Sarah Sanders White House Press Briefing – 3:30pm EDT

Sarah Huckabee Sanders delivers the White House press briefing for Monday June 25th, 2018.  Anticipated start time 3:30pm EDT.

UPDATE: Video Added

WH Livestream LinkFox Livestream LinkPBS Livestream Link

Advertisements
This entry was posted in media bias, President Trump, Press Secretary - Trump, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

123 Responses to Sarah Sanders White House Press Briefing – 3:30pm EDT

  1. covfefe_USA says:

    We’re behind ya, Sarah, x millions!!!!

    Liked by 21 people

  2. bosscook says:

    Wouldn’t it be great if she answered all their inane questions with a giant red chicken puppet??

    Liked by 18 people

  3. MfM says:

    I’m sure she will have some good comebacks to Red Hen questions.

    I’d really like it if she gave them the zinger of them following her family to another establishment and harassing them there like her father is said to have talked about.

    Liked by 5 people

    • allhail2 says:

      I didn’t realize they were followed to the next place and harassed even further. That’s the point right there that I would be very concerned for my family’s safety. Pussy hat husband, pussy hat son, Red Hen cow and anyone joining in all get a new dental profile. If they want to keep playing these childish games, fine. But they’re going to win some adult prizes

      Liked by 13 people

    • kinthenorthwest says:

      That is the one thing I would like to know. Lexington’s mayor denied it Oh well. he was too smooth talking for me anyway.
      Oh I went on a campaign because people where saying the mayor was behind Wilkerson. Do know she is on too many boards of that city & they need to dump here if they want to save any face. Below is what i have been posting on FB & Twitter(a bit shorter for Twitter).
      Time to give Lexington Mayor Frank W. Friedman a callI–I did—
      He said that he respects my right to not visit as much as he respects Wilkerson right to kick out Sanders. Hmmm.
      Give him a call..To me he sounded like a typical smooth talking politician.
      ffriedman@lexingtonva.gov
      P. O. Box 94
      Lexington, VA 24450
      Ph: 540-570-3485

      Liked by 9 people

      • The point is Wilkerson didn’t have a right to throw out Sarah. The restaurant is a public accommodation & is subject to specific laws. They can only refuse service for very specific reasons such as drunk & disorderly or health hazard.

        Liked by 4 people

        • Deb says:

          They can refuse service to whoever they want, it’s a private business. The point is that this is rude and uncivil, and so people will now steer clear of this inhospitable town.

          Liked by 2 people

          • Then why do bakeries have to bake cakes that go against their religious convictions? They sell to anybody in the normal course of business. Isn’t this discrimination?

            Like

            • Bakeries cannot refuse service to people except in special circumstances. However being asked to create something against their religious beliefs is a separate issues. None of the bakers in question wouldn’t sell products to gays. They however wouldn’t make a cake to celebrate a ceremony that their religion doesn’t countenance. Several of the bakers had made cakes for other types of occasions for the people who sued them.

              Liked by 1 person

          • Hi Deb. No they cannot.
            Aren’t Restaurants Considered Private Property?

            Yes, however they are also considered places of public accommodation. In other words, the primary purpose of a restaurant is to sell food to the general public, which necessarily requires susceptibility to equal protection laws. Therefore, a restaurant’s existence as private property does not excuse an unjustified refusal of service. This can be contrasted to a nightclub, which usually caters itself to a specific group of clientele based on age and social status.

            What Conditions Allow a Restaurant to Refuse Service?

            There a number of legitimate reasons for a restaurant to refuse service, some of which include:

            Patrons who are unreasonably rowdy or causing trouble
            Patrons that may overfill capacity if let in
            Patrons who come in just before closing time or when the kitchen is closed
            Patrons accompanied by large groups of non-customers looking to sit in
            Patrons lacking adequate hygiene (e.g. excess dirt, extreme body odor, etc.)

            In most cases, refusal of service is warranted where a customer’s presence in the restaurant detracts from the safety, welfare, and well-being of other patrons and the restaurant itself.

            Liked by 1 person

          • GB Bari says:

            No Deb. they cannot.

            A business open to the general public cannot discriminate unless it can be clearly demonstrated that a particular customer posed a threat to the well being and safety of the staff and patrons. This has already been tested several times in other venues.

            Thats why private clubs were created – to legally discriminate against those who they didn’t want in the club.

            Liked by 2 people

        • kinthenorthwest says:

          Mayor says it was her right YUCK…Talked him this morning.

          Like

  4. patrickhenrycensored says:

    Sure to be a stalker’s advocacy session by the press.

    Liked by 3 people

  5. Sandra-VA says:

    20 mins late so far….

    Like

  6. andyocoregon says:

    Foreigners can apply for asylum from anywhere in the world. The ones who try to sneak into our country and are caught just claim asylum as a fallback ruse to stay here. That plan worked well for them under Obama. Not so with President Trump.

    Liked by 10 people

    • FofBW says:

      Just to clarify, did Sarah say that?

      Like

    • kroesus61 says:

      as SHS was answering the question about “asylum seekers seeing an immigration judge” my thought was that if they ILLEGALLY cross they forfeit the right to file any asylum claim

      Liked by 12 people

      • Carrie2 says:

        kroesus61, as I understand it you must apply for asylum to come to America and be accepted to do so. That is why 80% pleading asylum were refused!

        Liked by 3 people

        • You are right Carrie2.

          You must apply for asylum at one of our embassies or consulates located in the country you are living in.

          You can not jump our border then apply for asylum.

          Also if an illegal is caught within 100 miles of the border and with in 14 days of entering our country illegally they can be sent back home without the right to see a judge.

          It is called expediated process.

          Obama’s executive order of “catch and release” gave due process rights to illegals that they have no right to.

          Liked by 1 person

    • Carrie2 says:

      andy, and the good news is that some 80% were turned down saying they wanted asylum, meaning that trick is not working any more. Just do NOT let them cross our border at all and I am glad that Trump agrees with we the majority on this, and reunite parents and child/children but most of those parents don’t want those children so then send the children back alone as thousands of children have come by themselves so no problem shoving them over the Mexican border and letting Mexico deal with all the illegal/invaders we don’t want nor need here. Went to Home Depot today and saw only TWO illegals awaiting some one to hire them and this means a lot of them are hiding or have left to go back to whichever country they have come from. If they are not Mexican nationals, they will be booted out of Mexico as well.

      Liked by 4 people

      • andyocoregon says:

        Yes, since Mexico eagerly facilitates the migration of massive numbers of Central Americans to our southern border, it’s only fair we should dump those who are caught sneaking in between the legal ports of entry back into Mexico. Let these people be Mexico’s problem, not ours. Legally, these migrants are required to apply for asylum in the first country they enter and that would be Mexico.

        Liked by 3 people

  7. Pam says:

    Liked by 15 people

    • The Boss says:

      Notice how the press whores avoided that topic. Why?
      Because it’s a loser for them.
      I also noticed the reference to low IQ Maxine Waters’ idiocy.
      Another loser for the left.

      Liked by 16 people

      • andyocoregon says:

        I wish Sarah had mentioned Waters by name, but I suppose the CNN and MSNBC reporters would have screamed “Racism” again.

        Liked by 2 people

        • skeinster says:

          We recently moved, so I looked up my new Rep. and asked him to formally censure Rep. Waters. We all can do that- only takes a moment.

          Liked by 6 people

          • chooseamerica says:

            Emailed my democratic representative and told him to impeach Waters. Plus, said if resistance is all the democratic party has they have a HUGE problem and it’s not President Trump.

            Please become activists everyone.

            Liked by 6 people

  8. Pam says:

    Liked by 8 people

  9. Pam says:

    Liked by 10 people

  10. covfefe_USA says:

    Monkeys seem quite tame today….

    Liked by 7 people

  11. Ditch Mitch says:

    Sarah gets better and better.

    “we are not walking around making up laws, we are not the Obama administration.”

    Liked by 21 people

  12. Sandra-VA says:

    Presstitutes attending WH Press Briefings should be REQUIRED to understand laws and policies already in effect before asking questions on same! It is unbelievable how clueless they are in their questions.

    Liked by 10 people

    • FofBW says:

      They just tee themselves up and Sarah knocks them out of the park

      Liked by 4 people

    • fleporeblog says:

      Your so right! They felt emboldened by Harley’s decision to move some of their production to Europe. They felt like the President is getting a taste of his own medicine.

      What the WHORES don’t realize is that when he places the 232 tariffs on cars, trucks and parts, the same will occur with automobile corporations that decide I am either expanding and/or building a new plant in the US.

      That is EXACTLY what is going to happen!

      Liked by 5 people

      • Sandra-VA says:

        Well, I was actually referring to the illegal immigration questions… but that works too!

        Liked by 2 people

      • The Boss says:

        Harley will regret setting up shop in the EU. That I can tell you.

        Liked by 10 people

        • andyocoregon says:

          Once H-D spends all that capital building manufacturing facilities in Europe, watch the EU give in to President Trump’s fair trade demands and drop their new import duties. H-D will have spent all that money for nothing. And they’ll have to live within the laws and restrictions of those foreign countries.

          Liked by 3 people

          • Coast says:

            I purchased a new Victory motorcycle this year even knowing that Polaris had already closed their Victory line. The 2018 Harleys are grossly over priced and is an inferior design as to what I have sitting in my garage.

            Like

            • stephen fenlon says:

              the Harley style of bikes aren’t all that popular in the UK, except as a 3 wheeler. mainly Jap superbike or tourer types here. don’t remeber seeing many in Europe either. it’s a bit like the dearth of American made cars here, not necessarily price or build quality but the time it takes to receive spares.

              Like

  13. Psycho Monkee says:

    ❤️Sarah H. Sanders❤️ again plays whack-a-presswhore‼️
    How many times must she have to explain/address the kenyan’s immigration debacles?
    Agreed Sandra-VA regarding whore preparation. But you know, their incapable due to blind TDS.

    Liked by 3 people

  14. Coast says:

    Any illegal that enters the USA via Mexico is by default a Mexican citizen. I don’t care where they originally came from because it’s obvious that Mexico is allowing and encouraging these illegals to enter their country and then come across our border. We need to start busing them back to a site in Mexico, and do this by force if Mexico objects. This will stop if Mexico and the illegals start paying a price for this behavior.

    Liked by 3 people

  15. NC Nana says:

    Thank you God for giving America a brilliant, principled Press Secretary.

    Thank you Press Secretary Sanders for your willingness to serve your country. You were blessed with brilliance, dignity, and strength.

    Liked by 3 people

  16. 335blues says:

    It is absolutely freaking infuriating how dense the media operatives are!
    Sarah keeps answering the same questions over and over,
    and the reporters just wipe the spittle running down their chins away
    and ask the same questions again.
    Is there some kind of rule that says reporters have to be the stupidest among us????

    Liked by 1 person

    • It’s talking points. That’s why they ask such long winded questions. They want to get their talking points out there to besmirch and blacken President Trump, Sarah’s answer often matters less to them. Sarah’s answer is a chance to trap and twist her words but the sound bite they want is the false attack and spin to confuse the uninformed and to enrage their liberal audience & their sycophants.

      Like

    • Cathy M. says:

      Apparently

      Like

    • GB Bari says:

      She should learn how to say “Asked and answered” and then immediately point to another reporter in a different location, “Yes?”

      Liked by 1 person

  17. Ditch Mitch says:

    After watching the presser a second time (was dividing attention when the presser was live) I have a few observations:
    1. Prestitutes agenda al dia was to give illegals rights. Judges, due process etc.
    2. Sarah was less tolerant of press making accusations, lying, fake news. referenced to Bozo making laws, previous administrations and congress creating problems etc.
    3. Sarah is increasing her throwbacks to the press. Stupid, out of place etc.

    Great fun watching the presser muted as the expressions become more pronounced. Can’t wait for the next one. Some sarcasm there.

    Liked by 3 people

  18. rudy1876 says:

    Sarah is just so great at her job, and is top notch in the people/human department. Love her!

    Liked by 3 people

  19. Fools Gold says:

    When Sarah decides she’s had enough of the BS media, I hope she hands out pink vagina hats during her last press conference and tells them you must wear the hat in order to ask a question and get a response…

    Like

  20. Rainy says:

    Why not call on completely different people?

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Cathy M. says:

    Illegals in the U.S. are provided “due process”.
    Due Process is whatever Congress/President says it is via laws they passed.

    The Constitution does not provide Due Process for aliens outside the U.S.
    Aliens inside the U.S. are afforded “Due Process”.

    An example concerning the right to an attorney.

    The Immigration Court is an Administrative Court (not a criminal court). It is akin to U.S. District Civil Courts, Bankruptcy Court & the Court of International Trade. In all 4 of these,you have the right to an attorney.
    And none of these permit a court appointed free attorney whether you are a citizen or an illegal.(per law).

    Criminal courts:
    Both citizens & illegals may have a court appointed attorney (if qualified) in a criminal case (per law).

    Now-
    We’d be more than happy to appoint illegal aliens an attorney if, in lieu of the Immigration Court, illegal aliens prefer to be criminally prosecuted for their crime in U.S. District Court before they are removed/deported.

    I’m fed up with illegals, aided by the wingnuts, demanding special treatment for something U.S. citizens & legal residents do not have.

    Next post on Immigration due process avenues.

    Like

    • Cathy M. says:

      The INA provides for several types of Due Process for aliens.
      The alternate, non-judicial, substantially quicker (& Cheaper) routes available are:

      * “VOLUNTARY RETURN” departure: the Alien is advised of this option. Under this option, the alien returns to his/her country in lieu of formal removal proceedings with an Immigration Judge. This is not really “voluntary,” but is beneficial to the alien because it carries fewer consequences if the alien returns illegally again. (This option should not be offered to illegals who have been previously convicted of a crime(s). Not much of a deterrent, but would make it more lucrative than losing a deportation hearing & ordered deported (removed) by an Immigration Judge. Their are severer consequences if an alien is caught illegally entering the U.S. again after an Order of Removal.

      * EXPEDITED REMOVAL:
      Because it depends when & where the alien was encountered. (That’s what I meant by “it depends on the circumstances)
      If I’m recall correctly-
      Expedited Removals may be used to remove three groups of individuals. (1)those who attempt to enter the country by fraud without proper documents when they attempt to enter the U.S. through a border checkpoint, international airport, or shipping port, (2) individuals who arrived by sea and were encountered within two years, and (3) individuals who are encountered within 100 miles of an international land border and within 14 days of entering the country. The DHS officer’s decision is final and generally there is no right to speak with an Immigration Judge.

      There are 2 exceptions: alien requests asylum are turned over to an asylum officer to investigate the claim and (2.)or already has some sort of legal status. Those would generally end up in immigration court.
      That’s why we have so many requesting asylum on the SW border, when in reality, I’d say most of them are migrating for economic reasons- which is not grounds for asylum.

      ** “Expedited Removal Proceedings Against Aggravated Felons: Another proceeding that does not invoke a hearing before an immigration judge, they are ordinarily relatively quick.

      ** Reinstatement of Final Order of Removal: An alien who illegally reenters the U.S. after having been deported (Ordered Removed), or having departed on his own while under an Order of Removal, shall be removed from the U.S. by reinstating the prior order (reinstatement is signed by an ICE/ HSI or ICE/ERO Supervisor-not a Judge). Very fast turnaround & no option to go through the judicial process again.

      ** Fugitive Aliens: These are aliens who had been Ordered Removed by a Immigration Judge but disappeared into the U.S. before they were deported. As of 2014 there were 842,000 fugitive aliens & the numbers continue to grow. This is another quick turn-around and does not go through the judicial system again.

      1 more post on avenues to deport, next post

      Like

      • Cathy M. says:

        – JUDICIAL & Other-
        ** “Judicial Order of Removal.”- U.S. District Criminal Court Judge (as opposed to an Immigration administrative Judge) may, if requested by the prosecuting U.S. Attorney at the time of sentencing of an alien convicted of a federal offense, direct that alien’s Removal upon completion of any portion of the sentence requiring incarceration. Once such an order has been entered, there is no option, nor need, for proceedings under any other provision of the INA. No immigration court hearing.

        ** “Stipulated Orders of Removal”- Immigration Court equivalent to pleading guilty.

        -And The long, expensive process where most aliens do not bother to show up ARE:-

        ** “Removal Proceedings Before an Immigration Judge”: the government is not obliged to present its’ case to an immigration judge. A hearing in front of an Immigration Judge is an affirmative right, i.e. the alien must request to be heard in the Immigration Court.
        Most illegals do make the request,which explains the backlog. Heck, it’s easier & faster to go through the U.S. District criminal Courts.

        Immigration court records from 1996 through 2012 show 76 percent of 1.1 million deportation orders were issued against those who evaded court, i.e. disappeared into the U.S. and were not deported (fugitive alien). And Not even a quarter of those aliens free pending trial (issued an NTA) actually came to court and finished their cases.

        Like

  22. 4beagles says:

    Gota love Sarah !
    Patience of Job,
    Wisdom of Solomon
    Fighting spirit of David

    Her Dad taught her well

    Like

  23. Mike diamond says:

    Right On Sarah we love you ! The press is as always sour lemons !

    Like

  24. TigerBear says:

    Sarah, you have the patience of Job! Those journalists seem to think that if they change the wording of the questions they’ll somehow get a different answer. You are one woman whom I encourage my granddaughters to look up too!

    God bless you and yours, Sarah!

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s