by Mitch Kokai
Senior Political Analyst, John Locke Foundation
Caroline Downey of National Review Online reports concerns about recent statements from President Biden’s chief spokeswoman.
The National Fraternal Order of Police, the largest law enforcement advocacy organization in the country, accused White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki on Monday of mocking Americans’ concerns about the rising crime rate.
The president of the group, Patrick Yoes, wrote in a statement: “I think it’s wrong – very wrong – for Ms. Psaki to suggest that violent crime in our country is of no concern or to just laugh it off.”
“She may feel safe in the White House, one of the most protected buildings in the United States, but not everyone feels safe in their workplace. The world we find ourselves in is dangerous and increasingly more so. Tens of thousands of people have been the victims of crime this month alone and some of them never made it back home,” he said.
During a recent appearance on the Pod Save America podcast, Psaki seemed perplexed that some pundits and Americans are preoccupied with spiking crime.
Referencing how right-wing news anchors have repeatedly brought up the topic, Psaki giggled, “And then on Fox is Jeanine Pirro talking about ‘soft-on-crime consequences.’ I mean, what does that even mean? Right, so there’s an alternate universe on some coverage. What’s scary about it is a lot of people watch that.”
During a press briefing Monday, Fox News reporter Jacqui Hendrich gave Psaki an opportunity to clarify her comments. Psaki said her words were taken out of context and that she was rebutting accusations that the Biden administration is “soft-on-crime.” She mentioned that President Biden is meeting with relevant leaders, such as New York City Mayor Eric Adams, to work on the issue. …
… However, while Psaki keeps repeating the claim that the GOP voted to withhold funding from the police, Washington Post fact-checkers debunked that assertion in July, rating it “mostly false” with “three pinnochios,” as they found “significant factual error and/or obvious contradictions.”