you re editorializing enormously. how so? february 25th, she said, if you have 5,000 fewer border patrol hours or agents, you have 5,000 fewer border patrol agents, that has a real impact. those are her words. right. it s not politicized. how is that not the case? they announced yesterday they re not doing that. well, but there are reductions and whether it s those border go ahead and report that, he ed. we ve made clear, look 5,000, and we re not doing that. talk to the talk to those who have been laid off and furloughed in the look, you can obviously go to the dhs and she said we re going to be less safe. right. and the impact of the sequester will not all be immediate and if you can predict to me when the sequester will end, if it will end when the republicans will make the fateful decision to fund border patrol agents or fund our national security interests or head start at
napolitano was correct when she said 5,000 furloughs there and whether it would be safe. and how about the timing. immigration he reform, what s the biggest stumbling block? border security. and that is topical and any reporter especially one like ed henry would want to ask the white house press secretary on. there are legitimate responses and simon gave one, of course sequestration is going to hurt, no one is arguing that, don t exaggerate. but jay carney attacking almost ed henry and fox news and he s quote, unquote, editorializing and shows how shallow the response is, go ahead and tell your viewers and readings sequestration doesn t matter. that s a back and forth i might have with simon in the green room. it s not a back and forth you would expect the white house secretary would have with the correspondent of the highest rated cable station in america. megyn: it reminded me of a technique that they used to