Gibbs: Um, maybe Ahmadinejad isn’t the “elected leader” of Iran after all
posted at 3:32 pm on August 5, 2009 by Allahpundit
What was the euphemism The One’s team used last year whenever someone on their side said something mind-blowingly stupid and then had to walk it back the next day?
Ah, that’s right. “Inartful.”
On Air Force One today, Gibbs told reporters that he wanted to “correct a little bit of what I said yesterday. I denoted that Mr. Ahmadinejad was the elected leader of Iran. I would say it’s not for me to pass judgment on. He’s been inaugurated, that’s a fact. Whether any election was fair, obviously the Iranian people still have questions about that and we’ll let them decide that. But I would simply say he’s been inaugurated and we know that is simply a fact.
Asked if the White House recognizes Ahmadinehad as the leader, elected fairly or not, Gibbs said it’s not “for us to denote his legitimacy, except to acknowledge the fact.”
Does the White House think the election was fair?
“That’s not for us to pass judgment on,” Gibbs said. “I think that’s for the Iranian people to decide, and obviously there are many that still have a lot of questions.”
Today in Kenya, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said of Ahmadinejad, “we don’t always get to deal with the government that we want to…We take the reality that the person who was inaugurated today will be considered the president.”
Note how much slicker Hillary’s statement is than the one given by her boss’s paid professional mouthpiece. A few lefties were trolling me on Twitter last night insisting that Gibbs merely “misspoke” and never meant to imply that Ahmadinejad was fairly elected. Watch the clip; the whole point of the question was about Dinnerjacket’s legitimacy, with Gibbs rambling about Iranians “choosing their leadership” before capping the exchange with a concession to the fact that he’s the “elected leader.” If he can’t figure out a way to say “you play the hand you’re dealt” without stumbling into a gaffe so spectacular that it was picked up by Iranian state media then he’s not cut out for this job. Exit question: If it was just a slip of the tongue that Gibbs never intended, why didn’t they issue a statement to correct the “mistake” immediately after he made it?
Update: It’ll all be worth it if Iran “unclenches its fist,” though, right? A progress report:
Visibly angered by the slight, Mr Ahmadinejad struck a characteristically defiant note despite hundreds of protesters chanting “death to the dictator” almost within earshot.
“We heard that some of the western leaders have decided to recognise but not congratulate the new government,” Mr Ahmadinejad said in an acceptance speech before the Iranian parliament. “Well, no-one in Iran is waiting for your messages.”
“The Iranian nation neither values your scowls and threats, nor your smiles and greetings.”
Related Posts:
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
Sweet. How sweet it is.
Finally, Obama’s chikkinzzz are coming home to roost.
petefrt on May 19, 2013 at 8:22 PM
This.
When you have to plead incompetence to defend against charges of malfeasance, you know you might be in trouble.
petefrt on May 19, 2013 at 8:36 PM
ear relevant…
driguana on May 19, 2013 at 8:59 PM
Flush this lying tudd down the drain with the rest of the Obamacrap.
kemojr on May 19, 2013 at 9:34 PM
This was Dan Pfeiffer’s week in the barrel, like Susan Rice he was given the White House talking points and sent on a mission. He really needs to get copies of these tapes and watch them and see how foolish and unbelievable he looked and sounded. The White House is losing the little credibility it still had by sending these shills out every week trying to do damage control. Community organizers make poor leaders.
savage24 on May 19, 2013 at 9:42 PM
Pfeiffer’s statement that the law is irrelevant because the IRS conduct was “outrageous” and “inexcusable”, tells us all we need to know about this administration.
However, the follow-up should have been, “On what standard do you judge their conduct to be outrageous and inexcusable since the law is apparently not an appropriate standard?” (At least in Pfeiffer’s mind.)
What this comes down to is this: “if the Administrative deems something “outrageous” and “inexcusable,” then it is declared such. As we have seen in so many other areas, if the Administrative deems something to not be “outrageous” and “inexcusable,” then it is declared such.
In their mind, the law is – in fact – irrelevant. That’s what makes this situation so dangerous.
It’s not socialism. It’s worse.
EdmundBurke247 on May 19, 2013 at 10:36 PM
Irrelevant = “What Difference Does It Make?”
jaydee_007 on May 19, 2013 at 10:41 PM
A fitting capstone to Ed’s story about loss-prevention (aka employee theft) and management’s “permission structure” in this post.
(Not to mention the jaw-dropping statements of Eleanor Clift in this one.)
AesopFan on May 19, 2013 at 11:40 PM
I enjoy popcorn and hope it is a long week.
Drill and Fill on May 20, 2013 at 12:41 AM
Hey give Barky a break. He had to get his sorry ass out to Vegas.
tbear44 on May 20, 2013 at 4:49 AM
Of course they sent Pfeiffer out to do the Sunday shows. He was the most senior expendable staff member they had . . .
BigAlSouth on May 20, 2013 at 5:39 AM
Pfeiffer… The guy with the red shirt in the landing party…
Boudica on May 20, 2013 at 5:53 AM
Perfect!
lea on May 20, 2013 at 7:11 AM
Does anybody else remember the campaign in 2008 when Obama defended his lack of administrative experience by saying he was just so smart and tuned in that his instincts were better than experience. Someone needs to dredge up these sound bites and play then with the current line about the government being too large to control and that the White House only knows what it reads in the newspaper.
bartbeast on May 20, 2013 at 8:43 AM
If where the president was during the Benghazi crisis is “irrelevant”, then he wasn’t where one would expect the Commander-in-Chief to be. So, where was he? Was he watching a movie in the residence? Was he bowling? Or was he having a bi-curious outing with his good buddy Reggie Love? If Obama was AWOL, as I suspect he was, it is he who is irrelevant. This entire stinkin’ criminal Obama Regime must go and now!
SpiderMike on May 20, 2013 at 9:31 AM
If this continues all week, it will be ‘O’ himself doing the rounds on the Sunday talk shows – except for Fox, of course. (‘O’ can do everything better than everyone else as he has been known to say.)
He then gets the extra benefit that no one will challenge him like they have begun to do with his minions.
Carnac on May 20, 2013 at 11:00 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2