Curtis Houck's White House Press Briefing Gushfest, Part 4

Media Research Center writer Curtis Houck’s fawning over White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt continued into the new year, and he didn’t disappoint in a Jan. 15 post:

Towards the end of Thursday’s fairly tepid White House press briefing, things took a dramatic turn when The Hill’s Niall Stanage told Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt that an Immigration Customs and Enforcement (ICE) officer “acted recklessly and killed” Minnesota resident Renee Good “unjustifiably” and thus there was no way ICE does “everything correctly.”

Thankfully, Leavitt promptly shoved this partisan tool into a rhetorical locker. The initial question was hostile decrying ICE tactics since “170 U.S. citizens were detained by ICE” last year, but Stanage really stepped in it when Leavitt asked him “why…Good unfortunately and tragically killed” [.] […]

“So, you’re a biased reporter with a left-wing opinion? Yeah, because you’re a left-wing hack. You’re not a reporter. You’re posing in this room as a journalist…[Y]ou shouldn’t even be sitting in that seat, but you’re pretending that you’re a journalist,” Leavitt replied.

Stanage repeatedly insisted she explain to him “what was inaccurate in what I said,” but Leavitt schooled him on his lack of interest in the illegal aliens with lengthy and dangerous records being taken off the streets by ICE.

“I bet you didn’t even read up on those stories. I bet you never even read about Laken Riley or Jocelyn Nungaray, or all of the innocent Americans who were killed at the hands of illegal aliens in this country,” Leavitt added in part.

Stanage has long been a political hack. Taking a trip back into the NewsBusters archives, Stanage went on MSNBC and marveled at a book excerpt for Hillary Clinton’s What Happenedas proof of her “talk[ing] about [2016] in her own voice” and “we’re not used to that…blood and guts”

Houck made sure to avoid the fact that Leavitt’s tirade was all about avoiding having to answer Stanage’s question about Good, because it does appear that Good was killed for no reason. He did make sure, however, to point out that “on the conservative reporters front, our friend Reagan Reese of the Daily Caller wondered what further devolution inside Minneapolis would have to occur for President Trump to follow through on his threat to invoke the Insurrection Act,” adding that “Daily Wire White House correspondent and MRC Bulldog Award winner Mary Margaret Olohan was also there, asking Leavitt to speak to the anti-ICE rhetoric from the left.” He also noted that “Daily Signal’s Elizabeth Mitchell closed out the Q&A with two questions, one of which touched on an embarrassing display by a woke doctor at a Senate hearing this week.”

Jeffrey Lord weighed in on this exchange as well in his Jan. 17 column, contrasting Stanage’s actions with that of another reporter for The Hill, May Craig, a “journalist’s journalist” who was “respectful” and “polite”:

Craig was respectful and neutral in tone and substance. Stanage was seriously partisan, not to mention outright rude.

Which goes to a much larger point. Too many people covering the Trump White House, whether in the White House or spread across the media around the country, are not about journalism. They are about left-wing, anti-Trump activism — exactly as Leavitt said.

Just one of the problems with this is that down the road, when Trump is long gone from the White House and a Democrat holds the Oval Office, the ground has been laid for right-wing activists to also masquerade as journalists covering the Democrat President and his/her administration.

Which is to say, the old wisdom applies: “Be careful what you wish for.”

And if and when the day arrives that the White House press room is filled with conservative activists masquerading as journalists, you will know where they got the idea.

Actually, as Houck demonstrated, the White House briefing room does contain conservative activists. Lord simply pretends that they don’t exist — and that asking a critical question of a Republican administration is the same thing as “left-wing activism.” Lord also failed to explain what, exactly, was “rude” about Stanage’s question.

Houck’s fealty continued in a Jan. 26 post in which he cheered right-wing harassment of journalists (while, of course, denying he was doing ay such thing):

During Monday’s White House press briefing, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt rhetorically asked a relatively simple question of the mostly liberal, elite media gathered before her concerning what’s transpired in Minneapolis this month: How would you like it if people followed you everywhere you went, screamed, blew whistles, and recorded your every move?

Of course, to be clear, no one should be harassed in public and we have seen dangerous consequences (e.g. the mail bombs to CNN and elected/unelected Democrats). Even partisans like the White House press should be allowed to live in peace with their families.

The comments came in light of a reporter asking about reports from James O’Keefe and others that “local and state Minnesota officials are communicating with demonstrators to – to basically impede immigration officials.”

Leavitt first made clear it’s a concern and something “the FBI and the Department of Justice are looking into” because “it is illegal to unlawfully obstruct lawful immigration enforcement in this country” and oppose even “the worst of the worst” being removed from the country.

Houck went on to praise his favorite right-wing reporters who asked questions, though he insisted the reporters involved “mostly liberal, elite media”:

Elsewhere, the briefing began with a question 9from the unreliable Gateway Pundit) about the double standard between the left’s sympathies for Renee Good and Alex Pretti, but not Ashli Babbitt:

[…]

And, in one final highlight for the good of the order, Real Clear Politics’s Philip Wegmann pressed Leavitt from the right about the Second Amendment:

Houck gushed even more over Leavitt in a Feb. 11 post:

Tuesday’s White House press briefing was a barn burner for both its brevity and fire from Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt as, after offering the administration’s continued prayers for NBC’s Today co-host Savannah Guthrie and her family as they look for their kidnapped mother, took aim at CBS News for a vile, pro-illegal immigrant article and the wider White House press for ignoring a series of Trump administration successes on basic biology, the border, and the economy.

Leavitt tore into CBS after a question from National Review’s Caroline Downey, who was sitting in the “new media seat.” Notice how Leavitt correctly and directly asked whether CBS and other journalists would support having supposedly non-violent criminal illegals who’ve committed crimes such as distribution of child pornography and DUI:

[…]

And here was how she ended the briefing by listing how reporters refused to ask about a record-high Dow, a leading medical group coming out against child gender mutilations, a positive ruling for the administration to continue detaining illegal immigrants, record-low crime rates, plunging rents, improving affordability for home buying, and record-low border crossings:

No proof was offered by either Leavitt or Houck that any of this was true. Instead, he continued to whine:

In between, the liberal, elite press had other priorities such as the Epstein files, last week’s controversial video of the Obamas depicted as apes, Democrats being disinvited from a National Governor’s Association gathering, and a new flare-up with Canada over the Gordie Howe Bridge.

Following a question about the probe into his colleague’s missing mother, NBC’s Gabe Gutierrez asked a series of questions about Jeffrey Epstein, illustrating the left’s never-ending crusade to will into existence some deep ties between President Trump and the rich creep:

Houck, of course, continued to fawn over his fellow right-wingers at the briefing who asked thte questions Leavitt wanted asked:

Our friend and Daily Caller White House correspondent Regan Reese brought up congressional stammering on the SAVE Act that would secure America’s election systems:

[…]

MRC Bulldog Award winner and Daily Wire White House correspondent Mary Margaret Olohan then became the only reporter in the room to bring up Monday’s sentencing of pro-democracy newspaperman Jimmy Lai in Hong Kong:

Houck followed up in a Feb. 19 post:

Wednesday’s White House press briefing featured a wild detour away from reality when CBS senior White House and campaign correspondent Ed O’Keefe — who’s one of the least-expected elite media journalists to ask something crazy — wondered aloud to press Secretary Karoline Leavitt if President Trump has ever been falsely accused of being a racist.

Following a question about the administration’s efforts to remove markers on slavery from Philadelphia’s Independence Hall, he expressed confusion over a portion of Trump’s Truth Social post on the passing of Rev. Jesse Jackson Jr. in which the President said he’s been “falsely and consistently called a racist by the scoundrels and lunatics on the radical left.”

O’Keefe then asked: “Where or when does the President believe he has been falsely called racist?”

Leavitt couldn’t believe it: “You’re kidding, right?”

Leavitt cut right to the chase by warning O’Keefe she would “pull you a plethora of examples” by having “my team…start going through the internet of radical Democrats throughout the years, Ed, who have accused this president falsely of being a racist on ensure there’s many people in this room and on network television across the country who have accused him of the same.”

She then segued this into previewing President Trump’s Black History Month event later that day that she said would “talk about how his policies are advancing opportunity and prosperity for all Americans through record tax cuts, through the Trump Accounts that all Americans can access, regardless of race.”

“There’s a lot this President has done for all Americans regardless of race and he has absolutely been falsely called and smeared as a racist and I am happy to provide you those receipts and we gladly will right after this briefing,” she later added.

Along with the various White House social media accounts posting a torrent of examples of liberals hurling racism charges at Trump, we have plenty of our own thanks to the vast NewsBusters archives.

Houck went on to gush that “Leavitt opened in part with a lengthy statement on the state of the economy and the Trump successes downplayed or ignored by the elite media.” He also hyped that “Later on, Beni Rae Harmony with our friends at Real America’s Voice and then Univision’s Pedro Rojas brought up two of the latest far-left lunacy in deep blue states vis-à-vis illegal immigration.”

Craig Bannister added to the Leavitt-fluffing in a Feb. 24 propaganda piece:

CNN doesn’t care about the victims of illegal alien crimes or their families, White House Press Secretary Karoline said Monday, calling the leftist network “a total disgrace” for completely ignoring Monday’s event honoring and hosting “Angel Families.”

“.@CNN is a total disgrace,” Leavitt declared in a social media post following the White House ceremony, during which President Donald Trump signed a proclamation designating February 22, 2026 as National Angel Family Day:

As befits a propaganda piece, Bannister waited until an update to add: “In a statement to CNSNews, a CNN spokesperson said that the network was providing blizzard coverage during the Angel Family Day ceremony.” Bannister did not indicate whether he sought CNN’s reaction to his hit piece before he published it.

Houck keet up his fawning over Leavitt in a March 4 post:

Late in what was otherwise a surprisingly respectful White House press briefing on Wednesday afternoon, former conservative reporter-turned-CNN liberal Kaitlan Collins disgustingly claimed to Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt that Secretary of War Pete Hegseth’s comments hours earlier about the press fixating negative stories about the Iran mean the administration doesn’t want the media to cover the upcoming dignified transfer for six American heroes lost thus far in the war.

Collins — with her inability to show little emotion besides robotic annoyance — huffed: “You just mentioned the President is going to attend the dignified transfer for these families. Given what Secretary Hegseth said this morning, is it the position of this administration that the press should not prominently cover the deaths of U.S. service members?”

Shocked as anyone would be, Leavitt made the obvious distinction between honoring the fallen and the reality that the administration believes “the press in this room and the press across the country should accurately report on the success of Operation Epic Fury and the damage it is doing to the rogue Iranian regime that has threatened the lives of every single American in this room.”

Collins continued to be purposefully dense: “But Secretary Hegseth was complaining that it was front page news about these six service members who were killed.”

Leavitt stated another obvious point that this was “not what the secretary said” or “meant and you know it.”

“You know, you’re being disingenuous,” she added and tried to continue with the claim America’s “never had a secretary of defense who cares more” about the soldiers than Hegseth, but Collins wouldn’t let her finish and read the quote aloud.

“He said, ‘when a few drones get through or tragic things happen, it’s front page news. I get it. The press only wants to make the President look bad.’ As you know, we cover the deaths of U.S. service members under every president,” Collins groused.

Leavitt then dropped the hammer on the CNN tool by telling her “[t]he press does only want to make the President look bad” and “especially you and especially CNN” .] […]

In reality, Hegseth was making an allusion to the doom porn the press have been trigger happy to deploy in the early days of the war (such as here from Tuesday night on ABC).

Houck also made sure to give some love to right-wing reporters in the room: “On an important, non-Iran-related topic, our friend Reagan Reese of the Daily Caller brought up the SAVE Act.”

Craig Bannister served up a March 10 CNSNews propaganda piece starring Leavitt:

Democrats created, and media have promoted, the myth that the SAVE America Act’s voter I.D. requirement would make it harder for married women to vote, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt explained at a press event Tuesday.

“One of the biggest things the Democrats are saying, the claims they’re making, is that the SAVE America Act, it would prevent married women from voting in elections or make it harder for them,” a reporter told Leavitt, asking if the allegations are true.

“There is zero validity to these claims,” Leavitt said, noting that the Democrats’ false narrative has been advanced by the media:

[…]

It’s actually Democrats, not Republicans, who are working to disenfranchise voters, Leavitt said:

In fact, the SAVE America Act could, in fact, make it more difficult for married women to vote. But Bannister quoted only Leavitt and no opposing view.

Mark Finkelstein was upset that a reporter’s exchange with Leavitt was brought up:

On Tuesday’s Morning Joe, Joe Scarborough blithely delivered his legal judgment on potential U.S. strikes against Iranian infrastructure, declaring: “that’s a war crime, by the way.”

The remark came after a clip of NBC correspondent Garrett Haake pressing White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt on President Trump’s warning that Iran should make a deal or face overwhelming U.S. military force.

HAAKE: “Why is the president threatening what would amount to potentially a war crime with the U.S. military?”

LEAVITT: “…the United States Armed Forces has capabilities beyond their wildest imagination, and the president is not afraid to use them.”

Co-host Mika Brzezinski framed the exchange as involving possible U.S. attacks on “civilian infrastructure.”

Scarborough’s response was categorical:

SCARBOROUGH: “That’s a war crime, by the way.”

The self-described “simple country lawyer” rendered his verdict with unequivocal certainty.

That kind of certainty disregards the actual legal standard. Under the Geneva Conventions, attacking infrastructure is not automatically a war crime if it serves a military purpose or qualifies as a dual-use target, subject to proportionality and necessity. Oil infrastructure, in particular, can directly fund and sustain a nation’s military operations—making it a classic dual-use target and a logical focus of wartime strategy.

Moreover, in the current conflict, the U.S. military has explicitly warned Iranian civilians in advance of potential strikes.

[…]

That stands in stark contrast to World War II. The firebombing of Dresden killed an estimated 25,000 people, while the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed more than 170,000 by the end of 1945, including tens of thousands killed instantly—without comparable advance warnings to civilian populations.

But on Morning Joe, Scarborough reduced that complexity to a single, five-word verdict.

So one only has to advise civilians of potential destruction to their infrastructure to avoid committing a war crime? Interesting.