10 October 2001
Transcript: White House Daily Briefing, October 10, 2001
(President's schedule, Dr. Rice/media awareness in airing bin Laden,
Negroponte letter to Iraqi envoy to U.N., further expansion of war
outside of Afghanistan, Afghanistan/food aid, President/Tony Blair
relationship, other foreign policy issues/President's involvement,
Vice President's whereabouts, homefront/what Americans can do,
war/actions against other countries, anthrax cases, intelligence
leaks/President's response, trade promotion authority, stimulus
package, airline security bill, bipartisanship/bills) (7290)
White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer briefed:
Following is the White House transcript:
(begin transcript)
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
October 10, 2001
PRESS BRIEFING BY ARI FLEISCHER
INDEX
-- President's schedule
-- Secretary Paige/Pledge of Allegiance in schools
-- Dr. Rice/media awareness in airing bin Laden
- Possible censorship
- bin Laden's ability to communicate
-- Negroponte letter to Iraqi envoy to U.N.
-- Further expansion of war outside of Afghanistan
-- Food aid being destroyed by the Taliban
-- President/Tony Blair relationship
-- Other foreign policy issues/President's involvement
-- Vice President's whereabouts
-- Homefront/what Americans can do
-- War/future actions against other countries?
-- Other anthrax cases?
-- Intelligence leaks/President's response
-- Trade promotion authority
-- Stimulus package
-- Airline security bill
-- Bipartisanship/bills
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
PRESS BRIEFING BY ARI FLEISCHER
The James S. Brady Briefing Room
12:15 P.M. EDT
MR. FLEISCHER: Good afternoon. I want to give you a fill-in on the
President's day, and then be happy to take your questions. The
President this morning met with Speaker Hastert, Leader Daschle,
Minority Leader Lott, and Minority Leader Gephardt to continue their
bipartisan discussions about the congressional agenda. They discussed
making progress on the issues of the aviation security bill, the
counterterrorism bill, on the stimulus and the importance of moving to
get the economy recovering. They discussed -- discussions about
intelligence-sharing on Capitol Hill.
Following that meeting, the President convened a meeting of his
National Security Council where they met for approximately one hour.
And then the President visited the FBI to make an announcement about
the top 22 most wanted terrorists, which the President concluded that
announcement just a short time ago.
Early this afternoon, the President will meet with NATO's Secretary
General Lord Robertson to discuss coalition allied efforts in the war
against terrorism. And then in a domestic event, he will do a drop-by
at the White House briefing for Prison Fellowship Ministries
Leadership. That's a meeting that involves the importance of
faith-based solutions to help reduce recidivism among the prison
population, so that when they come out they can enjoy lives of liberty
that are crime-free. It's been a very successful program in many of
the nation's prisons, and it's another sign of the domestic agenda
that the President would like to move forward on.
And finally, this afternoon the President will participate in a
credentialing ceremony for several newly-appointed ambassadors to the
United States.
One brief announcement: The President will welcome President Arroyo of
the Philippines to Washington on November 20th.
Two announcements. In addition, I just want to let you know Secretary
Paige announced yesterday that this Friday, October 12th, America's
schoolchildren will be invited to participate in what's called a
Pledge Across America. That will be a nationwide, synchronized Pledge
of Allegiance. The Pledge will begin at 2:00 p.m. Eastern Time, and
identical times across the time zones across the United States, so
1:00 p.m. Central Time, noon Mountain Time, 11:00 a.m. West Coast
Time. The students will be asked to simultaneously take the Pledge.
It's an opportunity for American schoolchildren to be a part of a
nationwide display at this time, as people ask, what can we do to help
the United States. This is one of the things that the Secretary of
Education has asked schools to do.
He yesterday sent letters to over 100,000 school principals across the
country to encourage them and their students to join in the program.
President Bush will participate here from the White House, while
hosting a reception for Hispanic Heritage Month, beginning at 2:00
p.m. here at the White House.
With that, I'm happy to take questions. Ron?
QUESTION: Can you tell us about the discussions the White House has
had with the networks about their coverage?
MR. FLEISCHER: Yes. Dr. Condoleezza Rice, the National Security
Advisor, this morning called a group of network executives to raise
their awareness about national security concerns of airing
pre-recorded, pre-taped messages from Osama bin Laden that could be a
signal to terrorists to incite attacks. It was a very collegial
conversation. At best, Osama bin Laden's message is propaganda,
calling on people to kill Americans. At worst, he could be issuing
orders to his followers to initiate such attacks. Dr. Rice asked the
networks to exercise judgment about how these pre-recorded, pre-taped
messages will air. She stressed that she was making a request, and
that editorial decisions can only be made by the media.
Q: And what was their response?
Q: Ari, do you have a sense for what it is, whether this is
propaganda, or do you have suspicions that they may, in fact, be
trying to convey something?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, people are analyzing that now. There are no easy
conclusions to reach, but I think it's rather plain to have these
thoughts, these suspicions about what it could include. That's why, as
Dr. Rice indicated, at best, it's pre-taped, pre-recorded propaganda,
but propaganda of a most insidious nature. At worst, it could be
actually signaling to his operatives.
Q: Do you know of a real message, or a subliminal message? And what
was the response of the networks?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, there is no hard indications, Helen.
Q: Are you just guessing that it's --
MR. FLEISCHER: It's a specific level of concern.
Q: But, I mean, on what basis?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think it's fairly obvious. The means of
communications out of Afghanistan right now are rather limited. One
way to communicate outside Afghanistan to followers is through Western
media.
Q: Do you have the actual message that you're objecting to?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, as I said, it's an expression of concern.
Q: But I mean, should people -- should we all operate on your
impressions? Do you have concrete --
MR. FLEISCHER: Those are decisions that the media makes every day.
Q: And what was the response of the --
MR. FLEISCHER: I won't speak for the network executives. That will be
their determination to make and to share with the public.
Q: Does bin Laden -- does the administration know whether bin Laden
has a track record of doing this? Is that part of the basis on which
this request is made?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I can't speak to track records, I don't have any
indication on that. But the concern, again, is communicating outside
of Afghanistan right now is difficult business. While one way to
communicate, though, is by taking advantage of the ease of
communication -- and, again, what Condoleezza Rice was talking about
was pre-recorded, pre-taped messages that are played in their
entirety. She did not ask for no airing at all. I think it's
appropriate information that you all will make the judgments about how
much to air.
So the request really focused on how it's pre-taped, pre-packaged; you
don't know when it was done and you don't know the sequence in which
these things were done, if there is a sequence. And that's why Dr.
Rice thought it was important to make the call. And I just want to
indicate it's also fair to say, Helen, that the network executives,
who are zealous defenders of First Amendment rights, also just
acknowledge that this is a time of national responsibility and that
they are going to look at this in a very responsible way.
Q: It seems to me that you also will be well-informed if you're able
to analyze these message and so forth. It would redound to your good
to know what the hell is going on.
MR. FLEISCHER: The issue is not whether or not analysts are able to
see these messages, the issue is whether or not terrorists are able to
see these messages.
Q: What specific suggestions did the administration make to the
networks? What would you like to see aired and not aired, or how --
MR. FLEISCHER: Condi did not get at that level. She just made the
networks aware of the potential security implications. But these
judgments are for the networks and for the media to make.
Q: Ari, I'm told that the President made a similar request to the Emir
of Qatar regarding Al Jazeera broadcasts of al Qaeda messages. Is that
correct? Did you raise the issue Qatar, and are they going to do
anything about it?
MR. FLEISCHER: I would have to go back and check and see.
Q: Ari, you used the term "no hard indication." So this is a
suspicion, not information based on, say --
MR. FLEISCHER: That's correct.
Q: -- interviewing anybody who is in custody who might be asked about
--
MR. FLEISCHER: That's correct.
Q: Some analysts say that one issue with the tapes bin Laden -- the
airing of them -- is that he is able to sort of continue to create
fear in the United States and a sense of insecurity, even if they
can't pull off an attack. Are you saying that the White House, that
that isn't part of it, this sort of propaganda side of this that he --
he is still trying to put fear in the United States through those
tapes, and the administration is not reacting to that at all?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, Dr. Rice didn't indicate anything about fear. She
indicated exactly what I said, that at best, that this is a forum for
pre-recorded, pre-taped propaganda, inciting people to kill Americans
would find a public vehicle. And at worst, that it could actually be
the sending of signals. That's what Condoleezza Rice said.
Q: And is there a concern that there might be some kind of prearranged
set of language or something like that, that he would state that would
supposedly trigger --
MR. FLEISCHER: That's a possibility. And I do want to note, right
before I came out here, I saw one notification put up by one cable
station announcing a new policy as far as airing this. And so I think
the media already are coming to their own conclusions and making up
their mind about how to proceed.
Q: If I can just -- one more. You said the analysts -- it's not a
concern that the analysts see these tapes. So has the United States
intelligence community, are they ensuring that they still see these
tapes, either through foreign sources obtaining the tapes if the
networks are not going to show them here, or are the networks
providing them to the government? How are the analysts getting the
tapes?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think it's obvious that anything that's broadcast
from al Jazeera on TV, which is how this is first made public, is
available to analysts.
Q: Ari, if there is there is this level of a concern, why was this a
request and not a demand? And was something stronger than a request
considered at the White House?
MR. FLEISCHER: I appreciate the opportunity to say that we are in a
position to make such demands, but we're not. The media makes these
decisions for themselves. That's part of the job of the media and the
responsibility of the media. And that's why it is literally a request.
Q: So that type of censorship is not under consideration? I mean,
you're saying this is a war and in previous wars there has been
censorship. You're saying that type of thing is not now under
consideration at the White House?
MR. FLEISCHER: Keith, that is not censorship. This is a request to the
media, and the media makes their own decisions. And I think a
reasonable request.
Q: No, you said that you're not in a position to demand. In effect,
this government is in a position to demand if it wants. Are you guys
considering --
MR. FLEISCHER: Okay. If you're asking the legal questions about prior
restraint, we haven't gotten -- that's not been discussed.
Q: It's not a legal question. We're asking if real censorship -- I
understand this is just a request -- we're asking if real censorship
is under consideration, demands and not requests.
MR. FLEISCHER: No, there's nothing that I'm aware of like that. This
is why I'm telling you what Dr. Rice did, because I think you have a
right to know. It was a request, and I've shared with you what she
did.
Q: Ari, I'm just wondering, is this request only to American media,
and therefore, the American public, or are you saying that you wish
media all around the world would stop --
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I've reported to you what Dr. Rice did in a phone
call this morning, and so you have that --
Q: I'm asking this request --
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm getting there.
Q: Okay.
MR. FLEISCHER: And so I reported that information about what Dr. Rice
did, in fact, pick up a phone and ask for this morning among the
people she called. But this is a request that, obviously, the concern
here is not allowing terrorists to receive what might be a message for
Osama bin Laden calling on them to take any actions. So by virtue of
the fact that I am saying it here, others will hear it. I don't know
if there will be any other formal communications to anybody else -- I
don't rule that out. But it will all be in the same vein, that
requests will be made. And I think people are going to take very
seriously their responsibilities as they think through whether they
want to air pre-recorded, pre-taped messages of Osama bin Laden, given
this environment.
Q: You would like to see this same kind of thought about restraint,
anyway, in the rest of the world?
MR. FLEISCHER: Larry, what we would like to see is an environment in
which terrorists are not able to receive messages because Osama bin
Laden is in a position where he can't send them through routine means,
most likely picking up a phone, et cetera. And we want to make certain
that terrorists are not advantaged by receiving information from Osama
bin Laden, wherever that source may be. We live in an open society, we
live in a free society. These are requests.
Q: Let me follow up. You told us that you made this request of the
American networks. Why can't you tell us what countries you've made
this request of, as well?
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm not aware that we have done that, of any other
countries. I can just tell you that Dr. Rice made this phone call this
morning.
Q: Can you find out, though, if we have made the request of any other
countries?
MR. FLEISCHER: I'll be happy to.
Q: And, if not, why not?
MR. FLEISCHER: Listen, I will be -- Ron, I will be more than happy to
share all the information about who any such requests are conveyed to.
It's an important issue. I think people are going to very quickly
realize it and think about it for themselves, and come to conclusions
without even being asked. The more the word gets around, the better.
But I'd be more than happy to share information with you, but there's
just nothing to report right now, to give you a literal answer. Dr.
Rice made the phone calls just hours ago.
Q: Can I clarify one thing? I believe you said that Condi was
suggesting that we not run them in their entirety, not that nothing be
reported from them or --
MR. FLEISCHER: That's correct.
Q: -- no pieces of sound be used.
MR. FLEISCHER: That's correct.
Q: And is a similar request going to be made to newspapers not to
print these things in their entirety?
MR. FLEISCHER: As I indicated, I think there is a good possibility
there may be follow-on conversations, but I don't have any to report
to you.
Q: Who decides that part to run --
MR. FLEISCHER: The media. Helen asked me who decides what part is run;
and the answer is the media.
Q: Do you have anything more on the Negroponte letter to the Iraqi
envoy to the United Nations? Was he reacting to some knowledge of a
specific or possible threat, or was that really preemptive?
MR. FLEISCHER: It's -- I think preempted is a good word. It was made
clear that it's important for Iraq not to see the current
circumstances as an opportunity to act against their own population or
to act against any neighboring states.
Q: It was pretty strongly worded.
MR. FLEISCHER: Appropriately so.
Q: It said that Iraq will be attacked and it will be defeated.
MR. FLEISCHER: Now, wait a minute. Where did you get that language?
Q: That was the language as I saw it expressed. It said that there
will be an attack, and Iraq will be defeated.
MR. FLEISCHER: I want to make certain that you're not confusing the
letter that was sent to the Secretary General -- or the President of
the United Nations Security Council that was sent by Negroponte,
because that letter did not say that.
Q: If I could follow on that point, though. There's a letter to Iraq
from the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations putting them on notice.
There's the broader letter which you describe as routine, to the
Security Council saying the United States reserves the right to expand
outside of Afghanistan. The President today releases this list of 22
people, some of whom are known not to be in Afghanistan, and says this
fight will be around the world. Is he now preparing the American
people that the next phase of this campaign would involve operations
including military operations, whether covert or not, elsewhere?
MR. FLEISCHER: John, I think the President made abundantly plain to
the American people and to the world in his speech to the Congress
that the United States will take whatever actions are required to
defend our nation. And he did not indicate whether that would be
limited. Obviously, we are in a phase right now that involves the
Taliban, that involves Afghanistan and the terrorists who are being
harbored there. I'm not going to go beyond that and give any
indications whatsoever about any possible additional operations,
whether they exist or don't.
Q: Is Dr. Rice the only official who has been placing these calls or
are any other officials calling to, say, not only media, but
columnists? Is there anything to that?
MR. FLEISCHER: Again, I'm going to be more than happy to share any
such information with you. Dr. Rice's is the only phone call that I'm
aware of. If there are any others, I just haven't heard about it yet.
That's the only one I know about.
Q: A former general says this is a very unusual campaign in
Afghanistan because for the first time in his knowledge, we're
fighting them and feeding them at the same time. A representative of
the Taliban says that the humanitarian rations being dropped in the
thousands over the past few days are being gathered up and burned. Is
that true, or do you have any knowledge that these rations are
reaching the people?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think, again, it's a question you have to ask the
Department of Defense. But I note, also, the State Department has
indicated this, that there are now shipments that are making their way
in on the roads, as well. And this will be a prolonged commitment by
the United States government and by our allies to help feed the people
of Afghanistan.
I think it's notable that the Taliban regime, one of the first actions
they took since the terrorists attacked the World Trade Center and the
Pentagon, was to shut down all the humanitarian relief organizations
that feed their own people. And that is another reminder of why this
is not a war against the people of Afghanistan. And you're hearing
reports now -- I've seen several on the news -- that there are many
refugees who are saying they're looking forward to returning to
Afghanistan and they know that they're going to be fed when they do,
because they understand the motives of our country are to help the
people of Afghanistan.
Q: If I could ask how often President Bush has been speaking,
personally, to Tony Blair? And given the fact that six months ago they
barely knew each other, could you characterize their relationship now?
MR. FLEISCHER: They've been speaking rather often, I don't have an
exact, daily account of it. But they speak from time to time. Their
relationship began very strong and has stayed very strong. I've been
present at many of the meetings they had up at Camp David, at
Chequers, and it's very interesting, because you have a Prime Minister
who comes from the Labor Party, a President of the United States who
comes from the Republican Party, and, clearly, in this instance their
interests and their world outlook have a very strong overlap. The two
stand shoulder to shoulder.
Q: Is it fair to say, since the tape of Osama bin Laden was released
on Sunday and you haven't said anything until today, which is
Wednesday, are you more concerned about the second videotape by the
aide to Osama bin Laden, the one that aired yesterday?
MR. FLEISCHER: Dr. Rice's remarks, I believe, were focused on Osama
bin Laden. I don't recall, frankly, if she also broadened it to the
spokesperson.
Q: The first tape, that everyone saw on Sunday?
MR. FLEISCHER: What about that?
Q: Her remarks were focused on that tape, and not --
MR. FLEISCHER: Yes, her remarks were focused on that tape. But I don't
rule out that it could be focused on any additional. The issue is
pre-recorded, pre-taped information that obviously sits in a can and
is released at a timing and in a manner of Osama bin Laden's choosing.
It's not as if it's a live interview that any of you all would do. I
think if somebody were to have a live interview, that's not -- Condi
Rice made it perfectly plain that's not what she's talking about. If
somebody had a live interview, in the news category that's obviously
not a premeditated, pre-designed, pre-taped package message that sits
in a can.
Q: If you were Osama bin Laden would you give a live interview right
now on satellite feed -- (laughter.)
MR. FLEISCHER: Connie.
Q: What's the status of any other foreign policy initiatives --
Israel-Palestinian, Northern Ireland, antidrug campaign? Are they all
totally on the back burner now?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, they're actually moving forward. I know the
President, when he met with the members of the Foreign Relations and
the International Relations Committees, he talked about progress being
made in Macedonia. And so the domestic agenda is quieter, but it still
proceeds, it still is important. Other areas of the world still
present important issues to the United States. And in a good part
during the meeting with the Foreign Relations members yesterday,
International Relations members yesterday, the President discussed
prospects for peace in the Middle East.
Q: Ari, two things. First, you said that it's tough to get information
out of Afghanistan right now. By that, are you suggesting that bin
Laden and the Taliban -- or bin Laden's network has lost the ability
to use the Internet, for instance, or to pick up a satellite cell
phone and use that? Secondly, unrelated question. The Vice President's
whereabouts we still don't know anything about. What kind of a signal
does that send to the American people and to the world, both about his
safety and, frankly, about the President's safety?
MR. FLEISCHER: On the first point, about the ability of Osama bin
Laden and his followers to communicate from Afghanistan, I think the
most accurate way to say it is they face certain challenges in
communicating out of their country, right now.
As for the Vice President, he does remain at a secure location and
that's taken for security purposes. And I think that people understand
that. It's a reflection of the times that we're living in. It's also a
reflection of the importance of making certain that all security
arrangements are considered.
Q: On the home front, Ari, Governor Ridge said Monday, we will find
something for every American to do. Can you give us specifics on that?
And wouldn't specifics, like a national neighborhood watch or whatever
help people feel safer and more useful --
MR. FLEISCHER: I think what the Governor was reflecting is, he said,
many people come up to him and say, what can I do. And there are a
host of things that people can do. And many of them are in the area of
support, such as what Secretary Paige announced the other day, that I
just related to you, about the Pledge of Allegiance for all the school
children. I think, frankly, for the hundreds of thousands potential
schoolchildren who are going to do that, they're going to go home and
tell their parents and it's going to make them feel really good about
the role that they played. And that's the type of thing. There may be
other activities for people to do, and I think the Governor will have
further statements to make about that.
Q: -- shopping malls and unattended bags in airports --
MR. FLEISCHER: At that level, if you're asking on the security front,
it's vigilance. It's people being aware of their unusual circumstances
that were not previously there. You know, many nations in Europe, for
example, have more history, more practice with this. Israel, for
example, has more history, unfortunately, more practice with this. And
so it can be types of things on a security front, but it's also types
of things -- you know, everybody sending a letter to our servicemen
and women who are now abroad. If Americans of all ages send somebody a
letter, that's a time-honored American tradition, and it sure makes
the troops feel good.
Q: On the subject of the broader war against terrorism, which
officials who stand behind this podium are only too happy to remind us
of on a daily basis, it would be difficult for this country to launch
similar operations against other countries as it has against
Afghanistan; it would be difficult to build that propaganda wheel. So
do you foresee future action as being held in conjunction with local
governments and law enforcement?
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm sorry, I'm not sure I understand your question.
Q: Future actions in the broader war against terrorism. It would be
difficult for them to take on the same appearance as they do in
Afghanistan. So, do you envision future actions to combat terrorism in
other countries as being done in conjunction with local governments
and law enforcement?
MR. FLEISCHER: As I indicated earlier, I'm not going to speculate
about any potential actions in any other countries.
Q: Ari, first of all, have there been any other new anthrax cases that
you're aware of at this point?
MR. FLEISCHER: The investigation is continuing in Florida, and my most
recent update continues to indicate that there is the one person who
died last week of anthrax. There is a second person who has an
exposure to anthrax that was diagnosed in one nostril, and that is the
latest status report that I have received.
Q: Just more broadly speaking, though, because of these reports and
because of a lot of false alarms, there is enormous fear out there. Is
the administration trying to, in any way, coordinate how you get this
information out to the public? Is that something that would fall under
Ridge's job, for example, especially given what people are seeing
coming out of the administration now is what appears to be a
clamp-down on information, with phone calls to the media, with the
attempt to crack down on --
MR. FLEISCHER: Don't confuse the two. There will be a clamp-down on
information if it's classified. Classified information should not be
in the public realm, and the administration will work very hard to
make sure that it's not.
Totally different situation when it comes to, for example, the issue
you raised involving public health. There is a very, very proactive
effort to get information into the hands of people in Florida, for
example, who work in or who visited the AMI building. There have been
a series of announcements made by federal health officials and local
health officials on the ground down there. Every effort is being made
and will continue to be made to get information to anybody who has any
questions at all -- any parents who are wondering what to do about
children, any questions that parents or visitors have. All those
issues are being aggressively and publicly addressed in Florida, and
will continue to be.
As you pointed out, at a time like this there will also be false
alarms. Despite any false alarms, the government will continue to
investigate and to work with people and to help everybody get to the
bottom of it. And that is the system that is set in place by the
Centers for Disease Control, working with the Federal Department of
Health and Human Services under Secretary Thompson. Governor Ridge is
also involved in those efforts.
Q: Yesterday, the President made clear his point about leaks. He's had
breakfast today with congressional leaders. Is the President willing
to go from eight to a higher number of congressmen and senators
getting the information? And, if so, when would this occur?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, let me try to bring you up to speed on where we
are. That issue did come up in the meeting with the four congressional
leaders. And I think it's fair to say, message received. There's no
doubt about it that the importance of keeping classified information
classified has been stressed, and the President hopes that it will be
closely, exactly adhered to.
Having said that, the President did say this morning that he does want
to make certain that the members of the Armed Services Committee, for
example, can be briefed by Secretary Rumsfeld; that the members of the
Foreign Relations Committees can be briefed by Secretary Powell, et
cetera. It's important that members of Congress have information that
they need to do their proper oversight activities; while at the same
time, the President will continue to remind members of Congress about
the importance of keeping classified information classified.
Q: On the same subject, he had the two highest-ranking members of both
the Houses on the Intelligence Committee. Does this mean the same
thing applies to Armed Forces and --
MR. FLEISCHER: As I just indicated, there will be briefings by the
Secretary of Defense to members of the Armed Forces Committees.
Q: I mean, the number of people who can receive this information. He
had the ranking Democrat, ranking Republican on each committee of
Intelligence. Does this mean the same rule will apply to Foreign
Relations and to Armed Forces?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, I think when Secretary Rumsfeld goes up, he will be
talking to all members of the committees.
Q: When the members emerged, their perception was that the
administration was going to be much more careful in what information
it shared; that if it was classified or sensitive, they would share
that information if it was past-tense information, what happened
earlier today or yesterday. And the President made clear he would be
much more reluctant because he doesn't trust them to share "this is
what's going to happen tomorrow" information. Is that fair?
MR. FLEISCHER: I can't speak about past tense; I haven't heard that.
But I can suggest to you that secrets will be kept secret. And the
President knows that he will work with the Congress so that objective
can be achieved. And he was satisfied with the meeting this morning;
the leaders were satisfied with the meeting this morning. So I think
it's fair to say that from the members' point of view, and the
President's, this issue has been addressed. And I hope there is a new
sense of awareness throughout the government about the importance of
keeping information classified.
Q: Ari, is there also a new memo going out from the President -- the
one he sent out was fairly stern and very specific --
MR. FLEISCHER: No, there is no memo forthcoming.
Q: Wait. That one shared very specifically this policy will be in
effect until you are told by me that it is not.
MR. FLEISCHER: I think he actually wrote in there "until further
notice." And the President met this morning with the four leaders of
Congress and gave them some notice.
Q: That memo was written to Treasury, State, Central Intelligence,
FBI, all --
MR. FLEISCHER: The President has many means of communicating with the
people who work for him.
Q: So should we take from that then that the full select committees on
intelligence will now be briefed?
MR. FLEISCHER: The briefings will proceed as I just indicated in
performance with the President's wishes and as he expressed to the
members this morning at the meeting.
Q: Does that mean the full select committees on intelligence?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think just watch events unfold on the Hill and you
will see. And as I indicated this morning, the leaders seemed to be
satisfied.
Q: Last night, the House Ways and Means Committee, on a largely
partisan vote, approved trade promotion authority bill. Is the White
House concerned that if this bill hits the House floor it's going to
do serious damage to your bipartisanship?
MR. FLEISCHER: Trade promotion authority is a vital goal for this
President. The President has always believed that trade promotion
authority, while an issue that has not lent itself to full
bipartisanship, but certainly can't pass without a healthy level of
bipartisanship, is important because it creates jobs, a home for
America's workers; that it's important for developing nations so that
they can have trade that helps them to develop their resources at home
and their economies at home. So the President is committed to passage
of trade promotion authority.
In the past when it's passed, it always has been bipartisan. I remind
you when President Bush proposed it and it last passed in the
Congress, it was a very bipartisan effort. Even though it was opposed
by most Democrats, there were a sufficient number of Democrats who
successfully made it a bipartisan vote. And the administration will
continue to work with those Democrats to make that happen.
Q: You say you regard it as a vital goal. Is it a vital goal of the
anti-terrorism campaign?
MR. FLEISCHER: It was an important foreign policy goal before
September 11th; it's an important foreign policy goal now.
Q: To follow on Jim's question, is it fair to say now that the
President has served notice that this policy is no longer in effect,
or will there be some classified information that will be provided
only to the eight members of Congress that he mentioned?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think it's fair to say that the message the President
said about the importance of keeping classified information classified
remains fully in effect; that the message on the bottom of the memo
about further notice -- I would draw your attention to the subsequent
statements made by the President.
Q: What happens if somebody does leak after this, if Congress has been
put on notice? What happens now --
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm not going to deal with hypotheticals. I'll just
hope it doesn't happen.
Q: Ari, can I ask about the stimulus package? Leader Gephardt told us
this morning that the goal is now to get money into people's pockets
in time for the holidays. Is that the President's goal, too?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President would be very supportive of that. The
President thinks it's important for the stimulus to pass and pass
quickly, and to pass in a manner that gets relief to people quickly.
Q: Ari, just to follow up on that. Mr. Gephardt also said that what
the White House and Congress were talking about are $300-$400 rebate
checks that would go to people who pay payroll taxes, but not income
taxes. Is that indeed --
MR. FLEISCHER: At the meeting this morning they did not get into that
level of specificity. As you remember, the President, when he -- when
the President addressed the issue and announced his stimulus package
on Friday, one of the items the President did say that he thought
should be in here was tax relief for low and middle-income Americans.
Q: Is that specific idea under active consideration?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think it's fair to say the President is looking
forward to working with the Congress to see what they develop that
fits the parameters that he laid out.
Q: He likes that idea?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, again, the President was very clear that he
supports tax relief that helps low and middle-income Americans. That
can be accomplished in a number of ways. He's not going to tie the
hands of Congress on it, he's going to work with Congress on it. But
the President also made clear -- and these are bipartisan ideas --
that such ideas as faster expensing for businesses, so that way they
can make investments that help create jobs is important. And there are
a lot of Democrats who support that. Relief from the corporate
alternative minimum tax, which punishes businesses for investing in
plants and equipment, all of which helps create jobs -- there's a lot
of Democrat support for that, as well.
So the President is optimistic that Congress will move and will move
quickly so the economy can receive an extra jolt, because the
President believes it needs it.
Q: The President wants to get his airline security bill passed as
quickly as possible. How does he hope to pass it quickly if
Republicans in the House won't bring it to the floor?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, as always, there are going to be issues with the
Congress. There are a series of actions that Congress started to take
up that are moving at congressional pace and speed: the aviation
security bill is one; the stimulus has just started up on the Hill;
the counterterrorism bill, certainly, has been discussed for quite a
while up there. There is a whole series of initiatives that move at
congressional pace. The President, by having these meetings with the
members this morning, hopes to move the pace along a little faster.
Q: There's a real fundamental, ideological problem with the airline
security bill with Republicans. What is the President doing to try to
get them to overcome that?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I think it's fair to say that both parties have
ideological issues that they bring to bills that are presented before
them. Many of the Democrats --
Q: Airline security in particular, though?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, on the federalization of the workers. I think
there is no question that there is a group of members of Congress who
want to put all the airline workers on the federal payroll. There are
others who are suggesting that there may be better ways to accomplish
the same goal without making everybody a federal employee. And, as
usual, the President is going to work with Congress and to try to move
it along.
Q: Ari, all of these bills do require a lot of bipartisan work, and
that's been an important goal of the President, especially since
September. But there was a feeling, especially yesterday, on Capitol
Hill that the release of the memo and the tightening of information
with Congress had created a lot of ill will, and some people saying,
this is ricocheting all over the place, it's busting unity that's been
on the Hill, even though it might have been fraying before yesterday.
But does the White House have some concern that the impact of that
memo might have poisoned the waters a little bit, by the time --
MR. FLEISCHER: Jean, I think the members of Congress know that they
have many important responsibilities and that they will work with the
White House, work Democrats with Republicans, Republicans with
Democrats, on behalf of those responsibilities. That includes taking
action so the domestic agenda can move forward, so aviation security
can pass, so counterterrorism activities legislation can pass. And I
think members understand that.
I think members also are pained by what happened. I think they
recognize that they put the President in a difficult spot. Imagine if
the case had been that as a result of a CIA briefing to a committee,
information was revealed that was classified and the President didn't
care or said nothing. I think that also would suggest that classified
information is not being handled in a manner that it should be because
of the serious nature of classified information. And many members on
the Hill are very concerned about the fact that classified information
was leaked. They understand that there are important issues involving
sharing information with the Congress, and they want to see this
matter worked out as well as the President does.
Q: Two questions about the agreement between the President and the
Hill leaders on information. Number one, does it also include
administration officials below the Secretary level, such as Deputy
Secretary Wolfowitz, who was scheduled to testify before Senate Armed
Services before all this came up? And, number two, does it also
encompass committees such as the Appropriations subcommittees that
have jurisdiction over State and Defense, the Judiciary Committee?
MR. FLEISCHER: Again, as I said -- and I think we've pretty well
exhausted this topic -- as I said earlier, the President discussed
these matter with the congressional leaders. The President is
satisfied; the congressional leaders seemed to be satisfied; and I
think this matter will run its course and take care of itself.
Q: Ari, going back to this letter issue, since it's caused a little
bit of a rift, what was the mood going into this meeting this morning?
And was he happy that he had to open the circle up a little bit more
after he closed it down?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, first of all, the meeting discussed many issues.
I have to tell you that from the report I have, the discussion of the
memo was five minutes of an hour-long meeting. Yesterday, when all the
members of the Foreign Relations Committee that were here, it was a
45-minute meeting, and the discussion of the memo took about two
minutes. So I think you could say there is a disproportionate focus in
the media than some of the members when they meet with the President.
Q: Well, what was the tone of that five minutes? (Laughter.)
MR. FLEISCHER: The food was good. I don't know, I wasn't in there for
the meeting, so I couldn't share that. Thank you, everybody.
END 12:54 P.M. EDT
(end White House transcript)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
