Text 4271, 866 rader
Skriven 2007-03-27 23:31:02 av Whitehouse Press (1:3634/12.0)
Ärende: Press Release (0703274) for Tue, 2007 Mar 27
====================================================

===========================================================================
Press Briefing by Dana Perino
===========================================================================

For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary March 27, 2007

Press Briefing by Dana Perino White House Conference Center Briefing Room

˙ Video (Windows) ˙˙Press Briefings


12:33 P.M. EDT

MS. PERINO: Good afternoon. As I was able to tell you this morning, you
know that Tony Snow went into surgery yesterday. He told everyone last
Friday that he was going to have this surgery. You remember that he said
that the doctors had found a small growth, that they had seen over a series
of CAT scans and MRIs, that had been identified on his abdomen. It was in
the area where his previous cancer had been located. Tony called us this
morning and informed us that despite all of our best hopes and
expectations, that his doctors, unfortunately, learned that the growth was
cancerous and there has been some metastases, including to the liver.

This news has obviously saddened everyone at the White House; from the
President and the First Lady, his team, the entire staff, the outpouring
has been quite amazing. You heard from the President in the Rose Garden. Of
course, all of Tony's family is in our prayers. The President said, Tony
should stay strong, and "know a lot of people love you and care for you and
will pray for you." And we'll all look forward to the day when Tony can
come back and take the podium again. Believe me, we're looking forward to
that.

I spoke to Tony briefly this morning, around 9:30 a.m. He told me he was
up, walking around and comfortable. He will remain in the hospital for
several days. That was already part of the plan because it was major
surgery that he had. He did not have a lot more detail. I will try to
answer your questions as best I can, but the ones that I can't answer I
will endeavor to get you the answer, or I'll just have to tell you that
we're not going to be able to answer those questions. Some of them are
privacy concerns and health related.

If you know Tony, then you know that he's a fighter. He plans to take this
on with the advice of his doctors. They are in consultation right now,
talking about an aggressive treatment to go after the cancer that he said
will likely include chemotherapy, but could include other things, as well.
And when I have more on that I can provide that to you, as well. All of us
-- we gain a lot of strength from his optimism. He told me that he beat
this thing before and he intends to beat it again.

The other thing that I would say about Tony Snow is that he doesn't skip a
beat; he had obviously been paying attention to the news and he was really
fired up about the Iraq war supplemental. And I said that I would make sure
that I delivered the President's message today, regardless of this. So if
you'll bear with me -- I don't know if you were able to see it, given the
news this morning, while we were all focused on Tony -- the President did
issue a statement of administration policy on the Senate's Iraq war
supplemental. And just a couple of points -- I'm going to read it from --
just a little bit just to make sure I fulfill my promise to Tony and make
sure that you heard this before we go to questions.

The administration strongly opposes the Senate bill. The legislation would
substitute congressional mandates for the considered judgment of our
military commanders. The bill assumes and forces the failure of the new
strategy even before American commanders in the field are able to fully
implement their plan. Regardless of the success that our troops are
achieving in the field, this bill would require their withdrawal. This and
other provisions would place freedom and democracy in Iraq at grave risk,
embolden our enemies, and undercut the administration's plans to develop
the Iraqi economy. If this legislation were presented to the President, he
would veto the bill.

The war supplemental should remain focused on the needs of the troops, and
should not be used as a vehicle for added non-emergency spending and policy
proposals, especially domestic proposals, which should be fully vetted and
considered on their own merits. This bill adds billions in unrequested
spending that is largely unjustified and non-emergency. And because of the
excessive and extraneous non-emergency spending it contains, if this
legislation were presented to the President, he would veto the bill.

Congress should reject this legislation and promptly send the President a
responsible bill that provides the funding and flexibility our troops need,
and without holding funding for the troops hostage to unrelated spending.

And with that, I'll go to questions. Jennifer.

Q Dana, our thoughts really are with Tony, so if you would pass that on,
we'd appreciate it.

MS. PERINO: Absolutely.

Q Just one quick question, if you're able to answer. During the surgery, do
you know if they were able to take the area out of the liver that was
cancerous? And you mentioned that it had spread to areas, including the
liver. Does that mean it's gone beyond to other areas, as well?

MS. PERINO: I can -- I don't know the answer to the first question, in
regards to if they did any further surgery or -- on the liver at the time.
Again, if I can find that out, I'll let you know, if I can get back in
touch with him today. What he told me is that the small growth that they
had found was in the general area of where the first cancer had originated
those years ago, and that when they went back in, even though the blood
tests have been negative and the PET scans had been negative for cancer,
that they discovered it was cancer, and then he said, and it had spread to
the liver, and there has been some metastases -- plural. So that's as far
as I can go on that.

Kevin.

Q Dana, do you have a sense of how his treatment might differ this time,
versus the first occurrence of cancer?

MS. PERINO: I don't. I know that he's working with the same doctors, at
least a core of the same doctors that he worked with before. And, so,
obviously, they were successful in their first attempts to beat it back
those couple years ago. I think it was just last month that he had reached
the two-year mark of being cancer free.

So he just said that he's in consultations with his doctors, and I think
that they'll -- it will take some time, I think, for them to figure out
what's the best course of treatment. But as soon as I can tell you, and to
the extent that he's comfortable with me being able to share that with you,
I will do so.

Q Dana, where other than the liver? You said metastases, plural.

MS. PERINO: I don't know, he didn't say.

Jonathan.

Q Dana, just two questions. One, when was this growth first detected? And
then a question about the first episode. Do you know at what stage the
cancer was at the time in 2005 that it had actually penetrated --

MS. PERINO: Stage 3, that first -- when he was first diagnosed those years
ago, it was stage 3. I do not know which stage this cancer is that they
found.

Q But when was it that they first detected the growth?

MS. PERINO: This new growth?

Q The new growth, yes.

MS. PERINO: All I know is that he said, "in a recent series of CAT scans
and PET scans and MRIs, we have found a small growth in my lower abdomen."
I don't know specifically, but I do know that as a cancer patient, and many
others who either have cancer patients in their family or are survivors
themselves, you get regular checkups. And he would go in for a checkup
every three to four months. And I believe that this goes back -- maybe just
a couple of the tests before that. They've been keeping an eye on this
growth.

Q How big was the growth, Dana?

MS. PERINO: On Friday he said that it was about the size of the tip of his
pinky finger. And so -- his pinky finger is probably a little larger than
mine.

Q And do you have any information on his family? Obviously, his wife and
his children --

MS. PERINO: I don't. I know that Jill Snow, his wife, was with him at the
hospital today when I spoke to her. Obviously, this is a family that has
been through a lot. And they -- I have never seen such a close-knit family.
They really just love each other so much. They're very supportive. Being a
Press Secretary of the United States -- to the President of the United
States is not an easy job, but Tony really cut out time for his family
whenever he possibly could and they were very close. And so I'm sure that
this is difficult for them. And I know that they appreciate all the prayers
that people are offering.

Q Did he express that he was feeling ill prior to the surgery, or anything
that might have been -- looking back now --

MS. PERINO: No, he said that he felt fine. He said he felt fine.

Helen.

Q How does the President feel about his Republicans on the Hill tossing the
ball back to him and letting him hold the bag, basically, on a veto on
pullout, which is against the will of the American people?

MS. PERINO: Yes, I read reporting this morning that indicated that somehow
the Senate Republicans were defying the President. Actually, that's not the
case. In fact, last week, when the President met with the Senate Republican
leadership, they talked about needing to go ahead and get this vote over
with, and get the bill to the President's desk so he could veto it, so that
they could go on and get to the business of presenting the President a
clean bill.

Q So it was a plan, really?

MS. PERINO: Yes, and if you look at the President's remarks on Friday, he
indicated that.

Q Doesn't this go against the will of the American people who want to pull
out?

MS. PERINO: I think the President has been very clear that they don't want
to pull out if it means losing. And the President has said that --

Q How does losing -- losing what?

MS. PERINO: The President has made it clear that the goal is to make sure
that we can stabilize Baghdad, especially, so that the politicians in
Baghdad can do the work that they need to do in order to reconcile
politically and get the economic engine going, so that the security
situation can not only stabilize in Baghdad, but then spread throughout the
country.

Q At any price?

MS. PERINO: We understand fully the sacrifice that our men and women and
the innocent Iraqis --

Q And you still think it's worth it?

MS. PERINO: We do.

April. We'll go back to Tony.

Q Now that Tony has become more of a public face for cancer, and it's
shaken the White House, can we expect the White House, as it does other
health issues like heart awareness, heart health awareness, can we expect
to see something from the White House as to something on cancer prevention,
something that's been a pet project of Tony's?

MS. PERINO: It's a great question. Obviously, the President and Mrs. Bush
do lots of different focus -- as Mrs. Bush is really focusing on heart
health for women, and we have, obviously, AIDS prevention issues. It's a
good question about cancer prevention. I think -- well, one thing I know
for sure for myself and my team, and -- our team at the White House,
everybody, we are much more aware about cancer and also about the
treatments that people get, and the things that a family goes through when
they go in for their checkups, and there's that huge sigh of relief that
they have whenever that test comes back negative

And so it's a great question. I don't have any specific programs to think
about right now, but I know that we have had some increases in cancer
funding, and especially cancer research funding. And I'll work with Tony
Fratto, we can get you the details on that.

Anybody else? On Tony? Sheryl, then Connie.

Q Dana, a couple more questions on Tony. He went for a series of checkups
recently. There were -- a couple weeks ago he told us he was going off to
Walter Reed, and then I believe he went back again for an MRI. Did
something come up at that Walter Reed checkup that then prompted this
series of --

MS. PERINO: From what he told me and from what I understood -- and again,
I'm not a doctor, so I probably didn't ask all the right questions -- but
he had had the CAT scan and/or the MRI -- I don't know if anyone else
remembers -- but he had the CAT scan. And because the growth -- they
continued to see it and they had seen it had grown over that time period
between the last checkup, there was a decision to do a PET scan and
possibly -- I don't know when the MRI came in. Maybe around the same time.
But the PET scan was, as I understand it, a more in-depth look as to what
was going on with the growth. And so he did that PET scan, and it was from
there that they decided and weighed options about how to go in and tackle
it.

Q And also, last Thursday, when Elizabeth Edwards made her announcement,
Tony spoke rather eloquently about her. And it was only the next day,
Friday, that he told us that he would, himself, be going in for surgery.
Did he talk at all about this being on his mind on Thursday, as he was
speaking --

MS. PERINO: It was on his mind. He had been wrestling with the decision
with his doctors. I think that early on Tony Snow had decided, given the
options, whether laparoscopic surgery and just doing a biopsy, or going in
and doing the full surgery, that that was something he and his family and
his doctors had to weigh. And Tony decided -- I think he told you last week
that he was very -- he's an aggressive cancer patient. And once you decide
to be that optimistic person and you have the will to live, that you are a
person that's a really good patient for the doctors. And he had decided
that he wanted to do the full-blown surgery.

He needed to get some things in order, and he needed to make sure he talked
to the President; he needed to find -- he wasn't sure when the -- on
Thursday, I can tell you, he wasn't sure when the surgery was going to be.
I believe they were still talking with the surgeons to figure out
schedules.

Q But, Dana, you remember that moment, that quite emotional moment, when he
was talking about Elizabeth Edwards, and he paused -- was he aware of
something at that point that was causing such emotion for him?

MS. PERINO: No, if you remember -- well, I think anyone who is a cancer
survivor -- and I am not one, so I cannot put myself in their shoes -- but
anytime I think that you're talking about a fellow human being -- and I
don't know how well he knows the Edwards family, but I think that you have
a kinship and an understanding and a connection that maybe some of us don't
have. And of course, I'm sure he was thinking of his own family and he knew
that he had made the decision to go in for the surgery.

But remember, he told all of us not to jump to conclusions because the
blood tests and the PET scan had been negative for cancer. And he really
believed that the best thing to do for himself and for his family was to
aggressively go after the cancer and just to see -- I'm sorry --
aggressively go after the growth, see if there was any problem with it. And
unfortunately, there was.

Q Did he talk to you today about a feeling of shock? I know that when I
spoke to him, he seemed -- he was very upbeat about it and he told us all,
don't jump to conclusions, as you said. So did this -- how did he take this
news?

MS. PERINO: Our conversation was about five to six minutes long. When I
talked to him he had already talked to the President. It's hard for me to
describe if he was shocked, or not. Disappointed, surely; but resolute, and
almost immediately ready to get up and start fighting. Like I said, he
said, you have to make sure that you deliver the message on the Iraq war
supplemental. But in addition to that, he had said that his doctors are
top-notch, and that they were already in consultations. So they did the
surgery yesterday, and within a 12-hour period, they're already discussing
the treatment for the way forward.

Q Dana, is it his expectation, his desire, to be back here on the job while
he undergoes this treatment? I mean, obviously, we don't know what the
treatment is yet. But if that is physically possible, is it his desire to
be back here?

MS. PERINO: Well, I certainly hope so. But he -- I can't say what his
treatment is going to be, because he hasn't decided yet. And I did talk to
Dr. Tubb just to understand the range of possibilities with chemotherapy
treatment, and he doesn't know what the doctors are going to decide, but it
just depends on what they decide to do and what the needs are.

I do know that Tony Snow loves this job. He says it is the best job he's
ever had in his life. He, in fact, has called it "communications
Disneyland." (Laughter.) So he loves the job, and I think his intention, of
course, is to come back. The President wants to have him back, as you heard
today. So as soon as we have more on that, we can let you know. But the
intention is that he'll be back, and I just don't know when.

Q Is he watching you now, do you think?

MS. PERINO: Is he watching me now? I hope he's sleeping. I hope he's not
watching me now, I'll start blushing. (Laughter.)

Connie, go ahead.

Q Thank you. By the way, we are all sorry, and we appreciate you talking to
us. Two questions. Abdominal surgery is really painful. What is being done
to control the pain?

MS. PERINO: I don't know. I don't know the answer to what's being done to
control the pain. I'm sure his doctors are taking very good care of him,
and if he's in pain, that they're addressing it.

Q And one more. He made a huge financial sacrifice to take this job, even
though he loves it. Is the White House or the government doing anything to
help --

MS. PERINO: Tony Snow is paid the salary that he's paid, and he has health
insurance, and I'm sure he's taken care of that way.

Q How bizarre is this for you?

MS. PERINO: How bizarre is this for me?

Q Yes, I mean, now suddenly you're up there, it's an incredibly intense
time, as far as the administration goes. I'm sure you weren't prepared to
--

MS. PERINO: Anticipating this?

Q Yes.

MS. PERINO: No. As my team laughs. But the great thing about the White
House is the people that you work with. That is by far what everyone says,
whenever they leave, that the thing that they miss the most are the people
that you work with. And we are so supportive of each other. And Tony has
really given all of us a lot more opportunities as deputies, and we have
tried to step up to the plate where he has allowed us to -- or given us
opportunity to. And so, for me, I don't have really any other feeling but
concern for Tony, a little bit of shock for myself. I thought he was going
to call back and they were going to say, oh, he's fine, no problems.

And so all of our energies are going to be concentrated on making sure that
we do the job Tony would want us to do, and we will make sure that we try
to fulfill every need that you have and that the President has, and we'll
be in touch with him for advice.

Roger.

Q Would the President be considering a visit to him in the next few days or
early next week?

MS. PERINO: We'll let you know. I know there's nothing on the schedule
right now. Remember, Tony didn't tell you where he was. And if we take the
President, then you'll know where he is.

Q When I asked him Friday, he wouldn't say, either.

MS. PERINO: No, he doesn't want to say.

Q Dana, do you know enough about what's in Tony's short-term future to know
whether he will be in a position to be in daily contact with the White
House, or is he --

MS. PERINO: Seems so. I don't know for sure, but it seems so. I talked to
him -- he talked to the President in the 7:00 a.m. hour this morning; he
talked to me at 9:30 a.m. And again, he said, none of us should bug him for
details about his medical condition, but I think that if we need him, we
need his advice, I'm sure that if we need to find him, we can. But it's
just too early to say.

Q So he's making the afternoon meeting this afternoon by phone? (Laughter.)

Q Have any doctors discussed what the survival rate is for cancer victims
who have had cancer metastasize --

MS. PERINO: I'm sure all of you have access to medical experts or medical
correspondents that -- I'd have to refer you to them. I know of no such
thing.

Q For viewers who want to send a get-well wish, a card, anything like that
--

MS. PERINO: Can I look into that and figure out the best way to do that?
And we'll get you a good address to make sure -- make sure they get there.

Jim.

Q Are we ready to --

MS. PERINO: Lester, is yours on Tony, or not?

Q It begins with Tony, but I'll --

MS. PERINO: Why don't we save you to the end?

Q Sure.

MS. PERINO: Best for last. Still on Tony? Okay, April.

Q It's kind of a procedural -- understanding cancer, how will -- as the
process goes, we just don't know how long it takes and what kinds of
treatments have to be done -- what will be in place procedurally here for
us? Will it be you or someone else?

MS. PERINO: As Tony said on Friday, that I'll be assuming as acting press
secretary or deputy -- I am his deputy. I'm not the press secretary; I'm
the deputy press secretary, but I'm acting in his position. So if you need
things that you would have taken directly to Tony, I'll try to help you
out.

Moving on. Okay, Jim.

Q I'd like to ask you about Monica Goodling. Her decision to take the Fifth
contradicts the Attorney General's promise that his staff would be
forthcoming. What are your thoughts about that?

MS. PERINO: Well, I think it's unfortunate that a public servant no longer
feels that her testimony would be treated fairly before the Congress. And,
yes, the Attorney General, with the support of the President, urged all the
members of the Justice Department to cooperate with Congress's request for
testimony. However, we must respect the constitutional right of the
individuals involved, and we are not going to question decisions that she
made in private conversations with her and her attorney to protect those
right.

Q But, clearly, the Attorney General is unable to deliver on a promise
about getting to the bottom of all this now.

MS. PERINO: Again, I am not going to question someone's constitutional
right that they made the decision based on with their lawyer. I would refer
you to her attorney, who made a statement yesterday, to pursue that, or to
the Justice Department as to --

Q Does this interface at all, or underscore for you the other part of this
discussion, which has been about the terms in which White House staff will
be able to have conversations with the Judiciary Committees? Because it
just shows the complexity of communication, that perhaps the rules that are
in place, how we do this, transcript, so forth, should be in place here?

MS. PERINO: I still believe that what we could have done at the White House
is told the Judiciary Committees that no one at the White House was going
to talk to them at all. Instead, what the President did was say, I've got
-- you have requests to speak to four individuals, four members of my
administration, close advisors, and I'm willing to have them meet with you
and to have a meeting and discuss this. And I don't think that anything
that she would have said, or her lawyer would have said on her behalf
yesterday changes that for us.

Q Senator Specter also said that he had heard comments from Senator Leahy
that he felt were prejudicial. Did the President think that the Senate
Judiciary Committee had a presumption of guilt, and did that weigh in to
his decision to not let Karl Rove and Harriet Miers be sworn and --

MS. PERINO: No, I've not heard the President express it that way. What
we've talked about, going back, is to the principle of the equal branches
of government as established by the founders of our nation under our
Constitution. That was the President's principle that he was thinking of.

Q So separation of powers, and not a presumption of guilt?

MS. PERINO: Correct. But I will tell you what the President said, as well,
is that what he provided was an opportunity for the members of the Congress
to get to the facts that they said that they wanted to get to, in a way
that was consistent with presidential prerogatives, and that he was going
to resist subpoenas, of course, because of the desire on behalf of some
Democrats, it seems, that they would rather have a public spectacle made
out of this whole deal, rather than get to the facts that they said they
want.

Peter.

Q What's the White House view on the congressional Democrat calls for
safeguarding political emails by the party or by anyone in the White House
who may have a sort of political email account?

MS. PERINO: What I know -- I checked into this -- is that certain White
House officials and staff members who have responsibilities that straddle
both worlds, that have responsibilities in communication, regular interface
with political organizations, do have a separate email account for those
political communications. That is entirely appropriate, especially when you
think of it in this case, that the practice is in place and followed
precisely to avoid any inadvertent violations of what is called the Hatch
Act. And so there are some members of the administration that do straddle
both worlds. And so under an abundance of caution so that they don't
violate the Hatch Act, they have these separate emails.

Q So is that traffic being safeguarded, if you will, for Congress to look
at, if it decides?

MS. PERINO: With respect to presidential records, an email that is sent to
or from a White House email address is automatically archived, even if the
other person is not using a White House email account. I believe our --
well, I know that our White House Counsel's Office is in communication with
the RNC's general counsel to make sure that those archivings have taken
place.

Q So if someone sent aide X an email at one of these political accounts,
are you saying that it would be archived on the --

MS. PERINO: As a general matter, I believe that to be true, but as I said,
the White House -- our White House Counsel's Office is talking to the RNC
just to make sure that that's the case. In some cases -- I don't know how
far back that goes. I think that -- even though that there was email use in
the '90s, I do think that our administration is the first, in a lot of
cases, to be dealing with the volume of email that all of us deal with on a
daily basis and that now you guys get to have fun with looking through.

Q So how's the White House going to respond to the request for them?

MS. PERINO: As I said, our White House Counsel's Office is talking to the
RNC, and then we'll try to get back to you.

Q Is that in response to Senator Waxman's call?

MS. PERINO: The archiving?

Q The archiving, yes.

MS. PERINO: No, this has been something that was in place long before that.

Q So it's automatic?

MS. PERINO: Let me get back to you in terms of dates and how far it goes
back and for which individuals.

Q I'm not sure I understand. The White House Counsel has asked the RNC to
make sure which emails are archived?

MS. PERINO: Well, I took your question to be -- I took your question just a
second ago to be that we all knew -- started archiving once Waxman made a
request; that's not true.

Q That's not true?

MS. PERINO: No.

Q No, no, no. But you said that Attorney Fielding is in contact with the
RNC to ensure -- to make sure some archiving took place. What archiving is
that? I'm sorry.

MS. PERINO: The archiving that would have been for any of these -- over the
past few years, of emails that had been going back and forth between people
that would have these accounts to the outside.

Q How many people have those accounts?

MS. PERINO: I think it's a handful, I don't think it's a lot. Obviously,
the Office of Political Affairs, because they straddle these -- both
worlds. I know I don't have one.

Can I go to the back and come back? Victoria.

Q Is the White House also in touch with Bush-Cheney 2004, over their email
accounts?

MS. PERINO: Not that I know of. Bush-Cheney 2004 --

Q Bush-Cheney 2004 email accounts were also --

MS. PERINO: I don't know. Let me get back to you. I don't know how those
emails were -- you mean if people had both an RNC email and a Bush-Cheney
email? I think, in some cases, I think those were forwarded to one place,
but those are technical questions I can't answer from here right now.

Q Is it the White House's position then that it would be, or would have
been inappropriate to have disposed of any emails of RNC or Bush-Cheney
2004 email accounts?

MS. PERINO: I don't know all the policies that have been in place, but I
know that anything -- that we would want to make sure that we are in
compliance, not only to avoid any inadvertent violations of the Hatch Act,
which carries criminal penalties, but we also want to make sure that we are
in compliance with the Presidential Records Act.

Q Why did you not come forward and tell the committee about this? This came
out as a result of the committee's investigation they we're about;
otherwise, they would never have known about it.

MS. PERINO: Well, I don't think there was anything to hide. I think people
have been having these email addresses since the beginning of the
administration. It's nothing hidden.

Mark.

Q The Attorney General continues to meet with prosecutors around the
country. What is his message to them? Is he going to complete that? And
then is there a plan for him to come see President Bush in the near future?
And is there any plan to advance that testimony that, as you know, is still
three weeks hence?

MS. PERINO: I'll let the Attorney General talk about his conversations with
the U.S. attorneys that he's meeting with around the country. I'm sure that
he's got -- I saw reporting that he had had a conference call with them, I
think maybe it was last Saturday, maybe the Saturday before, in which he
told them how much he appreciated all of their service.

As to whether or not the Attorney General will be coming back to the
President to report, I don't have anything on the schedule, but of course,
if the Attorney General wanted to talk to the President he would be welcome
to do so.

Q And how about advancing the schedule date for the testimony? Because even
you were saying yesterday that that is a long time.

MS. PERINO: Yes, that's something the Justice Department is going to have
to work out with the committee. I don't know of any efforts underway by the
Justice Department to speed that up.

Q One last question. Did the President have any reaction to the musings
that the Attorney General made on his future in that interview last night,
about, well, I've put some thought into whether I should stay?

MS. PERINO: I have not talked to the President about it. I talked to the
President this morning about Tony Snow, but as the President -- we've said
that the President has the confidence -- the Attorney General has the
confidence of the President.

Q On the White House's offer right now for lawmakers to have these
interviews, as you call them -- you talk about that being basically the
point at which -- that that's the compromise that was reached by the White
House that was presented. But was it ever really seriously considered to
not make anybody available at all? I mean, was that really an option?

MS. PERINO: It's certainly an option. It's certainly an option, sure.

Q But at a time when, obviously, this is such a politically charged
atmosphere and there are questions, that even the President has expressed
concerns about --

MS. PERINO: I think that whenever -- I'm not going to discuss internal
White House deliberations as to how we arrived at the offer that we arrived
at. However, lots of things go into that consideration. And the decision
that we made was one to be as forthcoming as possible to Congress and still
preserve the President's prerogatives.

Sheryl.

Q Dana, it would seem that on the issue of testimony interviews by Rove and
others, you're at an impasse. The Judiciary Committee has sent Fred
Fielding a letter formally rejecting the White House offer, and saying that
it would like further negotiations. Is Fred Fielding preparing a response?

MS. PERINO: I'll check -- as far as I know -- and I saw him this morning --
I don't know of any negotiations that are ongoing. I will check to see if
there have been any discussions. I know that Fred was willing to listen
respectively and attentively to members, but that we felt that our offer
was one that we would hope that they would see wisdom in accepting.

Q The Democrats seem to feel that the ball is in your court to respond to
that letter.

MS. PERINO: The ball is on the fence.

Q Do you feel that the ball is in their court, and that theirs --

MS. PERINO: We do.

Q -- and theirs is the next move, and they can either accept or issue
subpoenas?

MS. PERINO: Look, we -- I would say that they initially said that they
wanted to issue subpoenas. We said that's not necessary. We said we will
make these four individuals available to you to talk to in a way that's
consistent with the President's prerogatives. And they decided not to take
it.

However -- so they went ahead and they authorized subpoenas anyway. So they
said they were going to do it; we said you didn't need to; they went ahead
and did it, in terms of the authorization. And I haven't heard anything
more about whether or not those subpoenas are forthcoming. But we believe
that if they wanted to get to the facts of the matter, we have presented
them a way to do that.

Q So whose is the next move?

MS. PERINO: I think it's Congress's.

John.

Q Dana, if Justice officials are taking the Fifth, does that put any
pressure on you guys to possibly negotiate? Because Tony has been saying
you can get everything you need from all the key players at Justice, and
we're being extremely generous, as well.

MS. PERINO: Well, first of all, step back. You're saying if Justice
Department officials, plural, are going to be taking the Fifth -- and I
want to make it clear that there was one individual who, through her
counsel, made a statement yesterday regarding that. I don't know of anybody
else that has, but I am not in regular contact with them, and I'm not
inquiring to their counsels of what they're going to do.

And I can see -- I can see your point, as to why someone might think that
that we would want to change our negotiations stance. However, I think that
lots of people can find lots of different reasons for us to change our
negotiation stance, and I don't see any reason to at this point.

April.

Q Dana, is pleading the Fifth signifying that a crime has been committed?

MS. PERINO: Well, I think that's an unfortunate interpretation of the Fifth
Amendment, which is available to all of us, that in our public -- in our
judicial system, invoking the Fifth Amendment is not an admission of guilt.
But I would refer you to her lawyer for anything more.

Jonathan. I'm sorry, go ahead.

Q Once again -- and I asked Tony this last week -- was a crime committed in
firing --

MS. PERINO: There is absolutely no indication that there was any crime
committed, nor was there anything improper done.

Q You're saying, "indication;" you're not giving me a flat-out no.

MS. PERINO: I'm telling there's absolutely no indication that would point
to that. Absolutely no indication to point to that.

Jonathan.

Q Ask about Iran?

MS. PERINO: Sure.

Q The Pentagon has announced naval exercises in the Persian Gulf involving
two aircraft carriers, quite an elaborate exercise. Is this an effort to
send Iran a message, particularly in regards to those captured British
sailors --

MS. PERINO: No -- I checked on this right before coming out, and I
understand that those are long-planned naval exercises that they're
carrying forward. They were long -- they've been on the schedule for a
while, and so I'd have to refer you to DOD for more.

Q Actually, what the Navy said is that the two aircraft carrier groups were
scheduled to be in the Persian Gulf for a long time, but this exercise was
planned after the seizure of those British sailors.

MS. PERINO: Then perhaps I misunderstood what I heard. I understood the
exercise was planned, as well. But can we look into it and get back to you?

Can I go to the back, and then Lester? Then maybe we'll be done? Okay.
(Laughter.) Steve -- help me. (Laughter.)

Q We can stop now. (Laughter.)

MS. PERINO: Go ahead.

Q Are you aware of how many conversations the President had about the eight
U.S. attorneys in question prior to them being dismissed?

MS. PERINO: No, I have said on the record for several weeks now that there
is no indication that the President knew about any of the ongoing
discussions over the two years, nor did he see a list or a plan before it
was carried out.

Q If that's the case, what is the White House position, as it relates to
executive privilege? My understanding of executive privilege, as it was
decided by the Supreme Court, is that if the President has not had a
conversation about the issue at hand, the people involved in the Office of
the President would not be covered by executive privilege.

MS. PERINO: No -- well, first of all, we have not asserted --

Q What is the White House position regarding --

MS. PERINO: Okay, I'll answer you. First of all, we have not asserted any
privilege at all, whatsoever, and that includes executive privilege. I have
laid out for you the principles that we have. But I will tell you that
conversation amongst and between the President's closest advisors are
included in that principle that a President should be able to get advice
from his closest advisors. That includes the conversations that happen in
between them, even if they don't reach the President.

Q So as it relates to congressional committees' requests to meet with
members of the White House staff, you have not gone back to those senators
and congressmen and said, the reason why we don't want our members of the
Office of the President meeting with you is because of executive privilege?

MS. PERINO: I think if you look at the letter that we sent to the Hill, we
spell that out pretty clearly.

Okay, Lester. Make it quick.

Q Yes. Two questions.

MS. PERINO: Okay. I figured.

Q What role does the President believe government should play in advocating
or requiring higher fuel efficiency standards for vehicles?

MS. PERINO: Well, we said that in the President's 20-in-10 program that he
is seeking to reduce gasoline consumption by 20 percent in 10 years. You
get there two ways. One is by reforming the CAFE system, and the other is
by replacing 35 billion gallons of traditional gasoline with alternative
fuels.

Q And second question: Senator Hillary Clinton said that Attorney General
Gonzales should resign "because he is at the center of a widening scandal
over the firing of several U.S. attorneys, a grand total of eight." But in
March of 1993, when Janet Reno fired all 93 U.S. attorneys at once,
President Clinton said -- a quote -- "All of those people are routinely
replaced," noted The Wall Street Journal. And my question: What is the
President's reaction to the Clinton appointment of Paula Casey as U.S.
attorney in Little Rock who never brought any major Whitewater indictments?

MS. PERINO: Well, first of all, let me back up and say that people might
want to use -- use the word "scandal" to describe the President's
absolutely proper and reasonable reasons to -- or the reasonableness of
being able to hire and fire U.S. attorneys at will because they serve at
the pleasure of the President, and the President sets a broad prosecutorial
agenda which the U.S. attorneys are there to fulfill.

And I will let other people, and your listeners, make conclusions about
Hillary Clinton's statements.

Q Thank you.

MS. PERINO: Thank you.

END 1:10 P.M. EDT
===========================================================================
Return to this article at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/03/20070327-4.html

 * Origin: (1:3634/12)