Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Press Briefing by Kayleigh McEnany; July 9, 2020
PRESS BRIEFINGS
Press Briefing by Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany | 7/9/2020
Issued on: July 9, 2020
James S. Brady Press Briefing Room
2:05 P.M. EDT
MS. MCENANY: Hello, everyone. There has been no greater champion for rectifying racial and income disparities in America’s educational system than President Trump.
{snip}
Rest assured that President Trump knows more than anyone the importance of opening our schools, which is why he has been the most vocal advocate for reopening. And President Trump’s America — make no mistake that he will continue to be the biggest fighter for equal opportunity in our schools and continued access to the American Dream for all.
And with that, I’ll take questions.
Q Thank you, Kayleigh. I’m just curious: After today’s Supreme Court rulings, how is President Trump feeling about the two justices that he appointed to the Supreme Court, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, who ruled against him today?
MS. MCENANY: Well, the justices are entitled to their opinion. This is an independent branch of government.
But as for the decision, President Trump underscored to me — I was just in the Oval Office with him — that it was Justice Kavanaugh who pointed out in the New York State court case that there was unanimous agreement that this should be remanded to DC, to the — excuse me, to the district court, where the President may raise constitutional and legal arguments. That was unanimous agreement.
Also, there was a note in the Roberts opinion that the New York State case — basically, the grand jury said that they were prohibited from arbitrary fishing expeditions, and initiating investigations out of malice or intent to harass. So that language made it pretty clear that this was a win for the President.
{snip}
Yes.
Q Thank you, Kayleigh. I’ll try to barrel through these quickly. Are the President’s taxes still under audit, and specifically which years?
MS. MCENANY: The President’s taxes are still under audit. I don’t have years for you.
Q Okay. Let me ask you, if I can: He could release his taxes at any time. This case went all the way to the Supreme Court. His own nominees ruled against him. Why shouldn’t the American public, at this point, believe that the President has something he’s trying to hide?
MS. MCENANY: First, let me note something: The taxes are under audit. He said he released — he would release them when they are no longer under audit. The justices did not —
Q Obviously, he can do whatever he likes. Do you agree?
MS. MCENANY: The justices did not rule against him. In fact, it was a unanimous opinion saying that this needs to go back to the district court. And they even recognized that the President has an ample arsenal of arguments that he can make.
And, in fact, I would show that the Vance majority laid out a roadmap for the President. The Vance majority said the President has “the right to challenge the subpoena on any grounds permitted by state law,” be it “bad faith or undue burden or breadth.”
They went on to say the President can raise subpoena-specific constitutional challenges, and they specifically mentioned a violation of the supremacy clause as one thing that he can raise.
So they essentially laid out a roadmap. This — his justices did not rule against him.
Q So to be clear — okay, fine. I don’t dispute anything that you just said. What I’m asking, though, is the President — whatever the court says, the President can release his taxes whenever he likes. So why shouldn’t Americans, at this point, believe that the President isn’t trying to hide something in there?
MS. MCENANY: You know, the media has been asking this question for four years, and for four years, the President has said the same thing: His taxes are under audit, and when they’re no longer under audit, he will release them.
But I would also note the excruciating ruling for House Democrats who were very much called out for their partisan games. They also subpoenaed the President’s information — financial information. And Justice Roberts said, “Far from accounting for separation of powers concerns, the House’s approach aggravates them by leaving essentially no limits on the congressional power to subpoena the President’s personal records.”
So leave it to House Democrats, who did a partisan impeachment, a political witch hunt against this President — and this was yet another part, only to be rebuked by the Supreme Court.
{snip}
Yes, Kaitlan.
Q I’ve got two questions for you. One, on these rulings today: The Supreme Court is rejecting this assertion from the President that he is immune to investigation while he’s in office. Does he agree that he is not immune?
MS. MCENANY: Well, where the President stands is he still maintains his initial position, and he agrees with Justice Thomas in the dissent, who said, “The demands on the President’s time and the importance of his tasks are extraordinary, and the Office of the President cannot be delegated to subordinates. A subpoena imposes both demands on the President’s limited time and a…burden.” And he went on to describe that position. So he agrees with the dissent.
Q But they agreed that he’s not immune.
MS. MCENANY: He agrees with the dissent by Justice Thomas. So he takes issue with the point that the majority made on absolute immunity, but nevertheless, I would underscore the victory here as Cy Vance, the attorney, was not given what he wanted, which was access to the records.
Q So he still thinks immunity is — he’s immune to investigation?
MS. MCENANY: The President still stands beside the posture that he made. He accepts any Supreme Court opinion as the law of the land, but nevertheless, doesn’t change his viewpoint. He can disagree with the opinion but he certainly will follow it.
{snip}
Q Thank you, Kayleigh. A logical follow-up to Kaitlan’s first line of questioning, though, is: If the President still believes he has absolute immunity, it makes him sound as though he thinks he’s above the law while he’s President of the United States, at least.
MS. MCENANY: It’s a very — it’s almost as if folks don’t understand a legal term of art. “Absolute immunity” is a legal term of art. And, you know, I can go and describe that, and maybe I can best describe that by quoting Alexander Hamilton, who was referenced in the Thomas opinion.
{snip}
Q But perhaps — could you — Kayleigh, could you expand a little bit on Education Secretary DeVos’s comments today about he’s not going to cut funding to schools, but to shift funding to families? Do you know what that means?
And the second question, unrelated, is: Does the White House have a comment on the retirement yesterday of Colonel Vindman from the Army?
MS. MCENANY: So to your first question, I did not see Secretary DeVos’s comments. But as you describe them, it leads me to believe that it was a reference to the President’s tweet yesterday about changing education funding if schools don’t reopen.
As I noted yesterday, what this administration’s goal is, is that funding be tied to the child, not to a school district where schools are staying closed. That’s our paramount guiding principle. As to what that looks like in action, that will be forthcoming. We’re hopeful that all the schools reopen in the nation; that’s the goal. And we are hopeful for more education funding in phase four, as I noted.
And with Colonel Vindman, you know, I’m not going to focus or comment on a former junior employee. I know the White House has not spoken to him since he left, and I would refer you for further to the Army.{snip}
Yes. Emerald.
Q Thank you, Kayleigh. A study that came out of Detroit last week about hydroxychloroquine, which the President tweeted about, showed that it cuts deaths in half, yet the American people have been told by government agencies like the FDA and some government medical experts that it is not effective for coronavirus. So what is the American people supposed to think? What is the official position from the administration on this possible therapy?
MS. MCENANY: So I’m glad you’ve asked this.
{snip}
Yes. Chanel.
Q Thank you, Kayleigh. My question — one question on Cyrus Vance, the New York DA who is demanding Trump’s taxes. Vance has a troubling history of protecting predators and attacking Republicans. Case in point for non-New Yorkers: In 2011, he worked to reduce Epstein’s sexual predator status; in 2015, NYPD had audio evidence of Weinstein admitting rape, and Vance’s office refused to prosecute. All this while attacking President Trump’s family and their enterprises.
Given this history, what is President Trump’s view of Vance from both a personal standpoint and a political standpoint? Is this Vance just — I mean, is he just politically abusing the court system? What is President Trump’s view on him?
MS. MCENANY: Yeah, you raise some very some very good points about the partisan attorney in Manhattan. You know, Justice Alito said this in his opinion, and it really stood out to me. He said, “As for the potential use of subpoenas to harass, we need not ‘exhibit a naiveté from which ordinary citizens are free.’” “As we have recognized, a President is ‘an easily identifiable target.’” “There are more than 2,300 local prosecutors and district attorneys in the country…Many local prosecutors are elected, and many prosecutors have ambitions for higher elected office.”
Bring in Cy Vance, a Democrat, someone who — Justice Thomas pointed out something very interesting. Justice Thomas noted that the district attorney for the county of New York, Cyrus Vance, served a subpoena on the President’s personal accounting firm that, quote, “was nearly identical to a subpoena issued by a congressional committee, requesting nearly 10 years of the President’s financial records.”
So the partisan attorney, the Democrat from New York, is aiding and abetting the Democrats, the lawless Democrats like Nancy Pelosi who have pursued this President with bogus charges of collusion, with bogus charges in the impeachment inquiry, and are now pursuing this, only to be rebuked by the Supreme Court and assisted by Cy Vance.
Q For non-lawyers, I mean, is there a legal recourse against overly political DAs out here? Or is this just a war on a different front?
MS. MCENANY: So I’d have to — yeah, you know, this was an individual who was elected at the state level, so I guess the recourse would be the ballot box.
But I would also note, just on that point, that, you know, you have President Obama and Vice President Bidend [sic] — Biden, who were caught spying on the Trump campaign, the opposition party. You had former Vice President Biden in the Oval Office, just before the inauguration, talking about the Logan Act, when later, the Logan Act was weaponized and used against Lieutenant General Michael Flynn in a way that was so unfair and a grave miscarriage of justice. But you have Obama and Biden who get away with this, but yet we need to go investigate President Trump. It really is quite nonsensical.
Yes.
{snip}
Q Hi. The health department director in Tulsa has said President Trump’s rally there likely contributed to a big surge in coronavirus cases in the area. Does the President now regret holding that rally?
MS. MCENANY: So we have not seen data to reflect that, and, no, we don’t regret holding the rally.
Yes.
{snip}
Let’s make sure we have peace in our streets this weekend and hold these families in our prayers.
Thank you.
END
2:37 P.M. EDT
Press Briefing by Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany | 7/9/2020
Issued on: July 9, 2020
James S. Brady Press Briefing Room
2:05 P.M. EDT
MS. MCENANY: Hello, everyone. There has been no greater champion for rectifying racial and income disparities in America’s educational system than President Trump.
{snip}
Rest assured that President Trump knows more than anyone the importance of opening our schools, which is why he has been the most vocal advocate for reopening. And President Trump’s America — make no mistake that he will continue to be the biggest fighter for equal opportunity in our schools and continued access to the American Dream for all.
And with that, I’ll take questions.
Q Thank you, Kayleigh. I’m just curious: After today’s Supreme Court rulings, how is President Trump feeling about the two justices that he appointed to the Supreme Court, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, who ruled against him today?
MS. MCENANY: Well, the justices are entitled to their opinion. This is an independent branch of government.
But as for the decision, President Trump underscored to me — I was just in the Oval Office with him — that it was Justice Kavanaugh who pointed out in the New York State court case that there was unanimous agreement that this should be remanded to DC, to the — excuse me, to the district court, where the President may raise constitutional and legal arguments. That was unanimous agreement.
Also, there was a note in the Roberts opinion that the New York State case — basically, the grand jury said that they were prohibited from arbitrary fishing expeditions, and initiating investigations out of malice or intent to harass. So that language made it pretty clear that this was a win for the President.
{snip}
Yes.
Q Thank you, Kayleigh. I’ll try to barrel through these quickly. Are the President’s taxes still under audit, and specifically which years?
MS. MCENANY: The President’s taxes are still under audit. I don’t have years for you.
Q Okay. Let me ask you, if I can: He could release his taxes at any time. This case went all the way to the Supreme Court. His own nominees ruled against him. Why shouldn’t the American public, at this point, believe that the President has something he’s trying to hide?
MS. MCENANY: First, let me note something: The taxes are under audit. He said he released — he would release them when they are no longer under audit. The justices did not —
Q Obviously, he can do whatever he likes. Do you agree?
MS. MCENANY: The justices did not rule against him. In fact, it was a unanimous opinion saying that this needs to go back to the district court. And they even recognized that the President has an ample arsenal of arguments that he can make.
And, in fact, I would show that the Vance majority laid out a roadmap for the President. The Vance majority said the President has “the right to challenge the subpoena on any grounds permitted by state law,” be it “bad faith or undue burden or breadth.”
They went on to say the President can raise subpoena-specific constitutional challenges, and they specifically mentioned a violation of the supremacy clause as one thing that he can raise.
So they essentially laid out a roadmap. This — his justices did not rule against him.
Q So to be clear — okay, fine. I don’t dispute anything that you just said. What I’m asking, though, is the President — whatever the court says, the President can release his taxes whenever he likes. So why shouldn’t Americans, at this point, believe that the President isn’t trying to hide something in there?
MS. MCENANY: You know, the media has been asking this question for four years, and for four years, the President has said the same thing: His taxes are under audit, and when they’re no longer under audit, he will release them.
But I would also note the excruciating ruling for House Democrats who were very much called out for their partisan games. They also subpoenaed the President’s information — financial information. And Justice Roberts said, “Far from accounting for separation of powers concerns, the House’s approach aggravates them by leaving essentially no limits on the congressional power to subpoena the President’s personal records.”
So leave it to House Democrats, who did a partisan impeachment, a political witch hunt against this President — and this was yet another part, only to be rebuked by the Supreme Court.
{snip}
Yes, Kaitlan.
Q I’ve got two questions for you. One, on these rulings today: The Supreme Court is rejecting this assertion from the President that he is immune to investigation while he’s in office. Does he agree that he is not immune?
MS. MCENANY: Well, where the President stands is he still maintains his initial position, and he agrees with Justice Thomas in the dissent, who said, “The demands on the President’s time and the importance of his tasks are extraordinary, and the Office of the President cannot be delegated to subordinates. A subpoena imposes both demands on the President’s limited time and a…burden.” And he went on to describe that position. So he agrees with the dissent.
Q But they agreed that he’s not immune.
MS. MCENANY: He agrees with the dissent by Justice Thomas. So he takes issue with the point that the majority made on absolute immunity, but nevertheless, I would underscore the victory here as Cy Vance, the attorney, was not given what he wanted, which was access to the records.
Q So he still thinks immunity is — he’s immune to investigation?
MS. MCENANY: The President still stands beside the posture that he made. He accepts any Supreme Court opinion as the law of the land, but nevertheless, doesn’t change his viewpoint. He can disagree with the opinion but he certainly will follow it.
{snip}
Q Thank you, Kayleigh. A logical follow-up to Kaitlan’s first line of questioning, though, is: If the President still believes he has absolute immunity, it makes him sound as though he thinks he’s above the law while he’s President of the United States, at least.
MS. MCENANY: It’s a very — it’s almost as if folks don’t understand a legal term of art. “Absolute immunity” is a legal term of art. And, you know, I can go and describe that, and maybe I can best describe that by quoting Alexander Hamilton, who was referenced in the Thomas opinion.
{snip}
Q But perhaps — could you — Kayleigh, could you expand a little bit on Education Secretary DeVos’s comments today about he’s not going to cut funding to schools, but to shift funding to families? Do you know what that means?
And the second question, unrelated, is: Does the White House have a comment on the retirement yesterday of Colonel Vindman from the Army?
MS. MCENANY: So to your first question, I did not see Secretary DeVos’s comments. But as you describe them, it leads me to believe that it was a reference to the President’s tweet yesterday about changing education funding if schools don’t reopen.
As I noted yesterday, what this administration’s goal is, is that funding be tied to the child, not to a school district where schools are staying closed. That’s our paramount guiding principle. As to what that looks like in action, that will be forthcoming. We’re hopeful that all the schools reopen in the nation; that’s the goal. And we are hopeful for more education funding in phase four, as I noted.
And with Colonel Vindman, you know, I’m not going to focus or comment on a former junior employee. I know the White House has not spoken to him since he left, and I would refer you for further to the Army.{snip}
Yes. Emerald.
Q Thank you, Kayleigh. A study that came out of Detroit last week about hydroxychloroquine, which the President tweeted about, showed that it cuts deaths in half, yet the American people have been told by government agencies like the FDA and some government medical experts that it is not effective for coronavirus. So what is the American people supposed to think? What is the official position from the administration on this possible therapy?
MS. MCENANY: So I’m glad you’ve asked this.
{snip}
Yes. Chanel.
Q Thank you, Kayleigh. My question — one question on Cyrus Vance, the New York DA who is demanding Trump’s taxes. Vance has a troubling history of protecting predators and attacking Republicans. Case in point for non-New Yorkers: In 2011, he worked to reduce Epstein’s sexual predator status; in 2015, NYPD had audio evidence of Weinstein admitting rape, and Vance’s office refused to prosecute. All this while attacking President Trump’s family and their enterprises.
Given this history, what is President Trump’s view of Vance from both a personal standpoint and a political standpoint? Is this Vance just — I mean, is he just politically abusing the court system? What is President Trump’s view on him?
MS. MCENANY: Yeah, you raise some very some very good points about the partisan attorney in Manhattan. You know, Justice Alito said this in his opinion, and it really stood out to me. He said, “As for the potential use of subpoenas to harass, we need not ‘exhibit a naiveté from which ordinary citizens are free.’” “As we have recognized, a President is ‘an easily identifiable target.’” “There are more than 2,300 local prosecutors and district attorneys in the country…Many local prosecutors are elected, and many prosecutors have ambitions for higher elected office.”
Bring in Cy Vance, a Democrat, someone who — Justice Thomas pointed out something very interesting. Justice Thomas noted that the district attorney for the county of New York, Cyrus Vance, served a subpoena on the President’s personal accounting firm that, quote, “was nearly identical to a subpoena issued by a congressional committee, requesting nearly 10 years of the President’s financial records.”
So the partisan attorney, the Democrat from New York, is aiding and abetting the Democrats, the lawless Democrats like Nancy Pelosi who have pursued this President with bogus charges of collusion, with bogus charges in the impeachment inquiry, and are now pursuing this, only to be rebuked by the Supreme Court and assisted by Cy Vance.
Q For non-lawyers, I mean, is there a legal recourse against overly political DAs out here? Or is this just a war on a different front?
MS. MCENANY: So I’d have to — yeah, you know, this was an individual who was elected at the state level, so I guess the recourse would be the ballot box.
But I would also note, just on that point, that, you know, you have President Obama and Vice President Bidend [sic] — Biden, who were caught spying on the Trump campaign, the opposition party. You had former Vice President Biden in the Oval Office, just before the inauguration, talking about the Logan Act, when later, the Logan Act was weaponized and used against Lieutenant General Michael Flynn in a way that was so unfair and a grave miscarriage of justice. But you have Obama and Biden who get away with this, but yet we need to go investigate President Trump. It really is quite nonsensical.
Yes.
{snip}
Q Hi. The health department director in Tulsa has said President Trump’s rally there likely contributed to a big surge in coronavirus cases in the area. Does the President now regret holding that rally?
MS. MCENANY: So we have not seen data to reflect that, and, no, we don’t regret holding the rally.
Yes.
{snip}
Let’s make sure we have peace in our streets this weekend and hold these families in our prayers.
Thank you.
END
2:37 P.M. EDT
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
