While the liberal media spent Thursday’s White House press briefing in a state of amazement and curiosity over the Biden administration’s hard pivot away from Israel by warning of unspecified moves if more isn’t done to placate to Hamas-run Gaza, Fox’s Peter Doocy called out this possible abandonment of a democracy in favor of Islamic terrorists holding innocents hostage.
As a result, things got tense with the National Security Council’s John Kirby.
Doocy started with a question about who warned Israel about alleged and specific threats to Israel’s security from Iran in the next 48 hours, but then made the pivot with this hardball: “On October 7, President Biden said, ‘my administration’s support for Israel’s security is rock solid and unwavering.’ That is not true anymore, correct?”
Kirby claimed “still true today”, which left Doocy incredulous: “[H]ow support unwavering, but you’re also reconsidering policy choices?”
Things quickly grew tense with Kirby having a look of utter disgust that left the liberal press corps laughing at Doocy:
KIRBY: Both can be true.
DOOCY: They cannot be true. They’re — they’re completely different things.
KIRBY: No, no, no. I just —
DOOCY: He is —
KIRBY: — I’m sorry.
DOOCY: — he is wavering.
KIRBY: Ah, now, now, now. Come on, Peter. Get out.
DOOCY: How is he not?
[REPORTERS LAUGH]
KIRBY: Ah, come on. Come on now.
Doocy then let Kirby drone on for a little bit about how “both things are true” that “the manner in which they’re defending themselves...needs to change” and “our support for Israel’s self defense remains ironclad” given “[t]hey face a range of threats”.
Kirby even went as far as to say the Biden regime’s backing of Israel is “not gonna waiver” other than “some policy changes that we might have to make”.
Having let him go on long enough, Doocy interjected to lambaste Kirby for his use of the phrase “not gonna waiver”: “How is that unwavering? It sounds like you guys are trying to have it both ways here. You support Israel but we are going to make all these changes because we don’t support Israel?”
In the midst of that, either another reporter or White House staffers chided Doocy, yelling out his name!
For Kirby’s part, he insisted he “didn’t say we’re going to make changes” and then went personal to sarcastically presuming Doocy doesn’t see innocent people starve and face slaughter.
When Doocy pointed out “nobody wants to see that” and kept pressing, Kirby had an unfortunate flub by saying, “[o]n October 7, we didn’t see thousands and thousands of innocent people killed” (click “expand”):
KIRBY: I said, we need to see how Israel’s responds to the humanitarian crises in Gaza and how they respond to protection of aid workers. I think we can all agree. I think you would agree. You don’t want to see innocent civilians killed and targeted, do you? You don’t want to see Gazans starve. You don’t want to see famine in Gaza, do you?
DOOCY: Nobody wants —
KIRBY: Of course not.
DOOCY: — to see that, but —
KIRBY: So —
DOOCY: — you’re a policy maker and you’re talking about policy changes.
KIRBY: — so —
DOOCY: That is not what you were talking about on October 7 —
KIRBY: — because things have —
DOOCY: — when it was solid and unwavering.
KIRBY: — on October 7, there wasn’t near famine in Gaza. On October 7, there wasn’t, um, a diminution of trucks getting into Gaza. On October 7, we didn’t see thousands and thousands of innocent people killed. Uh, I mean, I could go on and on. We’re talking about a conflict there which is dang near at six months here this weekend, six months, and it has changed over time and the — what the President’s message today was we need to see some changes in the way Israel is dealing with that threat.
DOOCY: And —
KIRBY: That’s — that’s what two good friends and allies can discuss. This isn’t about un — this isn’t about changing our support to Israel or the security of the Israeli state, and I — I just have to take issue with the premise of the question.
Doocy wrapped with what should have been asked way earlier in the Q&A, not at almost the 30-minute mark: “Where is President Biden on any of this? When he wants to talk about how angry he is or frustrated he is about the high cost of insulin, he comes out and gives an impassioned speech. Where is he on any of this?”
Kirby tried to play cute: “He’s been talking about this. He’s been issuing statements on this.” Doocy noted that’s something concocted in “private”, but again Kirby played it off by saying presidential statements are “public”.
Only after a third time did Kirby change his tune: “I’m sure you’ll continue to hear from the president about this, and many other national security issues.”
Fast-forward to the end of his turn at the podium and HuffPost’s S.V. Dáte asked an important question (albeit gently) that correctly pointed out the Biden administration’s dramatically increased opposition to Israel and demands for a ceasefire would lead one to think they’re no longer prioritizing Hamas returning the remaining hostages.
Kirby said this wasn’t the case, but with only a mere throwaway line in his last sentence about hostages:
HuffPost’s S.V. Dáte: “Admiral, could you clarify on the — the — the ceasefire language that the President used the statement? He says that, uh, that there should be a ceasefire, um, and then the next — after a comma, it’s ‘he urged Prime Minister to empower negotiators to… pic.twitter.com/0qbFCOrZIV
— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) April 4, 2024
To see the relevant transcript from the April 4 briefing (including questions about EVs, TikTok, and a report of a sexual harassment scandal in the White House), click here.
