A CNN panel grilled former Biden communications director Kate Bedingfield after she insisted the White House's abrupt cancellation of a press briefing had nothing to do with Hunter Biden's guilty verdict. The panel members challenged her explanation, suggesting the decision was made to avoid answering questions about the verdict.
Former Biden communications director Kate Bedingfield faced scrutiny from a CNN panel over the abrupt cancellation of the White House press briefing on the heels of Hunter Biden's guilty verdict. The panelists raised doubts about Bedingfield's claim that the cancellation was unrelated to the verdict, arguing that the timing suggested otherwise.
The issue came to light when CNN co-hosts Brianna Keilar and Boris Sanchez announced they had received word of the briefing's cancellation. Keilar remarked that it came "after the president's son was convicted," leading to laughter among the panel.
Bedingfield dismissed the notion, explaining that briefings are commonly canceled after significant remarks from the president. She pointed to Biden's recent speech as a reason for the cancellation. However, Keilar questioned this explanation, noting that the White House had anticipated media coverage of the speech.
Citing President Biden's guilty verdict on gun charges, CNN political commentator Shermichael Singleton challenged Bedingfield's claim. He argued that the White House canceled the briefing to avoid answering questions about the verdict, a move he deemed understandable but lacked transparency.
Despite Singleton's skepticism, Bedingfield maintained that the White House has addressed numerous questions about the issue. However, Singleton clarified that this had occurred prior to the verdict. CNN senior political analyst Gloria Borger also voiced disagreement with Bedingfield, suggesting that the White House's response had indeed changed after the conviction.
Bedingfield insisted that the communication strategy remained unchanged, aiming to keep the focus on the president's message. She explained that the White House needed time to formulate its messaging and avoid preempting any potential statements from the president.
The panel continued to debate the issue, with Borger concluding that the cancellation raised more questions than it answered. The incident highlights the scrutiny surrounding the White House's response to sensitive political matters and the challenges faced in balancing transparency and messaging.
