Text 4195, 564 rader
Skriven 2007-03-07 23:31:36 av Whitehouse Press (1:3634/12.0)
Ärende: Press Release (0703074) for Wed, 2007 Mar 7
===================================================

===========================================================================
Press Briefing by Tony Snow
===========================================================================

For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary March 7, 2007

Press Briefing by Tony Snow White House Conference Center Briefing Room

˙ Video (Windows) ˙˙Press Briefings


12:13 P.M. EST

MR. SNOW: All right, let me begin with a quick readout of a couple of main
-- do we have audio on? Is this the mic up? Okay.

Just a quick readout on the President's meeting with the co-chairs on the
Commission on Care for America's Returning Wounded Warriors, and also the
Interagency Task Force. The President met with Secretary Shalala and
Senator Dole, and not only thanked them for their service, but there's a
theme running through the meetings, which is that he wants to make sure
that for people who are in service, that there is a seamless transition for
those who are wounded when they return home, or actually the moment they
enter the Department of Defense health care system. At some point, there's
a transition to V.A., and at a later juncture, a transition to life after
V.A. And he wants to make sure that all of those are seamless and that the
needs are taken care of and that the government's duties and
responsibilities are taken care of fully at every step along the process.

Senator Dole certainly has experience in the system. Secretary Shalala, not
merely by virtue of running HHS, but she's also been involved in ongoing
health care efforts in Florida. She did mention, also, that I believe it's
now four straight generations of her family have been in military service,
including a nephew who is deploying to Iraq.

Meanwhile, the Interagency Task Force on Returning Global War on Terror
Heroes, that's the interagency task force that's being chaired by Secretary
Nicholson. Part of what they're doing is taking a look right now at
addressing problems as they become apparent throughout the system, and
dealing with them, and also serving both as a resource and an agent of
action for the Commission on Care for the Wounded Warriors.

Let me also note that at 4:00 p.m. today, Secretary Gates and Chief of
Staff Pete Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, are going to be holding a
briefing at the Pentagon, also, about some ongoing efforts in their own
operation dealing with Walter Reed and Bethesda.

Q It seems this will probably run into a question of money, of whether
there's enough money available. Is the President prepared to offer an
emergency budget request to take --

MR. SNOW: We've got a supplemental coming up. I don't want to try to
prejudice exactly what's -- we're going to figure out a way to meet the
needs of those who have served.

Q Secretary Nicholson seemed to think that everything was pretty much okay,
that these were isolated incidents -- when he was talking outside. Is that
the President's take, too?

MR. SNOW: The President's take is isolated or not, you need to deal with
them. What we want to have is a system that fails no one who has served.
So, you know, I mean, there is certainly plenty of evidence that this has
been a health care system that has had a good record of success. But on the
other hand, we've had some documented failures of late, and you've got to
address those. So at this point the emphasis is not only on making sure
that there's a high standard of care, but it's applied to everybody.

Q Tony, two quick questions. One, yesterday, Secretary Rice (inaudible) the
global human rights (inaudible) at State Department. And she had already
sent a stern warning for a number of countries, like Burma and North Korea
and China, as far as human rights violations are concerned. And Saudi
Arabia and the Iranians are also now standing and asking -- calling on the
U.S. to do something. And as far as human rights violations are concerned,
this time, again U.S. is absent from the United Nations Human Rights
Council, which is really run by the violators of human rights. So where are
we heading now, as far as global human rights are concerned?

MR. SNOW: I'm sorry, that last part, Goyal?

Q The U.N. Human Rights Council --

MR. SNOW: No, I understand the Human Rights Commission, yes.

Q This has been run now by the violators of human rights. And the U.S. is
again absent from this council, this (inaudible).

MR. SNOW: Well, I think our commitment to human rights is well documented,
and we continue to believe that everybody has not only -- we believe in the
dignity of all human life, and what we're trying to do is to extend the
borders of democracy. You've got a freedom agenda that at the core of that
is a firm and fixed belief in human rights. And the President also believes
strongly in having the United Nations live up to the obligations under the
universal declaration of human rights and applying to such situations as
Darfur and around the world. So I think the President's record is clear on
that.

Q A second. Former House Speaker, Mr. Newt Gingrich, he was speaking at
CPAC and he said that U.S. is rewarding North Korea (inaudible) -- and
maybe Iran is next on the -- and why are we rewarding the countries that we
have been against this nuclear program?

MR. SNOW: Well, I think there have been -- again, I don't want to -- I did
not hear Newt's speech, so I don't know precisely how he framed it and I
don't know if that's an exact characterization of the argument or a
paraphrase. But let me say of our position, it is based entirely on what
the North Koreans do. If you take a look at what Chris Hill was saying
yesterday, it was very obvious that the desire here is not to hand out
goodies regardless of what the North Koreans do; instead there's got to be
a very real commitment for us to shut down Yongbyon, and then also to take
down any capacity for enriching uranium or plutonium and accounting for all
those materials and dispensing of them.

So the goals remain the same. And if you take a look at the way in which
the six-party talks are structured, you have at the beginning a 60-day
window. The first thing they've got to do is they've got to close down
Yongbyon and they've got to allow IAEA inspectors back -- that is a key
element. And beyond that there are things that they may become eligible for
in the fullness of time, but they have to engage in actions. They have to
earn it. And that remains -- that's one of the reasons why we think it --
secondly, you also now have within the six-party talks -- it's not
two-party talks, it's not the United States and North Korea. The attempt to
isolate the United States or even to isolate other partners within the
six-party talks is not going to work. There's a unified front here in
dealing with the North Koreans. And that's one of the reasons we feel
confident of the diplomatic approach and hopeful that the North Koreans
will live up to their obligations.

Jim.

Q Tony, have there been any discussions, either with the President or among
staff members, about a pardon for Scooter Libby?

MR. SNOW: I'm not aware of any. And let me just say that -- all of this
conversation/speculation about a pardon, I know, makes for interesting
speculation, but it's just that. Right now Scooter Libby and his attorneys
have made it clear that they're going to try to get a re-trial; if they
don't get that, they're going to get an appeal. And we really haven't been
commenting on any aspect of it.

As we pointed out before, there is a process, you know, and it's available
to anybody who has been convicted in the United States.

Q I've been looking at some of Mark Knoller's carefully culled statistics,
and it seems to suggest that the President, relative to other Presidents in
recent history -- with the exception of his father -- is stingy when it
comes to giving out pardons.

MR. SNOW: I think I would use the term "careful."

Q What does --

MR. SNOW: Because a pardon is not a goodie. And I think it's important, so
I would hesitate to use a term like "stingy." But I think it's something
that's taken very carefully. You've got -- the general process is an
application will go to the pardon attorney, that could be forwarded to the
Department of Justice, which in turn would make a recommendation to the
White House. These are not things that are treated blithely.

Q But what do you think -- both as governor and as President -- what do you
think it tells us about the President's approach to the concept of pardons,
pardons that he's given relatively fewer than other Presidents --

MR. SNOW: I think it means that he takes the process very seriously and he
wants to make sure that in his judgment, anybody who receives one, that
it's warranted. But, again, I would caution against any speculation in this
case.

Q Can I have one more follow-up?

MR. SNOW: Yes, please.

Q I want to know, after the verdict yesterday, because the Vice President's
top aide has been convicted of perjury, I think it's a natural question is,
think about motive, it raises questions about protecting the Vice
President. Does the President feel that any statement/further
explanation/discussion with the American people is necessary at this point,
outside of the legal proceedings?

MR. SNOW: At this point, we are -- our view is that you have an ongoing
legal proceeding, and we're very wary of saying anything that may prejudice
the rights of Scooter Libby as he proceeds to seek a retrial or an appeal.

Q And the questions that are raised among --

MR. SNOW: Well, a lot of questions -- again, you've asked a very -- you've
asked a general question about questions. It's difficult for me to --

Q I'm asking about the very many people in this country who, after
yesterday, are perhaps looking at this in a different way than they were
before, now that there's been a verdict rendered, and that perhaps the
President -- and it speaks to so many issues about the administration --
that perhaps the President wants to -- feels like something is necessary.

MR. SNOW: Well, again, what you're asking -- if you want to try to identify
issues, I think there has been an attempt to try to use this as a great big
wheelbarrow in which to dump a whole series of unrelated issues and say,
"Ah-ha." And it is what it is; it's a case involving Scooter Libby and his
recollections, and we're just not going to comment further on it.

Q It doesn't provide any greater insight into the way the administration
was addressing critics --

MR. SNOW: If you want insight into the way the administration addresses
trouble, I would have you take a look at what's happened with Walter Reed
in the last two weeks.

Q Tony, has the President yet spoken to the Vice President about the
Scooter Libby verdict? Have they discussed it? And what are his thoughts,
to those who say this leaves a cloud over the White House, over the Vice
President, in particular?

MR. SNOW: Kathleen, you've asked me in a different way to answer the same
question I didn't answer with Jim. Let me make it clear. The Vice President
and the President have confidential conversations. They don't share them
with us. Did it come up? I don't know. I can guess. It's a pretty hot topic
today. But not having absolute confirmation, I'm just not going to tell you
"yes" or "no." But, furthermore, they don't share their conversations with
us. So I cannot tell you what they talk about. They don't pass it on to us.
It's one of the reasons why I think there's so much trust, and also
closeness between the two.

Q But, again, Tony, what do you say to those who say this leaves a cloud
hanging over the White House, and in particular the Vice President?

MR. SNOW: How?

Q It's their words. I'm just --

MR. SNOW: I know, but it's -- see, the use of terms like "cloud" -- because
this has come up before -- is, what does that mean? There's an attempt to
impugn ability, or -- this White House takes very seriously its obligations
to the American people. And you've got a President who has made it clear
after the elections that he is going to be aggressive and he is going to be
bold in dealing with the problems that the American people face.

You take a look at the State of the Union address -- immigration reform,
energy, with environmental impacts. You've got education. You've got health
care. These are issues that Americans care about, and care about deeply.
And he is not only talking to Congress, but working with members of
Congress on both sides of the aisle.

No doubt those things are going to come up today in the meeting with the
leadership of the House and Senate when they come over. In addition, on the
war on terror, similarly, there is a real determination to figure out a way
forward that is going to lead to success.

It's okay, I know -- cell phone violation.

Q The kid's home alone. The kid's home alone.

MR. SNOW: Oh, my goodness, more important. Well, if you have to go out
there to have a conversation, we'll let you come back.

Go ahead.

Q Has anyone reached out to Scooter Libby yet?

MR. SNOW: I don't know. I'm not aware of anybody.

Q Excuse me, may I have a question?

MR. SNOW: Sure.

Q And by the way, we hope your physical exam went well yesterday.

MR. SNOW: It -- yes. Although, I set off the radioactivity detectors all
day yesterday. (Laughter.)

Q You did?

Q We can understand why.

MR. SNOW: I had a PET scan, so they fill you up with this nuclear stuff, so
you could -- I mean, you could hear me -- literally, my staff could hear me
down the hall because all the things would start beeping. (Laughter.)

Q We always thought you were radioactive, Tony. (Laughter.)

Q What is your analysis of the fact that so many conservatives and
Republicans are calling for a pardon, whereas the Democrats are --

MR. SNOW: I'm not going to analyze it, Connie. People have strong feelings
about this on both sides.

Q In light of some of the comments that your predecessor, Scott McClellan,
said to me last night, do you feel Scott was deliberately misled by --

MR. SNOW: You know, I wasn't here, and I'm not going to get into it. I just
-- I'm an incompetent witness on that.

Q Does the President believe that the trial showed that members of his
administration leaked classified information?

MR. SNOW: I'm not -- I don't think the President is going to get into the
business of trying to characterize it. The one thing that he has said all
along is that you need to allow the system to work, and he has confidence
in our system of justice.

Q And does he stand by his statement that anyone involved in leaking
classified information will no longer work here?

MR. SNOW: Again, I think what we have to do is just take a look -- first,
what you are trying to do is to draw me into a conversation about matters
that may not have been at trial, but certainly are not appropriate to
comment on at this juncture.

Q But you won't just repeat the standard that anyone who leaked is gone?

MR. SNOW: Again, I'm telling you that I'm staying away from
characterizations of things that may arise in court.

Paula.

Q Former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan yesterday said that there's a
possibility of a recession by the end of the year. This contrasts
considerably with what the President's economic advisors and even this
current Fed Chairman have forecast. Are you at all revisiting the basis of
your economic outlook?

MR. SNOW: No.

Q Okay. (Laughter.)

MR. SNOW: I hope that was a crisp enough response. (Laughter.)

Q I have an unrelated follow-up.

MR. SNOW: Okay, go ahead.

Q And it does relate to the Libby verdict yesterday. The President has said
that he expects everyone on his staff to uphold the highest ethical
standards. Does the President believe that everyone involved in this has
upheld the highest ethical standards?

MR. SNOW: Again, look, I'm not going to go back and sort of re-litigate it,
but he does insist on the highest ethical standards in this White House.

Q Well, then, excuse me, the fact that he hasn't taken any action against
anyone, does that, indeed, mean that everyone has acted ethically --

MR. SNOW: Again, you're going to ask me to re-litigate the case. There was
only one person on trial yesterday.

Les.

Q Thank you, Tony, two questions. The President, in his addressing the
American Legion yesterday, talked about the importance of both diplomacy
and the need for a robust military strategy in Iraq. And my question: What
is the single most important factor in leaving behind, when the U.S.
military does leave, an Iraq that will not erupt into a conflagration of
terrorist activity?

MR. SNOW: I'm sorry, what was the most important -- I thought there were
two options there; you gave me one. Is there a second part?

Q When they leave behind -- when the U.S. military forces -- what is the
most important to assure that Iraq will not erupt into a conflagration of
terrorist activity, what is the most important --

MR. SNOW: I don't know. I mean, that's an awfully broad -- are you angling
for something? Help me out here; I want to be able to help you.

The fact is that the business of creating peace in Iraq is enormously
complex. If you take a look at the way forward, there is a military
component, there's a diplomatic component, including a regional component.
There's political reconciliation, there's economic development, sectarian
reconciliation.

So all those pieces are essential. I'm not sure that you can bracket out
one and say it, alone, is important -- because you pull out one of those
lights and the entire edifice can collapse.

Q Tony, a second one. As the President's chief media advisor, can you tell
us, Tony, do you honestly believe that the bulk of the American people will
conclude that real justice exists in the United States if Scooter Libby
goes to prison, while Sandy Berger doesn't?

MR. SNOW: Oh, my goodness. Thank you, Les.

Q You just want to evade -- that's newsworthy.

MR. SNOW: If you wish to characterize the non-answer of a crazy question as
an evasion, I will plead guilty. (Laughter.)

Q You think it's crazy?

MR. SNOW: Because what you're asking me to do is to come up with a global
analysis of people's assessment on the character of the system of justice
based on two things that have not happened.

Q Well, he -- Berger is still not -- he's still out, he's not going to
prison.

MR. SNOW: As I said -- he's not gone to prison. Again, you're posing --
you're asking me to get people to -- let me put it this way: I don't think
a lot of people are sitting around their dinner tables, saying, let's think
about these two things -- wow, honey, we really think about the system of
justice; pass the mashed potatoes. (Laughter.)

Q You think there's no injustice if Berger goes loose and he goes to
prison?

MR. SNOW: I think it's a wonderful thing to ponder, and I'll ponder it.

Q That's all?

MR. SNOW: Yes, that is all.

Q Okay, thank you.

Q Tony, the President said yesterday that the upcoming security conference
in Baghdad would be a test for both Iran and Syria. Iran has now said it's
definitely attending. Do you have anything specific in mind, in terms of
how Iran would pass that test? Anything specific you're looking for at this
conference?

MR. SNOW: No, again, as we've made clear all along, the purpose of this
conference is to deal with issues of Iraq. And the Iraqis are running the
conference, and we are happy to be participants. But I want to guard
against the notion that somehow we are -- there's a temptation to turn
something like that into an expectation that there's going to be a
bilateral conversation about unrelated matters, and that sort of stuff.
This is an opportunity for the parties there to be constructive in dealing
with Iraq.

Now there are any number of things that may come to mind, but rather than
have me serve as the person who tries to do the interpretation of that -- I
don't have a clear interpretation of precisely what they had in mind.

Q Of what the President had in mind when he said --

MR. SNOW: Let me give you some options. Number one, to be helpful. Iran
needs to make sure that there is no more exporting into Iraq of people who
are committing acts of terror and also weapons that are being used to kill
Americans and Iraqis and others within Iraq in an effort to disrupt the
government. There are a number of things that the Iranians can do to
demonstrate their bona fides as good neighbors. And we hope they'll do it.

Q Thanks, Tony. Does the President believe that the crimes that Scooter
Libby was convicted of yesterday -- obstruction of justice, lying to the
FBI and two counts of lying to a grand jury -- are serious crimes?

MR. SNOW: Yes, they're serious crimes. But, again, I'm not going to -- you
asked me the description of those crimes. I'm not going to characterize the
issues of Mr. Libby's case for the obvious reasons.

Q Well, you just said they're serious crimes. Are they so serious as to
preclude the possibility of a presidential pardon?

MR. SNOW: Anybody in the United States of America who has been convicted
can apply for a pardon. I am not going to characterize one way or another
what happens in this case when it comes to a pardon, because it's
inappropriate.

Q But can you tell me, has anything changed between yesterday, before the
verdict was announced, and today, after the verdict has been announced, in
terms of Vice President Cheney's stature in the White House? Has his
relationship changed in any way with President Bush?

MR. SNOW: No.

Q Tony, Secretary Shalala seemed to suggest that she heard a certain anger
in President Bush's voice about the Walter Reed issue. Do you describe him
as feeling angry? And do you have a sense of who the other seven people on
this commission may turn out to be?

MR. SNOW: I have a sense, but let's wait until the commission is fully
appointed. As I've noted earlier, when it comes to putting this together,
you get recommendations. And the President asked both Secretary Shalala and
Senator Dole for their ideas, as well. You have to take a look through a
list, then you go through a vetting process. It takes a little bit of time.
You want to make sure you have the right people.

Whether it's anger -- there's certainly passion in it. The President has
made no secret how deeply he feels a sense of affection and admiration for
those who have been serving in all of our Armed Services. And he wants to
make sure that we make good on our obligations to them. And he made it very
clear, he doesn't want anybody sugarcoating the situation. He wants to find
out what the facts are, and he wants people to come up with sensible
solutions to the problems, and he wants to get them enacted as swiftly and
effectively as possible.

And that is why you've got a three-layered approach. You've got the
Department of Defense looking at Washington-area facilities -- Bethesda and
Walter Reed -- you have the interagency task force taking a broader look.
We're concentrating at this juncture on the war on terror and the people
who are coming back. And then the commission, with Senator Dole and
Secretary Shalala taking an even broader look at the entire system to make
sure that there are no discontinuities from people from the time they leave
the theater of battle to the time they enter the Defense Department health
care system, to the time they go into the V.A., for the rest of their
lives, we want to make sure that there's continuity of service so that
people do not fall in the cracks.

Q Tony, is there any internal machinery, so to speak, here at the White
House, that is still investigating the Plame matter and the leak of her
name?

MR. SNOW: Investigating? In what --

Q Still looking into -- I just -- (inaudible) -- the White House looked
into it?

MR. SNOW: No, I think that's why you have -- that's why you have -- and the
solution was to find a special council.

Q So nobody in the White House is --

MR. SNOW: Do we have a Plame task force? No.

Q And, Tony, in retrospect, does the President feel it was wise to appoint
a special prosecutor in this case? And is he satisfied with Patrick
Fitzgerald's work?

MR. SNOW: I'm not going to characterize. The President has said that he
appreciates the diligence and professionalism of Mr. Fitzgerald. We're not
going to get into the business of second-guessing.

Q Had he to do over again, would he --

MR. SNOW: I don't ask him those questions, and I doubt he -- look, the
emphasis on this White House is to figure out what the tasks are before you
and to deal with them, and looking forward. So that's kind of one of those
questions that maybe, sometime in the dim and distant future, he'll be
talking about. But I've heard no conversation about it.

Q Tony, a question not about the legal process, but about a previous White
House statement. In 2003, this White House made it very clear that neither
Scooter Libby nor Karl Rove was involved in the leak. Does that public
denial need to be corrected?

MR. SNOW: Again, you're asking me things that predate me, and I'm not going
to try to get into parsing it.

Q Well, in that respect, though, then why did the President change the
grounds of dismissal for "anyone involved" to "anyone convicted"? And would
it be accurate --

MR. SNOW: I'm not sure that there has been a change, Paula. I just --

Q Well, there's a difference between "anyone involved" and "anyone
convicted," isn't there? I mean, you can act unethically, but not be proven
to have acted --

MR. SNOW: Well again, you've bundled a whole lot of things -- a lot of
presumptions into a question, and I'm not sure I accept any of them.

Q But what is the policy? Is it "anyone involved," or "anyone convicted"?

MR. SNOW: You know, I'm going to let the President's words stand.

Thank you.

Q But they were different words.

MR. SNOW: I don't think so. The words have been pretty consistent.

END 12:38 P.M. EST
===========================================================================
Return to this article at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/03/20070307-4.html

 * Origin: (1:3634/12)