In just a few days, former White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki faces the final deadline to fully confirm her cooperation with House lawmakers investigating President Joe Biden's chaotic and deadly withdrawal from Afghanistan. After months of refusing to sit for a transcribed interview requested by House Foreign Affairs Committee (HFAC) Chairman Michael McCaul (R-TX) — and under threat of subpoena — Psaki finally said she would answer questions but only if the White House clears her participation.
That condition, however, is not acceptable to McCaul or the committee. In his multiple request letters to Psaki, McCaul has cited "existing case law which provides substantiation and foundation for why it's appropriate for us to request her appearance," a spokesperson for the HFAC majority told Townhall. What's more, a former White House aide appearing before a House committee is simply not "unprecedented," as Psaki and her representation have claimed in correspondence with the committee.
Whatever alleged issues Psaki and the White House may think exist, Psaki has had months since the first HFAC request to iron them out and meet her duty to cooperate. Instead, she has continued to "dodge responsibility" with "thin legal arguments," as one letter from McCaul noted. Psaki also attempted to put the burden on HFAC to secure White House approval despite her no longer being employed by the Biden administration.
“It is not incumbent on the committee to negotiate on Psaki’s behalf with the White House," the spokesperson emphasized to Townhall. "She has had nine months to engage with her former employer and resolve any anticipated issues with her appearance.”
Instead of resolving the alleged issues, Psaki was busy hosting her show on MSNBC and notably releasing a book that shamelessly includes passages about her time in the White House amid Biden's botching of the withdrawal from Afghanistan.
"Psaki publishing a memoir, profiting off the very same tragedy she refuses to appear before Congress on, was the final straw," explained the spokesperson. "While the committee worked tirelessly to exhaust every resource at its disposal, Psaki capitalized off the committee’s patience."
The former press secretary's book also, notably, falsely claimed that President Biden did not check his watch during the dignified transfer ceremony for the 13 heroic U.S. servicemembers who were killed in the Abbey Gate suicide bombing at Kabul's Hamid Karzai International Airport.
Psaki's incorrect retelling of events is not a huge surprise. While serving as White House Press Secretary, Psaki presented numerous claims as fact that, based on evidence obtained through HFAC's investigation, are simply "not true," according to the committee.
Among the big-picture questions the committee looks to answer through a transcribed interview with Psaki — after finding a "disconnect" between what she said from the briefing room and the information others involved in the withdrawal said had been presented to the White House — "Where was the breakdown?"
McCaul's HFAC investigation of the withdrawal has so far included 17 transcribed interviews with other officials who "played a significant role — a pivotal role — in what transpired in Afghanistan" and who "bear varying degrees of responsibility for the events that unfolded in 2021," according to the spokesperson. "We've acquired a better understanding of the NSC process that dominated the Biden administration's Afghanistan withdrawal, including who all was involved. We also now know — thanks to the transcribed interviews, document discovery, and the committee's hearings — that the DOD was often shunted in those engagements while the State Department was prioritized," the spokesperson noted.
"The State Department, the DOD, and the IC provided their inputs to the White House as part of the interagency process," the spokesperson explained to Townhall. "At that point in time Jen Psaki, as White House Press Secretary, was purportedly briefed on those inputs."
Noting that the White House Press Secretary's "significant role and one that should be taken seriously" is to "communicate information they receive to the public," the spokesperson posed the key questions: "If you're lying to the American people, how much of the blame do you bear? What responsibility falls upon you?"
"That is what we need to figure out," the committee told Townhall, adding the answers to those questions about "what responsibility do you bear as the White House Press Secretary in sharing the truth to the American people" are a "fundamental component" of its pending interview with Psaki along with figuring out where the "breakdown" happened between what was communicated to the White House and what Psaki communicated to the public.
In one example of the consequences of that breakdown, the spokesperson cited American citizens in Afghanistan as the withdrawal deadline was looming watching the White House, a supposedly "authoritative source" saying that "everything is going to be fine, don't worry about it" as the Taliban stormed toward Kabul. "Are you going to plan to depart in the immediate future? Probably not," explained the spokesperson.
When it comes to this critical breakdown, the committee sees a few potential explanations: "Is it that the administration, including the State Department and DOD, failed to provide accurate assessments to Psaki? Alternatively, was the information being channeled through NSC Advisor Jake Sullivan, who misrepresented agency inputs to the White House Press Secretary? Or, finally, was the Biden administration choosing politics over policy, hiding the truth from the American people?"
It's worth remembering the Biden administration's first day in the White House in January 2021 when Psaki pledged in her first White House briefing that her goal was "sharing accurate information with the American people" and promised the president and his aides would "bring transparency and truth back to the government...even when it's hard to hear."
If Psaki again fails to fulfill her commitment to appear voluntarily by clearing the alleged obstacles preventing her cooperation by June 26 — a month ahead of the July 26 transcribed interview she conditionally accepted — the spokesperson said HFAC's subpoena is “prepared and ready to be issued, compelling her appearance.”
Notably, if Psaki's antics necessitate a subpoena from the HFAC majority, she would be the first and only witness to date who has been compelled to appear before the committee in McCaul's investigation. All other officials have voluntarily cooperated, likely because the probe hasn't been about "heads on a spike," the spokesperson noted. "It's about ensuring another such catastrophe never happens."
The committee's majority is "confident" that Ms. Psaki will choose to voluntarily appear given the legal precedent in its favor," the spokesperson continued. If she fails to do so, she has been put on more than enough notice of what the committee’s next step will be.