Spicer Speech

https://theintercept.com/2017/01/30...e-people-literally-crying-in-the-office-here/

White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer responded harshly to the leaked dissent memo during a press briefing on Monday. “I think that they should either get with the program or they can go,” he told reporters. “This is about the safety of America and there’s a reason a majority of Americans agree with the president.”

“The president has a very clear vision,” he added. “If somebody has a problem with that agenda, then that does call into question whether they should remain in that post or not.”

Spicer’s comments further infuriated State Department officials who in the dissent memo clearly expressed their belief that the President’s ban “will not achieved its stated aim of to [sic] protect the American people from terrorist attacks” but that instead it would “immediately sour relations with these six countries, as well as much of the Muslim world” as well as “increase anti-American sentiment.”

“Multiple people were absolutely livid,” said a State Department official, who spoke to The Intercept on condition of anonymity. The official noted the important role played by the State Department’s internal dissent channel.

The channel was established as a way for State Department officials to raise concerns with government policy during the Vietnam War and requires the Secretary of State to formally respond to the complaints raised through it. Last year, a few dozen officials filed a dissent to Secretary of State John Kerry on President Obama’s Syria policy.

“Freedom from reprisal for Dissent Channel users is strictly enforced,” the regulations state. “Officers or employees found to have engaged in retaliation or reprisal against Dissent Channel users … will be subject to disciplinary action.”

But this administration clearly has no interest in expertise or criticism.

“It shows zero understanding of the intent behind the dissent channel,” the official said, in reference to Spicer’s comments. “It’s an enormously grave insult to the institution, which is intentionally built to be deliberative.”

The White House’s response to this effort to raise concerns through official channels did little to reassure career State Department officials, many of whom learned of the executive order earlier this week with a mixture of bafflement and heartbreak.

When asked what the mood was like on the inside, the State Department official responded, “In a word — chaos. And silence.”

“Today has been astonishingly silent. No NSC taskers, no communication. We’re all in suspense and on hold, and obviously fuming. This is a new era of American foreign policy that nobody I know ever really thought we’d usher in.”

It’s not just the “obviously wrong minded” goals of the new administration, the official said, it’s also the opaque manner in which decisions about the executive order were being made and implemented.

“Procedurally speaking,” the official said, “it’s unprecedented.”