White House Press Briefing by Ari Fleischer

Transcript of Oct. 10 Press Briefing by Ari Fleischer
Transcript of Oct. 10 Press Briefing by Ari Fleischer
U.S. Newswire
10 Oct 15:47

Transcript of Oct. 10 White House Press Briefing by Ari
Fleischer
To: National Desk
Contact: White House Press Office, 202-456-2580

WASHINGTON, Oct. 10 /U.S. Newswire/ -- The following is a
transcript of today's White House press briefing by Ari
Fleischer:

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.

Q 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 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: I think it's fairly obvious. The means of
communications out of Afghanistan right now are r9'0Q(4 1/8Z
1/2Z:ed.
One way to communicate outside Afghanistan to followers is
through Western media.

Q But I mean, should people -- should we all operate on
your impressions? Do you have concrete --

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?

Q Ari, you used the term "no hard indication." So this is
a suspicion, not information based on, say --

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 --

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.

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 --

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.

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 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.

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.)

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.

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?

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 --

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 --

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.

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.

1. Helen Thomas can't pronounce SUBLIMINAL...now where do we know that word from???

2.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.

This is John Roberts from ABC asking this...what an idioit. You have to watch these conferences to see his expressions, he has the expression of a quarterback in Calc class being told about derivatives for the first time...check that, algebra. Can you believe the ANTAGONISTIC tone of his question...he's a first class moron.

Ask yourself, if these are the high-paid White House press, how stupid are my local reporters?

Boy, if that isn't the truth! Everyday we just watch Ari's briefing and just shake our heads in disbelief that they would ask not just one stupid question, but the same stupid question 100 different ways!

That blonde guy from CNN with the giant head really annoys me.

Ari has to be the most patient and good natured person I have ever seen.

Day after day, the poor man faces Helen Thomas and the rest of the crew. The only one who makes any sense is Jim Angle of Fox, who asks reasonable questions in a polite way.

I have noticed Fox rotates who they send to the press briefings. It must be because no one wants to hang around too long with that disgusting group.

Your comment about Fox News is very funny, Miss Marple.I really like Fox News--was within days of getting Direct TV when the cable folks came through.

I, too, have been amazed at how rude the reporters act and how stupid they sound sometimes. Why do they all ask the same question? This must be why there is such a dearth of real information being reported by these people; they're all asking the same question!! No creative, analytical thinking going on there!!!

It's obvious, too, that they're teed off that the party is over, serious people are running the show now, and they (the press) actually has to do some work now. Poor, poor things.

I think there is some sort of Darwinian selection for arrogance with reporters. I worked on a gubernatorial campaign last fall as a part-time volunteer. I was astounded at the attitude of the local press pepople when they came for press conferences and interviews.

The idea that some reporter for a local TV station in Indianapolis is a celebrity who believes he is entitled to fawning attention and special privileges is just amazing to me, but that is how they act!! I must assume as they climb the ladder of advancement they become even worse, culminating, of course, in the pit of vipers we see in this press conference.

Meanwhile, President Bush, the most powerful person on the planet, is a humble and gracious man. There is a lesson here, I think.

I'm afraid we in Canada have to take responsibility for John Roberts.

He used to host Canada A.M., CTV's morning news show, about 10-12 years back.

Fondest memory of John (or J.D., as he was known then):

Question to the Canadian ambassador to the U.N. about hopes for peace before the Gulf War: "What does he mean, it's hopeless?"

Answer: "He means there's no hope!"

I could be downright mean and say that Helen looks like the wicked witch of the west, but I will just let her annoying questions and her inability to let a subject die to speak for themselves. As another Freeper said yesterday, I would love to hear Ari say, "Helen, what part of NO don't you understand?" But he is too diplomatic for that.

What is it with Canada and the "facelss" anchors. I watch the CBC and all the men on there are clones of Jennings and Roberts...it's like Supermarionation...creepy.

He takes the cake for himbo news dudes.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.