{"id":38894,"date":"2022-02-04T09:37:04","date_gmt":"2022-02-04T17:37:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/?p=38894"},"modified":"2022-02-04T09:37:04","modified_gmt":"2022-02-04T17:37:04","slug":"shut-up-they-explained","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/2022\/02\/04\/shut-up-they-explained\/","title":{"rendered":"‘Shut Up,’ They Explained"},"content":{"rendered":"

The Biden administration doesn\u2019t like<\/a> being asked legitimate questions to provide evidence for their claims:<\/p>\n

Top White House and State Department officials tried to shut down reporters\u2019 questions on Thursday about the veracity of Biden administration claims on Russia and Syria.<\/i><\/p>\n

The reporters were asking for some proof to back up the administration claim that the Russian government was preparing to stage a false flag incident to provide a pretext for military action and a separate claim that the ISIS leader killed in a U.S. special forces raid had blown himself up along with his wife and two children. The White House press secretary and State Department spokesman didn\u2019t offer any evidence to corroborate the claims, and by the end of their exchanges with reporters each one had suggested that questioning these claims implied a preference for information provided by Russia and ISIS. Ned Price, the State Department spokesman, said, \u201cIf you doubt the credibility of the US government, of the British government, of other governments and want to find solace in information that the Russians are putting out, that is for you to do.\u201d These exchanges came in the same week that Jen Psaki, the White House press secretary, attacked Josh Hawley for \u201cparroting Russian talking points\u201d<\/a> when he questioned the wisdom of continuing to support Ukrainian membership in NATO. <\/p>\n

The dismissive and insulting responses to legitimate questions have been widely mocked and criticized, but they point to a troubling pattern in how the Biden administration is responding to criticism and basic journalistic inquiries. Even if we assume for the sake of argument that official claims about the false flag plan and the special forces raid are entirely accurate (quite an assumption given our government\u2019s track record over the decades), the administration has not done its credibility any favors by blowing off requests for evidence and then accusing the journalists asking the questions of some sort of disloyalty. The Politico<\/em>report<\/a> summed it up this way:<\/p>\n

When it comes to matters of war, the Biden administration\u2019s current stance is \u201ctrust us\u201d \u2013 and if you disagree, you\u2019re Vladimir Putin’s or ISIS\u2019 talking puppet.<\/i><\/p>\n

Read the rest of the article at Eunomia<\/b><\/a><\/p>\n

Daniel Larison is a weekly columnist for Antiwar.com and maintains his own site at Eunomia<\/a>. He is former senior editor at<\/i> The American Conservative. He has been published in the<\/i> New York Times Book Review, Dallas Morning News, World Politics Review, Politico Magazine, Orthodox Life, Front Porch Republic, The American Scene, and<\/i> Culture11, and was a columnist for<\/i> The Week. He holds a PhD in history from the University of Chicago, and resides in Lancaster, PA. Follow him on Twitter<\/a>.<\/i><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Biden administration doesn\u2019t like being asked legitimate questions to provide evidence for their claims: Top White House and State Department officials tried to shut down reporters\u2019 questions on Thursday about the veracity of Biden administration claims on Russia and Syria. The reporters were asking for some proof to back up the administration claim that […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":56,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"","_seopress_titles_title":"","_seopress_titles_desc":"","_seopress_robots_index":"","_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-38894","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"meta_box":{"disable_donate_message":"","custom_donate_message":"","subtitle":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/38894","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/56"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=38894"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/38894\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":38896,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/38894\/revisions\/38896"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=38894"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=38894"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=38894"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=38894"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}