Last Friday saw something of a landmark, less than half a year after the Biden administration assumed office.  The level of gaslighting – proclaiming things that are the exact opposite of the truth, such as blaming Republicans for defunding the police – has gotten so bad that even members of the progressive media feel free to mock at least some of the bilge they are being fed by Biden’s handlers’ press secretary, Jen Psaki.

The issue that provoked negative feedback from her normally supportive allies was not top-of-mind stuff like defunding the police, but rather an inside baseball sort of issue. I consider it a warning shot across her bow, warning her to keep lies to a level that could plausibly be sold to the public. “Don’t force us to peddle utter crap that everyone can recognize as BS” is my rough translation of the implicit message.

Nick Arama of Red State spotted the blowback:

… Fox’s Peter Doocy asked White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki for comment about the reports. He asked if the White House was concerned that staffers reportedly felt like they worked in an abusive environment? Jen Psaki’s response to staffers allegedly being abused? Oh, those are anonymous reports so I don’t have to respond to them

Press Secretary Psaki deflects on question regarding alleged "abusive environment" of Vice Presidential staffers: "I try not to speak to or engage on anonymous reports or anonymous sources." pic.twitter.com/RELZS48D5V

— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) July 2, 2021

“I try not to speak to or engage on anonymous reports or anonymous sources,” Psaki responded, trying to provide cover for Harris.

 Keep in mind that anonymous sources are the bread and butter of the White House and entire DC press corps. They are highly attuned to the nuances and are protected by clear rules on the use of anonymous sources. The first member of WH press corps to react came from Bloomberg, pointing to Psaki as a systemic user of anonymity:

“I try not to speak to or engage on anonymous reports or anonymous sources,” says @PressSec Jen Psaki, whose team regularly organizes anonymous briefings on topics in the news. https://t.co/wmPMxEp5ps

— Jennifer Jacobs (@JenniferJJacobs) July 2, 2021

 Psaki, perhaps assuming the reporters are as dumb as Ben Rhodes thinks they are, tried to counter.

I think everyone knows the difference between attacking someone as an anonymous source and providing details on a policy announcement to reporters in an effort to provide information and answer media questions

— Jen Psaki (@PressSec) July 2, 2021

Big mistake. Going anonymous in policy briefings, where there is no fear of retaliation (the reason sources want to be anonymous in the first place) just makes reporters’ stories weaker, basically making their jobs tougher. Class interests, as the Marxists might put it, are at stake.  Then came the deluge from erstwhile allies.

The New York Times:

Point taken. And this is true with every White House. But with all respect, why should "providing details on a policy announcement" be done anonymously in a transparent and open democratic society?

— Peter Baker (@peterbakernyt) July 2, 2021

Politico:

Actually, shouldn’t you have even less of a reason to be anonymous if you’re simply “providing details on a policy announcement…”? https://t.co/kLwp5jHD4g

— Nahal Toosi (@nahaltoosi) July 2, 2021

The LA Times:

Everyone doesn't know difference between these ex of anonymity, because there isn't one: Both are abuses of anonymity, which should be rare & reserved for serious risk of physical or prof harm (for whistleblowers, not politics). Attacks & answering media questions(?!) not valid. https://t.co/ZdgKsgwGKc

— Molly O'Toole (@mollymotoole) July 2, 2021

Even NPR!

Agreed. Anonymity allows government to make claims it doesn't have to stand by later. In that sense, it's not providing information but rather providing spin.

— Michel Marizco (@BorderReporter) July 2, 2021

Will Psaki heed the warning? She is only the mouthpiece, so she doesn’t get to decide what tacks to take, she obeys orders and tries not to smile when she is peddling BS.

I don’t think Jill Biden, Ron Klain, or whoever else Biden worries about getting in trouble with will change their tune.

And the agitprop media reporters will continue to assist the Biden administration in its propaganda operations, albeit with a little less enthusiasm, and a certain wariness.

Nonetheless, this is a landmark, demonstrating that the BS levels have gotten so bad that they cannot be sustained, even with a cooperative media.

Photo credit: Twitter video screengrab

To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.