AGORA

Agora debate ·

Trump's new press secretary faces scrutiny over legal credentials

Newly appointed White House Press Secretary Katie Zacharia is facing intense scrutiny over her legal credentials, just days after her appointment by President Donald Trump. Despite repeatedly describing herself as a lawyer and being introduced by President Trump as an "attorney," journalists have found no evidence that Zacharia is licensed to practice law in any U.S. state or the District of Columbia. A watchdog group, Campaign for Accountability, has filed a complaint with the State Bar of California, alleging she may have violated state law by presenting herself as a lawyer without a license.

The question

Does Trump's new press secretary deserve the criticism she's facing

Yes 71%No 29%

28 players picked a side before playing.

Play this story

The best arguments

Written by Agora players and ranked by Agora's AI reasoning score. Shown without names.

  • Voters will absolutely be exposed to the new press secretary's credentials, especially due to the publicity of her first briefing, which many people already criticize unduly, and her response to having passed the bar in China. The California State Bar has made a statement, and a formal complaint has been made. Many voters already have seen these clips, and that exposed alone is enough to influence how they view the new press secretary. Because of this, it is absolutely reasonable for the question of the press secretary's credentials, whether it is valid or not, to influence the perspective of voters insofar as the trustworthiness and technocracy of this administration. It would be unfair to remove the new press secretary, simply because there is a question of her credentials, if she is qualified; however, the publicity of her so-called, though incredibly overstated, "inadequacy" is enough to negatively influence the falling reputation of the administration prior to the midterms, thereb

    A player · strong argument

  • I think people are going hard on her. I would understand if she was still misspeaking or stumbling over her words months into the job but it was a first day being press secretary so mistakes are going to happen. As for the lawyer claim she did some work in China about International Transaction Law. She was hired there so she had at least some qualification for working there. While she didn’t pass the bar in either the United States or China, she worked as an associate for the law firm she was at in China. She is listed as an associate on the Zhong Lin Law firm in China. Associates are lawyers but just beginner lawyers so she was a lawyer in some capacity.

    A player · strong argument

  • We are doing both simultaneously as I already briefed you on. Your line of questions seem disingenuous. It made most sense to remove her but keep her employed with the administration because if the investigation ends up concluding in her favor we want to retain her but if the findings go against her we don’t want her to have been continuing work within the press office that whole time when she shouldn’t be. It’s similar to people in other fields being placed on administrative leave until the conclusion of the investigation. It just makes good common sense, which doesn’t seem so common to you, to not allow her to continue in the current position considering we don’t have all the facts

    A player · decent argument

  • Her credentials are being verified through the appropriate methods and it is not the media’s job to examine that as we have legal procedures for that in place. Again we should let her demonstrate her skills and do her job rather than creating this unnecessary questioning which feels politically motivated given the timing near the mid term election

    A player · decent argument

  • If you asked any member of the public what it meant to be a lawyer, the most likely answer you’d get is “to have passed the bar exam”. It’s such a well known part of credentials and this is such a public position that what the public thinks is of great importance. And now, they don’t think you’re a real lawyer and they think you hoodwinked the administration.

    A player · decent argument

  • I’m not talking about your bar exam status but Zach’s. I don’t want to waste time with reporters asking about her qualifications instead of White House questions

    A player · decent argument

  • The state bar is the one who wanted her dismissed from that position to begin with and we complied with that immediately by appointing a new non lawyer to the position. How is this hard to understand? Are you dumb, mentally deficient, or just asking questions in bad faith?

    A player · decent argument

  • Like I said before, so far the accusations have just been accusations, and any “potential” fraud is just that: potential. Should people have enough evidence to substantiate any fraud or illegal activities, they are more than welcome to take the correct legal action, and the White House should and will cooperate. This way the truth can be seen, instead of simply having a political mud-slinging contest. Should no one put forth any legal action, than it shows they didn’t have any evidence and/or were simply trying to slander a new Trump appointee. And honestly that last bit is the crux of the issue. Any Trump appointee is going to be criticized simply for being picked by Trump. Similar to when the media was up in arms when she was stuttering during her first conference (most likely from reasonable nerves), the opposition is trying to find whatever they can to discolor this woman. To be fair, if the little evidence that has been found so far is any indication, it seems they don’t have much

    A player · decent argument

In this game

  1. Which of these is Trump’s new press secretary, Katie Zacharia?
  2. In which country did Trump's new press secretary claim she passed the bar exam?
  3. Which tweet is real?
  4. Immersive Command Mode
Play this story

See every story