In the ever-entertaining world of media accountability, this week’s spotlight is firmly fixed on two former White House Press Secretaries, Karine Jean-Pierre and Jen Psaki. They’ve taken on the audacious task of twisting narratives and facts like pretzels, leaving the rest of us amused and slightly bewildered. It seems as though they’ve embarked on some fantastical storytelling adventure, each more imaginative than the last.

First in the ring is Karine Jean-Pierre, also known as KJP, who recently embarked on a book tour. During her so-called promotion, KJP spun a tale claiming President Biden has had more interaction with the press than former President Trump. Naturally, a quick fact-check shatters this fiction. Trusted sources like Axios, not exactly a bastion of conservative thought, reported that President Trump engaged with the media three times more than President Biden. It seems KJP might want to brush up on the definition of “fact” because her math here needs serious recalibration.

Next, KJP struck another curious note regarding President Biden’s mental sharpness. She assured everyone of her consistent honesty on the topic, only to trip over her own words from a previous statement where she boldly claimed President Biden was as sharp as ever. This was post-2024’s disastrous debate performance—something we all witnessed. It does make one wonder if their strategy involves hoping no one notices these strategically forgotten claims.

Then, of course, there’s Jen Psaki, who veered into the bizarre and unsettling with her recent commentary on Second Lady Usha Vance. Suggesting Usha needs rescuing from her own marriage seems like a peculiar way to engage political discourse. It’s clear Usha Vance, a highly accomplished woman with formidable academic and professional credentials, isn’t someone who requires saving from anyone, least of all from an armchair analyst like Psaki. Psaki’s imagination must surely be working overtime here.

Wrapping up this strange journey through storytelling and illusionary facts is Jen Psaki’s attempt to trivialize immigration concerns, articulated through mockery of exit polls. Apparently, thoughtful voter opinions aren’t worthy of respect in her view, particularly on matters like immigration which seem to matter to a great many Americans. Perhaps those concerns don’t fit the preferred narrative, so they get the Psaki treatment—dismiss and ridicule.

Both Psaki and Jean-Pierre have taken an audacious step into the world of twisting facts and creating narratives that are rich in what some might call “fiction.” Are these tales part of a broader playbook, or just random musings gone astray? Whatever the case, it would serve their audience well to approach their tales with a healthy dose of skepticism and a hearty sense of humor. These narratives, spun with such assurance, often unravel faster than a poorly knitted sweater.