Americans are highly concerned about violent crime right now. After watching the BLM and Antifa criminals prey on businesses for years, after watching cops get ambushed and murdered, average citizens shot by rampaging thugs, and crime in cities skyrocket, they’re fearful and want something done about it.
Well, Jen Psaki doesn’t care. She, during a weekend podcast appearance, said “‘Soft on crime policies.’ What does that even mean? There’s an alternate universe on some coverage. What’s scary about it is lots of people watch that.”
Jen Psaki mocks people discussing the “consequences” of “soft-on-crime” policies: “What does that even mean?” pic.twitter.com/C1KEnXVIQI
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) January 31, 2022
What “soft on crime” means, Jen, is that your insane administration and its leftist allies in cities and states are letting criminals off the hook, even if they’re violent, career criminals. As a result, the thugs are free to rampage around town and prey on law-abiding citizens, many of whom worry that they’ll be the ones that get in trouble if they defend themselves with deadly force.
Well, reporters weren’t willing to let that dismissive comment about crime go and confronted her about it during her January 31st press conference. One asked:
“I wanted to ask about: There was an appearance — your appearance on “Pod Save America.” There was a discussion of Fox’s crime coverage. And one line has prompted some criticism from people. It was, “‘Soft-on-crime consequences.’ What
even is that [does that mean]?” Were you speaking in your personal opinion? Or is that at all a reflection of the priorities of this administration? Because the criticism is that it would reflect that crime is not a priority of this administration.”
Jen, as is usual, gave a snippy response, neither answering the question nor giving anyone watching reason to suspect that Team Brandon is reversing its policies and pressing Democrat governors to do the same, which is the one thing that would mean that the crime problem would be dealt with.
Rather than give a meaningful response, she began by doing the usual Democrat thing and accusing the reporter of not actually listening to the conversation and its “context,” saying :
Well, I encourage anyone to listen to the full context of the interview and the conversation. What I was speaking to was a chyron on Fox News — since you raised it — which suggested this administration is soft on crime with no basis, given we have had many conversations and back-and-forths with you and your colleagues about the prioritization of the President to ensure that we are working as close partners with leaders, whether it is Mayor Adams, who he’s going to spend the day with on Thursday, or others in the country.
Then she gave a ridiculous, obviously untrue speel about how Brandon does actually care about crime, saying:
And the facts speak for themselves. This is what I was talking about in the interview, for the full context. In the American Rescue Plan, there was additional funding to support local COPS programs, something that every single Republican voted against. I said in that interview that I know they don’t like it when we call that out. I’m going to keep calling that out because that’s a fact.
Also, President Biden has proposed a significant increase in funding for local COPS programs in his budget — more than the prior President. That’s a fact.
After snapping about with that one thing she could hold up as evidence that Biden isn’t entirely pro-criminal, she attempted to use it to dismiss the question entirely, saying:
So if those facts are uncomfortable, I’m sorry for people who feel they need to be critical, but the President has been a longtime advocate of addressing crime. He’s never been for defunding the police.
Our Department of Justice has increased funding, has put in place support for strike forces.
And the other fact that is never talked about in these Fox packages — maybe even this one — is the fact that gun crime is a major driver of crime across the country — also a fact.
So, those are pieces, I think, in that moment I was speaking to. And, again, we’re about the facts here, and addressing crime is something that is a root of the President’s agenda.
But perhaps it’s unfair to criticize her for saying that people worried about crime living in an “alternate universe.” They obviously do.
Real people live in the real world and are worried about crime because it’s a problem there. Leftist apparatchiks and elites like Jen get to live in a fantasy land where they don’t have to deal with the same problems as the rest of us, including the skyrocketing crime.