🔗 Share this article Ignorance is BS: Speaker's Go-To Response on Trump's Misdeeds is Repeatedly 'I Don't Know' The US House Speaker, Mike Johnson, has crafted a repeated tactic when pressed about controversial actions from Donald Trump or officials of his team. His answer is typically some version of "I haven't heard about that." When pressed about the newest report from the Trump administration, Johnson, a Republican from Louisiana, repeatedly states he is in the dark—including as recently as last week regarding allegations about a controversial U.S. military strike. Compared to past leaders, who oversaw House proceedings and worked to hold the executive branch responsible, Johnson's tactic is both unusual and an abandonment of that position's traditional duty, according to scholars on the U.S. Congress. “It’s pretty rare for a House leader to plead ignorance about what the president is doing, particularly as often as Speaker Johnson,” said Matthew Green, a politics professor. “The president is a pretty prominent figure... and this president especially is a master of getting attention.” While lawmakers frequently avoid answering questions, Johnson's tendency of doing so is especially noteworthy because of the powerful place the speaker holds in government. “Only a handful of positions are mentioned explicitly in the constitution; the speakership is one of them,” Green said. “I would say it’s absolutely the responsibility of the speaker to be aware of what the president is doing and saying.” A Strategy of Professed Ignorance There are at least 14 notable cases of Johnson claiming he had not been briefed to review information on a major event from the Trump administration. These encompass questions about: Individuals pardoned by Trump. Actions by federal immigration authorities. The president's business interests. The use of the military. Notable Instances In May, after Trump hosted a exclusive event for top investors in a cryptocurrency tied to him, sparking ethical questions, a news host challenged Johnson. “I really have a difficult time imagining that if this was a Democratic president... you wouldn’t be outraged,” the host said. Johnson responded: “I don’t know anything about the dinner... I’m not going to comment on something I am completely unaware of.” Later, in October, after Trump pardoned a crypto executive convicted of money laundering, a reporter asked Johnson if he was concerned by the president's statement that he didn't know the individual. “I don’t know anything about that. I didn’t see the interview,” Johnson said. He also claimed he didn't “have any information” about a pardoned January 6 rioter who was later arrested for allegedly threatening a congressional leader. “It strains credulity that the speaker of the House would be uninformed of what a president is doing when it’s widely reported among reporters and on social media,” Green said. Deflection and Justification Johnson also frequently justifies the president or says it’s not his responsibility to address the issue. When questioned about Trump reportedly accepting a luxury jet as a gift from Qatar, Johnson allegedly deployed multiple tactics: claiming ignorance, defending the action, and stating it wasn't his concern. “I’m not following all the developments... I have definitely heard about it,” Johnson told reporters. “My impression is it’s not a personal gift... I’m going to leave it to the administration... It’s not my lane.” Green pointed out that, logically, “you can’t have all three.” “If you are unaware about it, then how can you justify it? And if it’s not your job, then why are you talking about it? And it is his responsibility, for the record. It’s the job of Congress to ensure that laws are followed,” Green stated. Resources and Strategic Avoidance Experts argue that even if Johnson is personally busy, he has a extensive staff to keep him briefed. “You know damn well there is someone briefing him on all this stuff,” said Larry Evans, a professor of government. “It is not that he is ignorant about it – any more, frankly, than when President Trump claims, ‘Oh, I didn’t know about that.’” Last week, when asked about a major report detailing a potentially illegal military strike ordered by the administration, Johnson's answer was characteristic. “I’m not going to prejudge any of that. I was very busy yesterday. I didn’t follow a lot of the news,” he said. Given Congress’s constitutional power to declare war, analysts argue that claiming no knowledge on such a matter is an failure of responsible governing. Political Calculus Analysts recognize the political reasons behind Johnson's strategy. The speaker doesn't just leads the chamber but also a thin majority party, so he must work to keep his conference together. “I think he sees his role as leader of his party and supporter to the White House as paramount,” said one analyst. Still, “his loyalty to Trump is somewhat exceptional.” Furthermore, in the fast-paced news cycle of Trump's current administration, consistently saying "I don't know" can be an useful strategy. “Just saying ‘I have no comment’ – and knowing that probably in 12 hours there will be new controversy that people are thinking about – it’s not a bad strategy,” concluded one observer.
The US House Speaker, Mike Johnson, has crafted a repeated tactic when pressed about controversial actions from Donald Trump or officials of his team. His answer is typically some version of "I haven't heard about that." When pressed about the newest report from the Trump administration, Johnson, a Republican from Louisiana, repeatedly states he is in the dark—including as recently as last week regarding allegations about a controversial U.S. military strike. Compared to past leaders, who oversaw House proceedings and worked to hold the executive branch responsible, Johnson's tactic is both unusual and an abandonment of that position's traditional duty, according to scholars on the U.S. Congress. “It’s pretty rare for a House leader to plead ignorance about what the president is doing, particularly as often as Speaker Johnson,” said Matthew Green, a politics professor. “The president is a pretty prominent figure... and this president especially is a master of getting attention.” While lawmakers frequently avoid answering questions, Johnson's tendency of doing so is especially noteworthy because of the powerful place the speaker holds in government. “Only a handful of positions are mentioned explicitly in the constitution; the speakership is one of them,” Green said. “I would say it’s absolutely the responsibility of the speaker to be aware of what the president is doing and saying.” A Strategy of Professed Ignorance There are at least 14 notable cases of Johnson claiming he had not been briefed to review information on a major event from the Trump administration. These encompass questions about: Individuals pardoned by Trump. Actions by federal immigration authorities. The president's business interests. The use of the military. Notable Instances In May, after Trump hosted a exclusive event for top investors in a cryptocurrency tied to him, sparking ethical questions, a news host challenged Johnson. “I really have a difficult time imagining that if this was a Democratic president... you wouldn’t be outraged,” the host said. Johnson responded: “I don’t know anything about the dinner... I’m not going to comment on something I am completely unaware of.” Later, in October, after Trump pardoned a crypto executive convicted of money laundering, a reporter asked Johnson if he was concerned by the president's statement that he didn't know the individual. “I don’t know anything about that. I didn’t see the interview,” Johnson said. He also claimed he didn't “have any information” about a pardoned January 6 rioter who was later arrested for allegedly threatening a congressional leader. “It strains credulity that the speaker of the House would be uninformed of what a president is doing when it’s widely reported among reporters and on social media,” Green said. Deflection and Justification Johnson also frequently justifies the president or says it’s not his responsibility to address the issue. When questioned about Trump reportedly accepting a luxury jet as a gift from Qatar, Johnson allegedly deployed multiple tactics: claiming ignorance, defending the action, and stating it wasn't his concern. “I’m not following all the developments... I have definitely heard about it,” Johnson told reporters. “My impression is it’s not a personal gift... I’m going to leave it to the administration... It’s not my lane.” Green pointed out that, logically, “you can’t have all three.” “If you are unaware about it, then how can you justify it? And if it’s not your job, then why are you talking about it? And it is his responsibility, for the record. It’s the job of Congress to ensure that laws are followed,” Green stated. Resources and Strategic Avoidance Experts argue that even if Johnson is personally busy, he has a extensive staff to keep him briefed. “You know damn well there is someone briefing him on all this stuff,” said Larry Evans, a professor of government. “It is not that he is ignorant about it – any more, frankly, than when President Trump claims, ‘Oh, I didn’t know about that.’” Last week, when asked about a major report detailing a potentially illegal military strike ordered by the administration, Johnson's answer was characteristic. “I’m not going to prejudge any of that. I was very busy yesterday. I didn’t follow a lot of the news,” he said. Given Congress’s constitutional power to declare war, analysts argue that claiming no knowledge on such a matter is an failure of responsible governing. Political Calculus Analysts recognize the political reasons behind Johnson's strategy. The speaker doesn't just leads the chamber but also a thin majority party, so he must work to keep his conference together. “I think he sees his role as leader of his party and supporter to the White House as paramount,” said one analyst. Still, “his loyalty to Trump is somewhat exceptional.” Furthermore, in the fast-paced news cycle of Trump's current administration, consistently saying "I don't know" can be an useful strategy. “Just saying ‘I have no comment’ – and knowing that probably in 12 hours there will be new controversy that people are thinking about – it’s not a bad strategy,” concluded one observer.