John Kelly’s Liar File Keeps Getting Thicker and Thicker

Mother Jones illustration; Photo by Cheriss May/NurPhoto via ZUMA

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

Rob Porter may be gone thanks to his history of domestic violence, but the White House continues to slip on its own banana peels. Today the Washington Post adds another tidbit to the “John Kelly is a liar” file:

During a staff meeting [this morning], Kelly told those in attendance to say he took action to remove Porter within 40 minutes of learning abuse allegations from two ex-wives were credible, according to the officials….“He told the staff he took immediate and direct action,” one of the officials said, adding that people after the meeting expressed disbelief with one another and felt his latest account was not true….At Friday’s meeting, Kelly also told subordinates to convey to other White House aides he cares about domestic violence, according to the officials.

I think it’s safe to say that (a) Kelly lied to his own staff about how quickly he took action, and (b) he lied about giving a shit about domestic violence.

Meanwhile, President Trump says it’s a sad time for Rob Porter and a sad time for the White House. Is it a sad time for the abused women too? Not so much. After all, Trump said, Porter claims he’s innocent. So, you know, maybe nothing happened.

While we’re on the subject, isn’t it odd that the White House never tried to defend Porter after news of his abuse became public? In cases of sexual harassment, you’re dealing with professional misconduct. It makes sense to fire someone who acts badly with subordinates. But you can make a case that (a) Porter’s actions were entirely private, (b) his second wife enthusiastically recommended that the White House keep him, (c) the actions were in the past and Porter regrets them, and (d) he deserves a second chance. Maybe you could even claim that Porter has gone through counseling¹ and then trot out Hope Hicks to say he’s been nothing but a total gentleman with her. I don’t know that this is a great case, but it seems like something you might at least try. Why didn’t they?

¹I assume this isn’t true, but that’s obviously never made a difference in the Trump White House.


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend