When all you've got is ad hominem and unsupported category error arguments, you got nothing.

From Karine Jean-Pierre Struggles When Confronted with Her Record of Election Denial.  Poor old KJP.  She's just not up to the job.  Psaki wasn't great but (highly politicized and frequently blatantly untruthful) but she was at least quick.  She was rough around the edges at the beginning ("I'll circle back on that") but quickly got her sea legs, such as they were.  We are many weeks in to KJP's tenure and she is still struggling.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre struggled Tuesday to respond to her past statements denying the results of an election — even as her boss President Joe Biden stated that “election deniers” posed a threat to democracy.

“Look, I’m not going to go back to where we were or what happened in 2016, we’re going to focus on the here and now,” she said, when confronted with past statements on social media about President Donald Trump stealing the 2016 election and also Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp.

“I knew this was coming, I was waiting Peter when you were going to ask me that question,” she said, in response to a question from Fox News reporter Peter Doocy during the White House press briefing.

Jean-Pierre dismissed the questions as not relevant.

“Let’s be really clear, that comparison that you made is just ridiculous,” Jean-Pierre replied.

She claimed that she had since stated that Trump and Kemp won their elections.

Jean-Pierre immediately pivoted to the January 6th riots.

“Let’s not forget about what happened on January 6th 2021 when we saw an insurrection, a mob that was incited by the person who occupied this campus, this facility at this time,” she said.

The article is filled with relevant links to Tweets providing the evidence that KJP has a history as an election denier.  I have seen collections of these tweets circulating for at least a couple of weeks or more.

What intrigues me is her assertion that she knew the question was coming.  In fact, it is more interesting than that.  

I knew this was coming, I was waiting Peter when you were going to ask me that question

Out of all the dozens of mainstream media "journalists" at these briefings, JPK knew the question would arise and she knew that only one journalist would ask, Peter Doocy from Fox News.  She knew that all the other mainstream media "journalists" would remain silent on behalf of the Administration.  

That in and of itself is a pretty startling acknowledgement of a reality everyone recognizes and few discuss.

I am no media maven or communications expert but I have done hundreds or thousands of presentations as well as dozens of major public speaking events (audiences in the many hundreds or couple of thousand).  

Of course you focus on what you are going to present but you always try and anticipate what questions might arise and where the discourse might head.  Sometimes that is easier to anticipate than others but there are almost some list of usual suspects in terms of tangents.

With her list of tweets denying election outcomes having been in circulation for some weeks, of course she knew the question would arise at some point and that it would come from the single reporter with a track record of independent questioning.

And knowing that the question was coming, she still did not have a good response.  She used the old standby for those without arguments, the ad hominem attack (you are ridiculous for making the comparison.)  The only substantive response was the accusation that Doocy had made a category error.  Her argument is that denying state level election results (and denying past federal election results) is not the same as denying the current federal election results.  

She provided no discussion or argument as to why it was a category error and it is not obvious that it is a category error.  I suppose one might possibly claim there is a real category error when comparing state and federal elections and, say, a PTA slate election.  But since State and Federal elections are held jointly and are subject to the same governing laws, it simply isn't apparent that denying a State Governor election or a past federal Presidential results versus denying a Federal Presidential election results.  

And that's it.  Knowing that the question was coming, her only response was ad hominem and an unexplained claim of category error.

That's pretty weak tea. 

Possibly she had a better response prepared but in the moment she got flustered and fell back on this weak argument.  Or perhaps this was indeed her best considered response.  In either case, it would appear that the President is not being well served.