Last Friday, Democratic press secretary turned MSNBC host, Jen Psaki had on former FBI director James Comey to talk about his new book, a fictional story that centered on a right-wing influencer who directed his followers to commit violence. Psaki used biased questions and responses to validate Comey’s outrageous claims that right-wing podcasters were like Islam extremists and were “white supremacist adjacent,” not just in his book, but in real life.
Psaki asks the question:
I think you’ve told me, you enjoy writing fiction. It — it’s fiction, but it centers around a right-wing influencer who directs his followers to commit violence. Which feels, it’s not exactly topical in this moment, but it feels like something we’ve been talking about for several years. What — what inspired you? Is there a specific moment or person that inspired you to write about that storyline?
This prompted Comey to suggest that right-wing podcasters were using the internet to reach and radicalize young men in a way akin to ISIS:
I’m trying to write stuff that grips people, but is also real. And this is a threat we’ve been dealing with since the Islamic State came on the scene in 2014 and was using the internet to reach troubled people and move them to violence. Well, that threat has now gotten much larger because podcasts are everywhere, and it’s a tool in white identity extremism trying to motivate young men. Especially to move towards violence because they’re being replaced, they’re being attacked, America is under assault. This is a real feature of the FBI’s work, and so I thought it would make an — a good setting for a crime novel.
While Comey used the Islamic State and their ability to use the internet to recruit people as a comparison to right-wing podcasts that use “white identity extremism” to “motivate young men because they’re being attacked,” he was saying this on MSNBC, the network which was a favorite of the congressional baseball shooter who targeted Republicans for death in 2017.
A NewsBusters interview with the lawyer for a doctor who sued MSNBC for defamation (who has settled the suit) revealed that the network’s lies about her client resulted in threats to his life.
Psaki’s constant interweaving of Comey’s fiction book with undertones of this actually happening today allowed for Comey to deliver these absurd comparisons:
PSAKI: Do you think there’s a — I mean, one of the things that is happening now is that the Trump administration, of course, testing the system in ways it hasn’t been tested before. In the law enforcement sense, do you think there are laws that should be put in place that would help better manage this, that aren’t in place now? I mean, are we equipped? Is the law enforcement system and the legal system equipped to deal with what we’re seeing now?
COMEY: Probably there could be changes at the margins, but in the main we have the tools, there are cultural impediments to doing this work. Let’s say you work in the FBI, you know that one of the two political parties is, let me put it nicely, white supremacist adjacent at a minimum. And so why would you want to throw your career on that side of the line and be summoned to capitol hill to be asked, why are you pursuing these innocent groups? And so we have a cultural impediment to working it effectively, that should get more attention than it does.
Her line of questioning allowed Comey to call Republicans “white supremacist adjacent at a minimum.” Psaki didn’t attempt to question Comey’s comparisons at all throughout the interview and even agreed with his answers on multiple occasions.
The transcript is below. Click “expand” to view.
MSNBC: The Briefing with Jen Psaki
May, 27th, 2025
9:14:41 PM EST
JEN PSAKI: We are back with former FBI director James Comey, so this is your third book that you’ve written, what a fun process. I think you’ve told me, you enjoy writing fiction. It — it’s fiction, but it centers around a right wing influencer who directs his followers to commit violence. Which feels, it’s not exactly topical in this moment, but it feels like something we’ve been talking about for several years. What — what inspired you? Is there a specific moment or person that inspired you to write about that storyline?
JAMES COMEY: Well, it’s been a feature of my work —
PSAKI: Yeah.
COMEY: Especially at the FBI, and I’m trying to write stuff that grips people, but is also real. And this is a threat we’ve been dealing with since the Islamic State came on the scene in 2014 and was using the internet to reach troubled people and move them to violence. Well, that threat has now gotten much larger because podcasts are everywhere, and it’s a tool in white identity extremism trying to motivate young men. Especially to move towards violence because they’re being replaced, they’re being attacked, America is under assault. This is a real feature of the FBI’s work, and so I thought it would make an — a good setting for a crime novel.
PSAKI: I remember well, because I was at the state department in the earlier days of ISIS, or when it became really front and center, and there were so many different efforts to fight back on the — kind of social media aspect of recruitment, and — and kind of building this network. Do you think the federal government, we’re in a unique time now, but do you think there’s been enough progress made in that regard as from what you’ve seen?
COMEY: No, we haven’t figured out how to deal with a threat that is essentially a devil sitting on a troubled person’s shoulder. Literally whispering in their ear all day long; you are maligned, you are picked on, you need to fight back, you need to stand up, you need to take action. That moves people in dangerous ways, and so it’s an important thing today. I hope the FBI is focused on it because it’s — after the obscenity that is the pardon of the January 6th defendants, I can’t imagine that a lot of people are clamoring to work domestic terrorism at the FBI right now.
PSAKI: No, and it’s such an important, important part of what they should be doing. The question of when speech becomes a crime is central to your book, too, and it is very topical, it has been for years. How do you think about that issue?
COMEY: Well, there’s an important line, right? We must protect speech, we must protect even obscene — upsetting speech, offensive speech, but there is a point at which the line, when it’s clearly out of bounds. Where someone is commanding someone to act in a violent way, directing someone to act in a violent way, and so what enforcers need to do is find the clear, out of bounds conduct, so you don’t chill speech, but you also punish really bad people. And so it’s not as hard as you might think, as long as you stay away from the grey areas, there’s plenty to work that’s out of bounds.
PSAKI: Do you think there’s a — I mean, one of the things that is happening now is that the Trump administration, of course, testing the system in ways it hasn’t been tested before. In the law enforcement sense, do you think there are laws that should be put in place that would help better manage this, that aren’t in place now? I mean, are we equipped? Is the law enforcement system and the legal system equipped to deal with what we’re seeing now?
COMEY: Probably there could be changes at the margins, but in the main we have the tools, there are cultural impediments to doing this work. Let’s say you work in the FBI, you know that one of the two political parties is, let me put it nicely, white supremacist adjacent at a minimum. And so why would you want to throw your career on that side of the line and be summoned to capitol hill to be asked, why are you pursuing these innocent groups? And so we have a cultural impediment to working it effectively, that should get more attention than it does.
Discussion about this post