Fox’s Doocy, Karine Jean-Pierre Clash Over Trump Assassination Attempt: ‘Incredibly Dangerous in the Way You’re Asking’

Fox News’ Peter Doocy and White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre clashed on Tuesday after Doocy asked why she was continuing to refer to former President Donald Trump as a “threat” while also calling for the “temperature” in political rhetoric to cool down.

At Tuesday’s press briefing, Jean-Pierre condemned political violence and pushed back against Trump himself blaming the rhetoric of President Joe Biden , Vice President Kamala Harris , and others for an attempted assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania and a would-be gunman arrested while Trump was playing golf in West Palm Beach, Florida this weekend.

Jean-Pierre said during the press conference that “violent political rhetoric is too high” and also referred to Trump as a “threat” to democracy, a common line used by Biden and others.

“It’s been only two days since somebody allegedly tried to kill Donald Trump again, and you’re here at the podium in the White House briefing room calling him a ‘threat.’ How many more assassination attempts on Donald Trump until the president and the vice president and you pick a different word to describe Trump other than ‘threat’?” Doocy asked Jean-Pierre.

The press secretary dismissed the entire “premise” of the question and suggested Doocy was being “incredibly dangerous” in how he worded the question.

Jean-Pierre said:

I actually completely disagree with the premise of your question. The question that you’re asking, it is also incredibly dangerous in the way that you’re asking it because the American people are watching and to say that, to say that [about] an administration that has consistently condemned political violence, from an administration where the president called the former president and was thankful, grateful that he was okay, from an administration who has called out Jan. 6, called out the attack on Paul Pelosi, called out and said we need to lower the temperature after the Butler incident, and now for you to make that kind of comment in your question because your question involved a comment and a statement. And that is also incredibly dangerous.

Doocy pushed further, asking if there is any “concern” that the “threat” comment is being taken “literally” by some.

Jean-Pierre pointed to the Jan. 6 Capitol riot as the reason Trump can legitimately be called a “threat” to democracy.

“We’re using examples. We’re not just saying that just to say it. Jan. 6, Peter, Jan. 6 — wait, Jan. 6. How many times do I — Jan. 6, 2021. That is a fact, what was reported, what happened on that day by some of your colleagues,” she said. “I mean, and we have at the same time denounced political violence over and over, denounce political rhetoric over and over and over again. Over and over again!”

Jean-Pierre against suggested Doocy was being potentially “dangerous” with his line of questioning before declaring she was “moving on.”

“I know your focus has to be on this side of the house and it can’t be on your side of the house, I get that, but we also have to be careful in how you’re asking me these questions,” she said. “People are watching and it is what you are saying about us raising political violent rhetoric, whatever, however, you just formulated it — this is an administration that has denounced and condemned any type of political rhetoric or violence.”

Check out the entire exchange below:

PETER DOOCY: It’s been only two days since somebody allegedly tried to kill Donald Trump again, and you’re here at the podium in the White House briefing room calling him a ‘threat.’ How many more assassination attempts on Donald Trump until the president and the vice president and you pick a different word to describe Trump other than ‘threat’?

KARINE JEAN-PIERRE: Peter, if anything from this administration — I actually completely disagree with the premise of your question. The question that you’re asking, it is also incredibly dangerous in the way that you’re asking it because the American people are watching and to say that, to say that [about] an administration that has consistently condemned political violence, from an administration where the president called the former president and was thankful, grateful that he was okay, from an administration who has called out Jan. 6, called out the attack on Paul Pelosi, called out and said we need to lower the temperature after the Butler incident, and now for you to make that kind of comment in your question because your question involved a comment and a statement. And that is also incredibly dangerous. When we have been very clear in condemning political violence from here. What I have said about the president, the former president, about Jan. 6 is facts that you all have reported. It is fact when you have a former president who basically says that the results of the election were not the results of the election, when dozens of more than 60 Republican judges said it was a free and fair election. More than 60 said it was indeed a free and fair election. You had more than 2,000 people who were told to go to the Capitol, it was one of the darkest days of our democracy, one of the darkest days! There are people, law enforcement officers who died because of what happened at the Capitol and they were there because the former president told them to go there. I mean, if that’s not a threat on our democracy — it was one of the darkest days of our democracy, Jan. 6, one of the darkest days and so we have been very clear from here. Now, we can have a disagreement on policies, we can on issues, that is what we should do, it is important to have those disagreements, it is welcome to have those disagreements on the economy, on healthcare, on foreign policy, but when you start bringing political rhetoric, political rhetoric, that is not okay. And that is what you’ve heard from us too. You’ve heard our differences on policies.

DOOCY: But to your point, there are people watching at home who might miss the part where you say, let’s lower the temperature, and they’re are just mentally unstable people who are attempting to kill political candidates, attempting to kill Donald Trump and they are still hearing you, this White House, refer to him as a threat. Is there no concern that people are taking that literally?

We’re using examples. We’re not just saying that just to say it. Jan. 6, Peter, Jan. 6 — wait, Jan. 6. How many times do I — Jan. 6, 2021. That is a fact, what was reported, what happened on that day by some of your colleagues. I mean, and we have at the same time denounced political violence over and over, denounce political rhetoric over and over and over again. Over and over again! But I know your focus has to be on this side of the house and it can’t be on your side of the house, I get that, but we also have to be careful in how you’re asking me these questions. People are watching and it is what you are saying about us raising political violent rhetoric, whatever, however you just formulated it — this is an administration that has denounced and condemned any type of political rhetoric or violence. It is the reason why this president decided to run in 2020. That is why the president decided to come back, he believed it was important to save the soul of America and our nation and he believed it was important that we continue to fight for our democracy, fight for our freedom, that’s what you see from this administration. I’m moving on.

Watch above via White House .