in

Hypocrisy, Thy Name Is Psaki

When you’ve been covering Congress, the White House, and the national political scene as long as I have, you encounter hypocrisy so often that after a while it hardly comes as a surprise.

But then former White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki sat down at the Christian Science Monitor’s weekly breakfast and delivered what is surely a new low in hypocritical whining.

“The thing that has been hardest, personally, is I have had threats, I have had nasty letters, texts to me with my personal address, the names of my children. It crosses lines, you know, and that’s when it becomes a little scary. And that has been the most personally difficult aspect of this job,” Psaki told the breakfast scribes.

She continued, according to The Hill, “I recognize I am in many ways a public figure, people can like me, dislike me, that’s OK,” noting she considers that freedom of speech. “My kids are six and four and I worry about their safety.”

But don’t think Psaki has been taking these threats sitting down. Oh no, she is absolutely certain about who is responsible for the threats and she’s alerted the Feds: “There is a circulation of my address among the Arlington Republican Party.”

If there is a Dissimulation Hall of Fame, Psaki should be admitted immediately because she stands out, even in a town that attracts the kings and queens of duplicity in speech.

Consider the context:

Hundreds of far-Left demonstrators were clearly primed for action before the leak of the draft Supreme Court opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, written in February by Justice Samuel Alito and concurred in by four other conservative Justices, including Thomas, Barrett, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh.

If the High Court finalized Alito’s draft, it would mean a landmark 5-4 decision overturning Roe and a return of the abortion issue to the state legislatures where it had been for two centuries prior to 1973.

That in turn would mean the 29 states that already allow abortion with few restrictions could continue doing so, while the 21 remaining states could make up their own minds, either adopting more or fewer restrictions. This is called “Federalism” and it is an essential tool for the preservation of individual liberty and civil cohesion.

But the ink was hardly dry — figuratively speaking, of course — on the Politico story reporting the leak before the mobs descended upon the Supreme Court, demanding that Roe be forever enshrined as the unquestionable law of the land, and that nobody ever again be permitted to question the right of a woman (whatever happened to those “birthing persons” we were discussing the week before?) to kill her baby at any point in the pregnancy and even for some period of time after birth.

But the mobs didn’t confine their frenzied rantings, chanting, and hysteric-ings to the Supreme Court building and its immediate grounds. No, they soon showed up in suburban Maryland and Virginia at the homes of several of the conservative justices, including that of Justice Amy Coney Barrett.

Barrett, with husband Jess, is the natural and adoptive mother of seven children, ranging in ages from eight to 19. Two of the children are adopted from Haiti, one is a Downs Syndrome special needs child.

So, perhaps Psaki, herself the mother of two young children, could ring up Justice Barrett and share a heart-to-heart discussion about the dangers of politicized mobs showing up at your private residence, making you fear for your little ones’ safety, and breathing anger and vengeance because they disagree with your political views.

But that conversation will never take place because it requires at least a minimal level of moral and political honesty to be a credible participant. Psaki doesn’t qualify, a fact made utterly clear by her mendacious suggestion that “Arlington Republicans” are behind the threats she received.

Think about that: It was a far-left nut-job supporter of Bernie Sanders who tried to murder multiple House Republicans practicing for the Congressional Baseball game.

It was a far-left nut-job who drove his car into a Christmas parade in Wisconsin, killing six innocent people, including adults and children.

It was another far-left nut-job who dressed up as a construction worker, tossed around smoke grenades, and began shooting up a New York subway car, with a result of 23 people with sustained injuries, including 10 with gunshot wounds.

I could go on and on because these kinds of examples are so common. And that is why nobody with even passing awareness of events since the Port Huron Statement of 1962 would be surprised to hear that one of those fanatical, screaming, chanting pro-abortion protestors at Barrett’s house suddenly began firing into the windows?

There would be no surprise in it because, just to pick one from among many candidates, beginning with the four New Left nut-jobs who blew up Sterling Hall at the University of Wisconsin in 1970, lethal violence by “progressive” radicals mouthing Marxist/Maoist demands has been an all-but-routine feature of the political scenery in this country. Events like the disgusting January 6 riot at the Capitol are exceptions that prove the rule.

Amazing, isn’t it, how those Arlington Republicans have been so successful at concealing their true identities for all those years—making the world think that ranting, blood-thirsty lunatics blowing up buildings, shooting up congressmen, mowing down Christmas parades, and threatening Supreme Court justices that they “won’t know what hit you” if you overturn Roe—have all actually been Lefties.

Compared to these Arlington Republicans, the idiots who crashed the Capitol on January 6 were rank amateurs.

Career Criminal, Low Bail, and Another Mass Shooting in Chicago

Wholesale Price Rise Indicates No Relief From Inflation Anytime Soon