I was reading a White House briefing transcript, when Spicer took an early question from:

“Roby Brock with Talk Business & Politics here in Arkansas, the home of the rowdiest town halls in the nation.”

Really, that intro should end in an exclamation point. I was hooked.

Anyway, Roby Brock asked whether Jeff Sessions would start prosecuting marijuana possession in states (presumably including Arkansas) where it was legal under state law. The followup ended with a New York Times shouting match, but I was flummoxed long before.

I know it’s tedious to point to politicians who justify their actions on moral terms when it’s convenient, then twist like a beached eel the next second. Still, this press conference was almost unhinged that way.

ICE raids, Spicer swore, were federal issues, even if the question was whether state’s would be forced to act as federal enforcement agents.

But LGBTQ protections, he insisted, were clearly states’ rights questions, even if the protections were civil rights, and hence federal. He even pushed the decisions down to individual school district.  Can you have Zip Code rights?

But marijuana was just as clearly a federal issue, because… um, recreational pot is really bad for you because… ah, I forget. Oh yeah! Opium addiction!

The press pool seem to buy in, asking followup questions as if the principle mattered. I can’t figure why. The decisions clearly weren’t based on the principles they cited.  If I’m impossibly charitable, I could say the problem is that the administration can’t articulate the principles behind their actions, but it’s way more likely they’re just openly lying. In either case, reporters pretend along, asking followups like “But if that’s the principle, then why do you act completely differently [here].”

Past a point, the reporter is lying, too.  They know that Spicer just dumped a load, but they pretend it’s their job to uncover the inconsistency gently, and that it’s the reporter’s responsibility to fully uncover every inconsistency. And even then, not challenge.

No.  I mean, Jesus!  It’s not the public’s job to carefully uncover and document every unclear answer or possible deceit.  It’s our public servants’ responsibility to explain their actions to us, clearly and honestly. All the time. It’s in the job description somewhere, I’m pretty sure. If they don’t make things clear, it’s their responsibility to make it better.

And yet they’re lying to us routinely, and on simple informational stuff. It’s a betrayal at a basic level.  We wouldn’t tolerate that from any other service.

But reporters go along. I don’t see any reason why I should pretend this is how public service works.

So this is from Sean Spicer’s Feb. 23 press briefing. First, here’s his answer to a question about sanctuary cities, asking in particular about Connecticut Governor Malloy’s objection:

MR. SPICER:  Well, Neil, I think there’s a couple things.  The idea that Governor Malloy would not want the law followed as enacted by Congress or by the Connecticut legislature in any fashion seems to be concerning, right?  Whether you’re a governor or mayor or the President, laws are passed in this country and we expect people and our lawmakers and our law enforcement agencies to follow and adhere to the laws as passed by the appropriate level of government.

I’m sympathetic to Spicer. It’s hard to make off-the-cuff answers in full sentences.  I’ve summarized the worst rambling parts, but you still have to untangle the next part.

[Spicer, cont.] So it’s obviously concerning [that Gov. Malloy doesn’t want Connecticut state resources answering to ICE].  Because we are a nation of laws, and I think that people need to understand that [whether laws are passed at the state or federal level], there’s a reason that our democracy works.  It’s because the people speak, our representatives at every level pass a law, and the executive in that particular branch of government signs or vetoes it, and then we live by those rules.  And the idea that you can decide which laws to agree or not to agree with, or follow or not follow, undermines our entire rule of law.

[“…The executive in that particular branch of government signs or vetoes it….” I’m guessing that would be the executive branch?]

Anyway, our democracy works because we’re a nation of laws, and everyone has to follow that.  OK, sure.  And I can see how a shared national border makes immigration policy a federal issue.

I can’t see why enforcing a state’s cooperation would be a federal issue, though. That seems pretty state’y thing to me. But yes, federal law does trump state law.  That’s a true thing.

Later, Spicer is asked about LGBTQ protections and the bathroom bills.

Q    Sean, on the bathroom issue, there was a different comment from the President about, you know, if people like Caitlyn Jenner wanted to use this bathroom in Trump Tower, she could now.  What’s happened?

MR. SPICER:  No, I think that’s — so just to be clear, the President was asked — at one point Caitlyn Jenner was in Trump Tower, and he said, that’s great.  That’s consistent with everything he’s said.  It’s a states’ rights issue.  And that’s entirely what he believes — that if a state wants to pass a law or rule, or an organization wants to do something in compliance with the state rule, that’s their right.  But it shouldn’t be the federal government getting in the way of this.

So, huh. That’s a switch. Now states are great, and can do what they want.  When Spicer was summarizing his answer, he reiterated:

But [president Trump] also believes that that’s not a federal government issue.  It’s an issue left to the states….

The argument was that LBGTQ protections are a civil rights issue, and hence federal.  Spicer didn’t disagree that it was a civil rights question, but said it didn’t matter:

[Spicer:] And so this is — we are a states’ rights party.  The President on a lot of issues believes in these various issues being states’ rights.  I don’t see why this would be any different.  And again, if you go through it, it’s not just — it’s how the guidance was issued, it’s the legal basis on which it was ordered.  It fell short on a lot of stuff.

So, it might be a civil rights issue — he’s not sayin’ — but because there wasn’t a sufficient comment period, it becomes a state’s rights thing anyway.  There were several followup questions, and Spicer repeated “It’s a states’ rights issue” over and over, even saying that individual school districts should be free to set their own bathroom policies as they see fit.

[When asked why the Muslim Travel Ban should be allowed when it failed a similar test, Mr. Spicer swore they were completely different issues. But forget that part.]

Then Sean called on my favorite reporter so far.

[Spicer:] …Roby Brock from the Talk Business & Politics in — where is he from?  Arkansas.

Q    Thanks, Sean.  Roby Brock with Talk Business & Politics here in Arkansas, the home of the rowdiest town halls in the nation.

Really, it’s part of a real, White House press briefing. Hand to god!

[Roby Brock:] I have a question on medical marijuana.  Our state voters passed a medical marijuana amendment in November.  Now we’re in conflict with federal law, as many other states are.  The Obama administration kind of chose not to strictly enforce those federal marijuana laws.  My question to you is:  With Jeff Sessions over at the Department of Justice as AG, what’s going to be the Trump administration’s position on marijuana legalization where it’s in a state-federal conflict like this?

MR. SPICER:  Thanks, Roby.  There’s two distinct issues here: medical marijuana and recreational marijuana….

Spicer went on about how medical marijuana was good, but recreational was bad.

…And I think that when you see something like the opioid addiction crisis blossoming in so many states around this country, the last thing that we should be doing is encouraging people.  There is still a federal law that we need to abide by in terms of the medical — when it comes to recreational marijuana and other drugs of that nature.

Yes, yes, beer clearly leads to heroin. I’m sure that’s been proven somewhere or another.

So I think there’s a big difference between medical marijuana, which states have a — the states where it’s allowed, in accordance with the appropriations rider, have set forth a process to administer and regulate that usage, versus recreational marijuana.  That’s a very, very different subject.

And apparently not a states’ right issue at all.  Because…?

Sorry. No idea.

Then things kinda devolved. Glenn Thrush of the New York Times, who wasn’t called, asked a question.

Q    What does that mean in terms of policy?  A follow-up, Sean.  What does that mean in terms of policy?

MR. SPICER:  Shannon.  Glenn, this isn’t a TV program.  We’re going to —

Q    What is the Justice Department going to do?

MR. SPICER:  Okay, you don’t get to just yell out questions.  We’re going to raise our hands like big boys and girls.

Q    Why don’t you answer the question, though?

MR. SPICER:  Because it’s not your job to just yell out questions.

White House Slap Fight!

(Not really.) <sigh>  Not today, anyway.