Spicer: Trump admin ‘going to piss off' MAGA base on Obama claims ‘if they don't act'
President Trump urged the Justice Department (DOJ) to deep dive into Obama and his officials in late July when Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard sent criminal referrals to the DOJ following a report accusing Obama's team of engaging in a 'treasonous conspiracy.'
'If these guys keep pumping out this stuff and declassifying things and don't go anywhere, you think Epstein was bad, you're going to piss off a lot of people if they don't act,' Spicer said during a Friday appearance on ' The Morning Meeting.'
In response to the report released by Gabbard, the president said multiple former White House staffers would be charged with crimes.
'Based on what I read, and I read pretty much what you read, it would be President Obama. He started it,' Trump said on July 22, when asked who the DOJ should target.
'And [then-vice president Joe] Biden was there with him and [former FBI director James] Comey was there and [former DNI director James] Clapper, the whole group was there. [Former CIA director John] Brennan. They were all there in a room, right here, this was the room,' he added.
Spicer said the public won't back off an information hunt regarding Obama's alleged wrongdoing.
'So I think they're creating the impression that things will happen, and there better be some kind of follow-up. People who dealt with this issue are a hell of a lot more vocal than they are on Epstein. And I think you're getting a lot of people's hopes up,' Spicer said.
'So I don't know yet, but I feel like they've started to create the expectation that there will be something and people want [that].'
However, Obama's office said the president's claims are ' bizarre ' and timely considering the backlash received by the Trump administration for not producing more information as it relates to Jeffrey Epstein's crimes.
'These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction,' Patrick Rodenbush, a spokesperson for Obama, said in a July statement sent to NewsNation, The Hill's sister company.
'Nothing in the document issued last week undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but did not successfully manipulate any votes. These findings were affirmed in a 2020 report by the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee, led by then-Chairman Marco Rubio, ' he added in response to Gabbard's report.
Former CIA Director John Brennan and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper also wrote a joint op-ed to reject Trump's claims.
'Every serious review has substantiated the intelligence community's fundamental conclusion that the Russians conducted an influence campaign intended to help Mr. Trump win the 2016 election,' the two wrote.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Buzz Feed
a minute ago
- Buzz Feed
MAGA Dad's Viral Journey Away From Trump
A Reddit post by a user who claims their father voted for Donald Trump twice has recently gone viral for revealing what finally turned their MAGA dad into a Trump critic. At the start of the post, the redditor explained what initially attracted their father to Donald Trump during the 2016 campaign. "What got him into Trump was the first primary debate he participated in, in which he brutally attacked Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, and the others..." They went on to explain that their father, a business owner, personally benefited from Trump's tax cuts, which made his view of Trump's first presidency a "success," despite events like January 6. According to the redditor, things started to change for their father when Trump's tariff war threw his business into "disarray." The negative financial impact of Trump's tariff war made their father seek out more "accurate reporting" of Trump, and the new information "awakened" him. "He wishes Trump would stop being such an idiotic fuckup." And finally, the post ended with the redditor's realization about changing the minds of "casual Trump voters." "You can bring all that stuff up, and they'll just wave it off. But as soon as he does do something harmful that affects them, they can be turned." After reading the post, people in the comments shared their perspective on "uniformed voters" who supported Trump. "I just think so many people drank the 'John Wayne' kool aid in the Reaganite '80s, the idea that, like the lone gunslinger, Americans are singular, self sufficient individuals, not members of a society. So many in the U.S. bought that BS wholesale, like this guy's Dad," one user wrote. "He thinks he only need care about his business, his family and his bikes, but he forgets that for businesses to flourish he needs society at large to be healthy, he needs trade rules to be enforced, and he needs stability in trade hates paying taxes, but never thinks about why the roads are maintained, why water comes out of the tap or electricity out of the socket. He's been trained and rewarded to see himself as a lone entity, independent of all social bonds. Now he's been uncomfortably reminded he is part of an interdependent society, but I'm sure he'll forget the reminder soon enough. Individualism is too deeply ingrained in his psyche for him to abandon it now." "Everyone keeps saying 'they voted for this.' But in reality, some didn't. There are lots of uninformed voters out there. I'm not excusing it, but it's true. My dad is the same way," another user admitted. "He liked the sound bites he saw about draining the swamp and liked the idea of a businessman instead of a career politician. My dad is woefully misinformed and wouldn't listen to me either. But he's not an evil monster. Just complacent and kinda ignorant. He's also 83, so there's that." "They're not going to figure out Trump sucks until they get burned by the hot stove," this user wrote. And finally, "I feel like the real takeaway from this is that the dad is against something Trump did, but still doesn't regret his vote." "The popular Reddit sentiment is that conservatives are feeling regret now that his policies are hurting them, but the actual sad truth is that given the opportunity at a revote, they'd probably vote for Trump again because they're convinced Harris would've still been worse or as bad as Trump anyway," another user wrote. What are your thoughts? Let us know in the comments below.
NBC News
2 minutes ago
- NBC News
White House economic adviser Kevin Hassett defends Trump's firing of labor statistics head
White House economic adviser Kevin Hassett on Sunday defended President Donald Trump's decision to fire the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, as well as the president's claim that weaker-than-expected jobs reports were 'rigged,' but failed to produce any evidence to support Trump's claim. 'What we need is a fresh set of eyes over the BLS,' Hassett, the director of the National Economic Council, told NBC News' 'Meet the Press.' On Friday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released a monthly jobs report that included weaker-than-expected numbers for July, plus major downward revisions of May and June's numbers. In a post on Truth Social on Friday, the president said the jobs numbers were 'rigged' and that he'd asked his team to fire BLS Commissioner Erika McEntarfer. 'We need accurate Jobs Numbers. I have directed my Team to fire this Biden Political Appointee, IMMEDIATELY. She will be replaced with someone much more competent and qualified. Important numbers like this must be fair and accurate,' Trump wrote. In another Truth Social post, the president added, 'In my opinion, today's Jobs Numbers were RIGGED in order to make the Republicans, and ME, look bad.' On Sunday, Hassett cast similar doubt on the accuracy of the jobs numbers, pointing to past revisions that were made to jobs reports after then-President Joe Biden stopped running for re-election last year. 'There have been a bunch of patterns that could make people wonder. And I think the most important thing for people to know is that it's the president's highest priority that the data be trusted and that people get to the bottom of why these revisions are so unreliable,' Hassett told 'Meet the Press' moderator Kristen Welker. He added later in the interview that the Trump administration's goal was to understand why there was such a sizable revision to past months' jobs numbers. 'The bottom line is that there were people involved in creating these numbers. And if I were running the BLS and I had a number that was a huge, politically important revision, the biggest since 1968 actually ... then I would have a really long report explaining exactly what happened. And we didn't get that,' Hassett said. It's not uncommon for jobs reports to be revised in the months following their release, but Hassett on Sunday emphasized that July's revision was one of the largest he's seen in decades. Trump faced criticism from Democrats and Republicans in Congress on Friday when he decided to fire McEntarfer, with several Republican senators questioning whether the firing would actually help the Trump administration improve future jobs numbers. 'We have to look somewhere for objective statistics. When the people providing the statistics are fired, it makes it much harder to make judgments that, you know, the statistics won't be politicized,' Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., told NBC News on Friday. 'I'm going to look into it, but first impression is that you can't really make the numbers different or better by firing the people doing the counting,' he added. On Sunday, Hassett said that installing Trump's 'own people' will help achieve more 'transparent and reliable' jobs reports in the future. 'The president wants his own people there so that when we see the numbers, they're more transparent and more reliable. And if there are big changes and big revisions — we expect more big revisions for the jobs data in September, for example — then we want to know why, we want people to explain it to us,' he said.
Business Insider
2 minutes ago
- Business Insider
U.S. to implement Trump's executive order restricting Birthright Citizenship
The United States Social Security Administration (SSA) has announced plans to enforce President Donald Trump's executive order (EO) restricting automatic birthright citizenship, as soon as it takes effect. The SSA intends to enforce an executive order signed by President Trump limiting automatic birthright citizenship. The order applies to children born after February 19, 2025, and restricts citizenship to children of U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents. This policy shift could significantly affect immigrant populations, particularly their access to citizenship and social benefits. The executive order, titled ' Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship,' was signed on January 20, 2025. It is expected to apply to children born after February 19, 2025, with enforcement scheduled to begin on July 27, 2025. This move will alter decades of established practice that grants citizenship to nearly all individuals born in the U.S. and will affect a wide range of foreign nationals, including African migrants, students, and professionals residing legally or temporarily in the United States. According to Reuters, the SSA's plans signal the administration's readiness to proceed with enforcement as soon as legal challenges are cleared. Under the current constitutional framework, children born in the U.S. are automatically granted citizenship regardless of their parents' immigration status. However, the new policy would limit that right to children born to U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents. ' With respect to citizenship, an SSN applicant may currently demonstrate U.S. citizenship by providing a birth certificate showing a U.S. place of birth, ' the SSA stated. CNN reports that, 'Several rulings issued by federal courts this month have ensured that that policy will not take effect for now, and the guidance documents acknowledge that reality.' However, preparations for implementation are underway. 'The government is preparing to implement the EO in the event that it is permitted to go into effect,' a USCIS memo read. Key Changes to Citizenship Verification Previously, Social Security Numbers (SSNs) were issued to U.S.-born applicants based solely on a birth certificate indicating a place of birth within the country. Under the new order, that will no longer be sufficient. Applicants born after the EO's implementation date will be required to provide proof that at least one parent was a U.S. citizen or a lawful permanent resident at the time of their birth. 'To comply with the EO, SSA will require evidence that such a person's mother and/or father is a U.S. citizen or in an eligible immigration status at the time of the person's birth, ' the SSA stated. The Social Security Administration will revise its internal manuals and application procedures to reflect these changes. Updated procedures will require applicants to submit one or more of the following: 1. Certificate of Naturalization 2. Certificate of Citizenship 3. U.S. Passport issued under the EO 4. U.S. Citizen Identification Card issued by the Department of Homeland Security 5. Consular Report of Birth Abroad 6. Other verification from the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Department of State, or federal/state court records 7. A U.S. birth certificate plus evidence of a parent's U.S. citizenship or eligible immigration status The Security administration added that children of green card holders may also qualify, but only with verified documentation such as a Permanent Resident Card (Form I-551), a Machine Readable Immigrant Visa (MRIV) with a Temporary I-551 stamp, or relevant DHS records. ' Once the EO takes effect, a birth certificate showing a U.S. place of birth will not be sufficient documentary evidence of U.S. citizenship for persons born after the EO takes effect, ' the SSA said. Implications for African Families The policy shift is expected to impact thousands of African nationals living in the U.S. on temporary work or student visas, including those under H-1B and F-1 classifications. It may also affect African families who travel to the U.S. for childbirth or educational purposes, expecting their children to gain automatic citizenship. For African countries with large diaspora populations in the U.S. including Nigeria, Ghana, Kenya, and South Africa; the loss of automatic citizenship rights could have long-term impacts, including reduced access to public benefits, limited legal protections for children, and potential disruptions to remittance flows and transnational family stability. On the brighter side, CNN reports that immigration rights advocates have filed legal challenges against the policy and have emphasized that the newly released SSA and USCIS guidance is 'meaningless' so long as the courts continue to block enforcement.
