If The White House Lies About A Dog, Is There Anything We Can Believe From Them?

Todd Starnes

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn

There was an interesting back-and-forth between a New York Post reporter and White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki regarding the First Dog. And it begs the question – if the White House is going to lie about a dog, how can we possibly believe anything they tell us.

Q:    And my second question on the topic is: Yesterday, the conservative transparency group, Judicial Watch, released Secret Service records on dog bites involving the First Dog, Major. One e-mail said that Secret Service agents were bitten every single day for eight days, from March 1st to March 8th, and that a White House visitor was as well.  At a March 9th briefing, you only described one biting incident to us and described the dogs as being (inaudible) — whisked back to Delaware on a pre-planned trip to visit family friends.

Obviously, that is not the world’s most important story but it is significant because we expect honest information, even for minor stories.  So, can you explain to us why there was some kind of misleading account presented to us?  And if we can’t get honest information about minor stories, why should we have faith in the administration’s account for larger issues like Afghanistan?

MS. PSAKI:  I know you do keep the dog in the news in the briefing room.  So thank you for that.

As we’ve stated previously, Major has had some challenges adjusting to life in the White House.  He has been receiving additional training, as well as spending some time in Delaware, where the environment is more familiar to him and he is more comfortable.

I don’t have any additional specifics but I think that speaks to where Major is located, to be fully transparent in your ongoing interest in the dog.

WHITE HOUSE TRANSCRIPT