortunate. It's for or us that sacrifice day in and day out for this country, for president Trump, ensuring that his agenda is implemented.

This guy, or this person, this source is lying. It's someone who obviously doesn't know the president, who doesn't engage with the president in the same way that those of us that do every single day. We've seen president trump in his meetings where he is the one making the final decisions, he brings in a group of advisers to have very robust discussions on a variety of issues.

FAULKNER: I understand it because you're sitting and you're talking about having these priorities, and having priority conversations. Mercedes Schlapp of the White House, thank you. We will be right back.

Can you help us out?

For 17 years we have been exposing Washington lies and untangling media deceit, but now Facebook is drowning us in an ocean of right wing lies. Please give a one-time or recurring donation, or buy a year's subscription for an ad-free experience. Thank you.

More C&L Coverage

Discussion

New Commenting System

Our comments are now powered by Insticator. In order to comment you will need to create an Insticator account. The process is quick and simple. Please note that the ability to comment with a C&L site account is no longer available.

We welcome relevant, respectful comments. Any comments that are sexist or in any other way deemed hateful by our staff will be deleted and constitute grounds for a ban from posting on the site. Please refer to our Terms of Service (revised 3/17/2016) for information on our posting policy.

Please Do Not Use the Login Link at the Top of the Site.

In order to comment you must use an Insticator account. To register an account, enter your comment and click the post button. A dialog will then appear allowing you create your account.

We will be retiring our Crooks and Liars user account system in January, 2021.

Thank you.
C&L Team