CNN’s Jake Tapper has vowed to blacklist Republicans who question the results of the 2020 presidential election, despite giving Stacey Abrams a platform in 2018 to do just that and claim election interference following her loss to now-Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp (R).
During an appearance last week on Kara Swisher’s New York Times podcast, “Sway,” Tapper insisted “there’s about a third of the House Republican caucus that I am willing to book” and offered to provide names of those who he felt safe enough to interview.
Following his comments on the podcast, Tapper released a statement to Politico Playbook, attempting to backtrack and say this “isn’t a policy,” but rather a “discussion” on whether to continue having on certain Republicans.
This isn’t a policy, it’s a discussion I think everyone in the news media should be having. Should those who shared the election lie that incited the deadly attack on the Capitol and that continues to erode confidence in our democracy be invited onto our airwaves to continue to spread the Big Lie? Can our viewers count on these politicians to tell the truth about other topics? This isn’t an easy conversation for some folks — especially for journalists who work for organizations where the Big Lie was platformed — but that’s all the more reason to have this conversation.
Tapper’s stance on the issue is being widely viewed as partisan position as he previously gave Abrams a platform in 2018 when she claimed there was deliberate interference in the gubernatorial race she lost.
When asked whether she believed there was “deliberate interference” in Georgia’s 2018 gubernatorial race, Abrams responded, “Yes. And I believe it began eight years ago with the systematic disenfranchisement of more than a million voters.”
“It continued with the underfunding and disinvestment in polling places, in training and in the management of the county delivery of services,” Abrams added. “And I think it had its pinnacle in this race.”
During her appearance on Tapper’s program, Abrams also refused to acknowledge Kemp as the legitimate winner of the election.
“The law, as it stands, says that he received an adequate number of votes to become the governor of Georgia, and I acknowledge the law as it stands,” Abrams said at the time. “I am a lawyer by training and I have taken the Constitutional oath to uphold the law.”
When pressed on the issue and asked once more at the time on whether she viewed Kemp as “the legitimate governor-elect of Georgia,” Abrams said, “He is the person who won the adequate number of votes to become the governor.”
“He is the legal governor of Georgia,” Abrams continued. “Words have meaning. I spent my lifetime not only as an attorney but as a writer and I’m careful of the words I choose. When he takes the oath of office he will be the legal governor of the state of Georgia, the legal victor.”
“What you are looking to me to say is that there was no compromise of our democracy and there should be some political compromise in the language I use and that’s not right,” she added. “What’s not right is saying that something was done properly when it was not. I will never deny the legal premature that says he is in this position and I pray for his success.”
“But will not I say that this election was not tainted, was not a disinvestment and disenfranchisement of thousands of voters,” Abrams concluded.