Site icon Flopping Aces

McEnany Schools Reporters On ‘Good Journalism’, Provides Suggested Questions On ‘Unmaskings’

White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany took it upon herself during Friday’s briefing to school reporters on the details of Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn’s case, since they had no questions about it and about the efforts to do so under the Obama administration, she said.



When asked by one reporter during the briefing about the former administration’s efforts to ‘unmask’ Flynn, which was detailed in documents recently-declassified by the acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell.

Referring to a number of potential questions “that any good journalist would want to answer about why people were unmasked”

“I just want to follow up with you guys on that, did anyone take it upon themselves to pose any questions about Michael Flynn and unmasking a President Obama spokesperson?”

No one answered but the crickets in the room. “Oh, not a single journalist has posed that question, ok,” McEnany continued as one reporter began to interject arguing that “his (Flynn’s) name wasn’t masked.”

“I would like to lay out a series of questions. And, perhaps, if I write them out in a slide format, maybe we’re visual learners and you guys will follow up with journalistic curiosity,” McEnany said.

The following are McEnany’s suggestions for reporters to ask President Obama’s spokesperson:

Lesson 1: Why did the Obama administration use opposition research funded by a political organization and filled with foreign dirt to surveil members of the Trump campaign?

Lesson 2: Why was Lieutenant General Michael Flynn unmasked? Not by the intel community entirely, but by Obama’s chief of staff, by the former Vice President Joe Biden, by Susan Rice, by the Treasury Secretary?

Lesson 3: Why was Flynn’s identity leaked in a criminal act?

Lesson 4: Why did the DOJ Sally Yates learn about the unmasking from President Obama?

Lesson 5: Why did James Clapper, John Brennan, Samantha Power, and Susan Rice privately admit under oath they had no evidence of collusion while saying the opposite publicly?

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Exit mobile version