WH Continues Alleging Without Evidence That Soleimani Strike Saved American Lives

White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham listens during a Cabinet meeting on October 21, 2019. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

The White House on Tuesday continued to argue that its decision to strike and kill an Iranian military official on Friday was spurred on by an imminent threat to American lives, while dodging questions about what that threat might have been.

During an interview Tuesday on Fox News, White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said that members of Congress would be briefed on the intelligence that led to the assassination of Iranian military official Qasem Soleimani in Baghdad. She argued it was “unfortunate” that people were questioning what she called an intelligence-based decision. When Fox News’ Bill Hemmer asked Grisham to specify what threats Soleimani posed to American forces in Iraq, Grisham dodged.

“No, that was an intel-based decision and it saved American lives, I think that’s what’s most important,” she said. “I know a lot of people are now questioning the intel, that’s really unfortunate, a lot of people are saying, ‘to what benefit?’ And I would answer that question by saying, the benefit was we saved American lives. We saved members of the military, we saved diplomats and we saved a lot of families from having to welcome their loved ones home in coffins.”

Grisham also said she wouldn’t be surprised if the intelligence that’s shared with Congress Wednesday is “leaked,” but said it would remain private for national security purposes. When Hemmer pressed further, Grisham questioned what the alternative might have been — “to not save these people?”

Then what would people be saying to us? What would Congress be saying? What would Nancy Pelosi be saying?” she asked. “That we sat by and let something that happened to our American troops or our American diplomats? Again, we saved lives here. That was the number one most important thing for this president.”

During a press conference following the interview, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo made similar remarks, declining to share any details on what he characterized as an “imminent attack” on Americans. The move is a slight shift from Pompeo’s defense over the weekend, that the Obama administration’s policies in the region “appeased Iran” and led to Soleimani’s increased influence in Iran and Iraq.

It’s also worth noting the hypocrisy of an intelligence-heavy defense of the attack in an administration that’s spent much of President Trump’s presidency deriding its confidence in Trump’s own intelligence community.

Latest News
29
Show Comments

Notable Replies

  1. Aren’t most things they allege without evidence?

  2. The snake lieth. Again. Of course.

  3. I’m just waiting for a student in one of my classes to ask, “since the President says stuff he can’t prove all the time, why do I get marked down for lack of supporting detail?”

  4. “The only ones that are mourning the loss of Suleimani are Democrat leadership and our Democrat presidential candidates.” Nikki Haley (former chief diplomat for the United States of America)

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

23 more replies

Participants

Avatar for discobot Avatar for srfromgr Avatar for trnc Avatar for rollinnolan Avatar for losamigos Avatar for cvilledem Avatar for dont Avatar for callmeeric Avatar for fifty50 Avatar for clearwater Avatar for murgatroid Avatar for crewman6 Avatar for tena Avatar for jonney_5 Avatar for rondo Avatar for rickjones Avatar for noonm Avatar for doginvt Avatar for bobcanuel Avatar for dominic Avatar for rascal_crone Avatar for paul_lukasiak Avatar for mtw Avatar for emiliano4

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: