Jen Psaki says Republicans in Congress are treating Americans’ savings and investments ‘like a game of Monopoly’ by choosing not to raise the debt limit

 Q  Hey, Jen. So, I understand that you’re obviously waiting for more details of this proposal from the Senate Minority Leader, but, you know, would the President accept a short-term deal to raise the debt ceiling while you try and find a broader path out of this crisis?

MS. PSAKI: Well, as I said a few minutes ago, we don’t need to kick the can. We don’t need to go through a cumbersome process that every day brings additional risks. And you heard many of the business leaders convey that, even as we look to risk tomorrow, the next day, as American — the American people are looking at the retirement accounts, worrying about their Social Security savings, members of the military worrying about their payments. We don’t need to incur that risk uncertainty.

And I think it’s important to also remember we’re at this point because Republicans in Congress treated the savings accounts and retirement savings of the American people, Social Security checks of retirees, and veterans benefits like a game of Monopoly, putting the stability and security of the American people at risk.

We’re at this point because Republicans in Congress blocked efforts by Democrats to raise the debt limit and protect the full faith and credit of the United States, despite having voted for it three times during the Trump administration.

So, obviously, as has been reported, and the vote has been delayed, there’s still an opportunity for Republicans to join us in being adults in the room and ensure that people have confidence in the economic security and their own retirement savings.

Q  The Minority Leader’s proposal, though, seems to go at one of the key arguments that the President was making yesterday about why he’s opposed to using budget reconciliation, which is that it would take time, it’s cumbersome, it could lead to, you know, unexpected scenarios.

So, is the Minority Leader taking off the arguments against reconciliation by offering this one-month extension? And if not, then what are your remaining objections? Is it simply that you don’t want Democrats to take a vote that will put a specific dollar amount on raising the debt ceiling?

MS. PSAKI: Democrats are very willing to be the adults in the room and take a vote to raise the debt limit. They’re not even asking Republicans to do that anymore, since they’ve clearly shown their refusal to do exactly that.

The point I’m making is that there is a very clear — the least risky option here that can ensure that there is confidence from the American people about their own checking accounts or about their own retirement savings, that’s something Republicans still have the opportunity to participate in and be a part of.

Q  And just on Afghanistan, if I could. The ISIS-K suicide bomber had — you know, who was — who carried out the attack that resulted in the deaths of 13 U.S. service members and dozens more Afghans had been released from the Parwan prison at Bagram Air Base just days before that attack took place, when the Taliban took control of that base.

Should the Biden administration have done more to secure Bagram or transfer ISIS-K prisoners outside of that? And do you now accept that this attack would not have happened had the United States retained control of Bagram?

MS. PSAKI: Well, I can’t speak to the specific case. I’d let it — leave it to the intelligence community to speak to that. So I’d point you to them.

I’d remind you that, as it relates to Bagram, there was a decision made to close Bagram because it wasn’t strategically in the interest of the United States and our national security to keep it open with 5,000 troops there protecting Bagram at a distance that was far away from the capital and far away from where people from the embassy would be evacuated. So, that was the broad-based decision.

I understand you’re asking me a different question than that, but I just wanted to reiterate.

Q  But would he have made the same decision had he known that it would result —

MS. PSAKI: Again, I can’t speak —

Q  — in the deaths of 13 service members?

MS. PSAKI: — to this particular report. I’d point you to the intelligence community.