in their own words
 |
|
|
 Subscribe to the WHPC RSS Feed
|
Press Briefing by Tony Snow 09/29/06 (Topic: Iraq)
— Friday, September 29, 2006 — Q Tony, can we go back to -- it seems like you're saying that Bob Woodward's book is inaccurate, where the administration didn't seem to have any problem with his books in the past that painted a very good picture of the administration. Are you saying this because you're on the losing side of the argument now? Because you're being very defensive about what's in that book. And yet you're not saying the attacks are down. You're saying that's a classified report. MR. SNOW: Well, people are trying to attack our troops. That's no secret. Q Are they higher? Are you in a state of denial? Does the American public really know what's going on there? MR. SNOW: I think the American people get a pretty good sense. The American people have a sense -- look, every day there are casualty reports that are public record. When people die, those are public record. And some of the definitions of attacks -- I'll tell you what, I'll try to find out what I can do to provide, in terms of specificity. But it is no secret that especially in Baghdad you have people who are trying to make Baghdad the central front of the central front of the war on terror. And you will expect people to commit attacks. What does that mean? That means it's a war, and that in this particular time, people are trying to go on the offensive. It also means that our people are alert and trying to defend themselves. It also means that in adjustments, what happens is that we are trying to provide the best equipment, the best protection, the best medicine. So, again, perhaps I've been missing it, but all I've been hearing from you guys from the time I've been here is, isn't it true it's getting worse? The fact is, you've got a war, you have a conflict, people are going after our people. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Iraq
Posted by WhiteHousePressCorps.org @ 9:32 PM  Press Gaggle by Tony Snow 09/28/06 (Topic: Fundraising Speeches) Q Could you talk more specifically about what kinds of differences he's going to point out? MR. SNOW: For instance, differences in votes on matters like the Hamdan legislation yesterday in the House of Representatives. He'll be citing some of the comments that members of the Democratic leadership have made in recent days about what they think is necessary for winning the war on terror, and so on. Q The Pryce thing tonight, is that hosted by the CEO of the Limited? MR. SNOW: Yes. Q Is he going to specifically name Democrats? MR. SNOW: No, he will not. He will not be naming names. He will be reciting quotes, however. Q So it will be clear who he's talking about? MR. SNOW: If you have been reading the papers, you will know. Q Uh-oh. MR. SNOW: Uh-oh, says Jennifer Loven of the Associated Press. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Campaign 06 | Fundraising
Posted by WhiteHousePressCorps.org @ 3:03 AM Press Gaggle by Dana Perino 09/27/06 (Topic: Intelligence Leaks) — Thursday, September 28, 2006 — Q Dana, Fran Townsend said yesterday that the leak of the report was a crime. Did the President -- is there some sort of -- is there going to be some sort of investigation into who leaked that information? MS. PERINO: I have not heard him express that. No, I think if there's something to update in terms of an investigation, I'd have to refer you to the Department of Justice, because I believe that the intelligence agency that produced this document that was leaked is the one who makes the request to the Department of Justice. The President, to my knowledge, has not made such a request. It is troubling that classified information is leaked. A couple of points about -- the intelligence community must have the ability to write frankly and to provide advice to the President, in which they provide both welcome and unwelcome news. And what you don't want to have happen, and what Fran Townsend was talking about yesterday, is losing that ability of both the intelligence analysts, and then the policymakers using the information that they're getting, to feel like they are hampered in any decision-making because they believe that that information is going to end up in the public and be exploited for political purposes. It is curious that this document was finished and provided in April and it doesn't show up until we're in the homestretch of the election. We've seen this pattern of behavior before. Just, overall, the leaking of classified information, the President takes it very, very seriously, I can assure you of that. But in terms of an investigation, I haven't heard that. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Dana Perino | News Media | Bush Administration | Intelligence Leaks
Posted by WhiteHousePressCorps.org @ 12:04 AM Press Briefing by Tony Snow 09/27/06 (Topic: Tony Snow as Fundraiser) Q To your knowledge, have Press Secretaries in the past done fundraising? MR. SNOW: I don't think so. I have not found any case in which -- there may be some cases, but I'm not aware of them. Q Then why are doing one now? Why are you the one breaking this precedent? MR. SNOW: I was asked. Q Being "asked" is not sufficient -- you could have said, no. MR. SNOW: I could have said no. Q You've been a journalist most of your life. You tell us that all the time -- MR. SNOW: And I'm -- you know what, and I'm the President's Press Secretary, and one of the things I want to try to do is to help the President, but do it in a way that's consistent with my role as Press Secretary. And if we find that there is an unalterable conflict, then the Press Secretary role dominates. But keep your eyes out on -- White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Campaign 06 | Fundraising
Posted by WhiteHousePressCorps.org @ 12:01 AM Press Briefing by Homeland Security Advisor Frances Fragos Townsend 09/26/06 (Topic: National Intelligence Estimate) — Tuesday, September 26, 2006 — Q Fran, I wanted to just follow up on George's question before on -- and particularly focus in on Iraq, in that regard. Every time Iraq comes up in this, you've responded, the President has responded, it's the central front, and therefore, it is integral to terrorism. But another way to read these key judgments is that the order in which we took these things made a difference and that one might conclude from this, though it does not explicitly state it in any way here, that had we not done Iraq first, had we stayed for a while to do Afghanistan or focused on Iran first or something else, that you might not have created what they refer to here as the Iraqi jihad movement that has attracted so much motion. That, the President doesn't go to, not the question of whether Iraq is or is not, but whether it was -- whether it has, itself, because of it's timing, turned the tide somewhat against us. Can you address that? MS. TOWNSEND: Sure. David, first, let me start with the notion of the central front in the war on terror. What's -- forget what the -- put aside for the moment what the President has said, because he's been clear about the administration's view. Let's look at what bin Laden and Zawahiri have said -- and Zarqawi -- about this being either where they're going to have ultimate victory or ultimate defeat when the President went through those -- the quotations from al Qaeda, themselves. Q But that made that statement only after we had invaded. In other words, had we chosen to delay invasion dealing with Iraq for X number of years, would -- is it your conclusion from this that we would have avoided having to deal with an Iraqi jihad at the moment that we are dealing with all of the other elements of this problem? MS. TOWNSEND: Two points. First I would say to you, it presumes that when you say, the order of things, that we can't do more than one thing at a time. And as we know, we're fighting in Afghanistan while we're fighting in Iraq. Second, what I would say to you is, there's always an excuse. I mean, we weren't in Iraq on September the 11th when we got hit, and they hit us anyway. There are always going to be some excuse for them to propagate their hateful ideology -- whether it's the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it's the conflict in Afghanistan, it's our troop presence in the Gulf -- there's always an excuse. And so I think that that's not -- I just don't think that holds weight. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | National Intelligence Estimate | Frances Townsend
Posted by WhiteHousePressCorps.org @ 8:04 PM Press Gaggle by Tony Snow 09/25/06 (Topic: Campaign Fundraising) — Monday, September 25, 2006 — Q Tony, how do you justify five events where the public has no idea what the President is saying, what the pitch is, who he's meeting with -- in some cases, how much money is raised -- MR. SNOW: I think people understand what the President stands for. It's not as if -- typically, you try to make sure that if you're having an event in somebody's private home, that it remains private. That's been a standard not only in this administration, but prior. It's not like the administration is pulling rabbits out of his hat. He's saying things that you've heard before and that you're aware of. Q Well, actually, in the previous administration they started this way and there were a lot of protests from the media -- and from Republicans, as a matter of fact -- and they allowed a feed to come out to reporters and they allowed a print reporter to be in. MR. SNOW: Understood. Q So are you all considering that at all? MR. SNOW: No. Q Why not? MR. SNOW: As I said, because, frankly, we're just not in the business of revisiting this. The President is certainly going to be plenty accessible to you guys and he's going to be accessible to the public and you know what his positions are. And we're going to continue to express them. Q But is this the way for Republican candidates who perhaps might not want to be pictured publicly with the President to avail themselves of his fundraising prowess while not being seen with him? MR. SNOW: You're going to have ask them. That's not my reading, but feel free to ask them. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Campaign 06 | Fundraising
Posted by WhiteHousePressCorps.org @ 9:49 PM Press Gaggle by Dana Perino 09/21/06 (Topic: Political Campaign Travel Expenses) — Thursday, September 21, 2006 — Q I'm wondering about the trip, is there going to be any official business that the President is doing on this trip? MS. PERINO: I believe that we just have two political events. Q So this trip is paid for by whom? MS. PERINO: There's a whole formula for that, that's dealt with in terms of the campaigns, through the RNC -- I don't know how that whole formula works out, but there is one that deals with the political costs of the trip.* Q This is not on the taxpayers' dime? MS. PERINO: The political part of the trip is not on the taxpayers' dime, no. Q There is no other part of the trip that isn't political? MS. PERINO: Let me try to get you the formula, because I don't have it with me. ... (Footnote from end of transcript) *A formula is applied that comes from regulations that have been used since at least the Reagan Administration. The percentage of time spent on political activity and official activity is determined from a particular trip. Then, the total cost of the trip, less security costs, is allocated based on the percentage of time spent on political and official activity. The government pays for the official percentage of the activity, the political entity pays for the percentage of the costs that are related to political activity. When the President travels and there is a political event on the schedule, the government does not incur any additional costs. When a trip is all political, the same formula applies. The political entity pays for all the costs related to the trip specifically. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Dana Perino | News Media | Bush Administration | Campaign Expenses
Posted by WhiteHousePressCorps.org @ 5:23 PM Press Briefing by Elliott Abrams on the President's Bilateral Meeting with President Abbas 09/20/06 — Wednesday, September 20, 2006 — Q -- basically said that any government that's formed will not necessarily recognize Israel, that it will say the resistance is legal. So am I right to assume that this is -- if there was any shot of the Quartet getting behind this unity plan, it's over now? MR. ABRAMS: We're not presented with a national unity government or with an agreement to approve or not approve. As you know, President Abbas said that he had suspended those discussions for his trip to the General Assembly. So it isn't -- it isn't going to -- the Quartet is not going to approve or criticize anything. I think it's fair to say that what the Quartet will do will be to commend and welcome his efforts to produce a government that would meet the criteria, and say, we all hope that those efforts succeed. But it is clear -- at least it is clear for the United States -- that if that does not happen, that is if the Palestinian government, Palestinian cabinet will not accept those criteria, then our relationship to it will not change -- or you might say our lack of a relationship with it will not change. Q But earlier, when we first started hearing about these talks, there seemed to be an agreement that this new form -- newly formed government would recognize all previous agreements, which would have implicitly implied that there is a recognition of Israel. But that's still not good enough because we -- the U.S. would want a -- and the Quartet would want an outright statement that Israel exists? MR. ABRAMS: I don't want to get into semantics over what the agreement among Palestinians says because there is no agreement as of yet. We have not been presented with an agreement by the Palestinians saying, here's the basis for a new national unity government. Our own view on that is clear. Obviously, as we try to understand any statements in an agreement, we would be hearing from President Abbas, but we would also be hearing from Hamas. And if a Hamas spokesman say, we know exactly what such a potential agreement means and it does not mean that we accept the right of Israel to exist, it does not mean that we abandon violence, well, it's hard to say then that they had, in fact, done that. But again, this is hypothetical because they've not concluded or abandoned negotiations yet, as far as we understand it. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Elliott Abrams | News Media | Bush Administration | Israel | Palestine
Posted by WhiteHousePressCorps.org @ 5:35 PM Press Gaggle by Tony Snow 09/20/06 (Topic: Iran) Q Given that Iran is showing no sign of backing off from its position, how much longer is the U.S. willing to give them for diplomacy to work, before they move to sanctions? MR. SNOW: Well, first, it's a little difficult to figure out whether there's progress or not on the Iranian front. You made a categorical statement about Iran's behavior, and there have been conflicting signals. But we've made it clear that they need to suspend, and the United States is going to proceed working with allies toward remedial measures if the Iranians do not suspend. We retain the hope that they'll suspend those activities, because, again, it's a great deal for the Iranian people -- not only will they get the nuclear energy they say they want, but in addition, they're going to get economic, cultural, and political benefits that aren't available to them. So there's a real choice now to be made on behalf of the Iranian people: Do you suspend, and get everything you want, or do you continue along the road toward developing the capacity to do an enrichment that could be used for weapons purposes, and find yourself isolated in the community of nations? Q There have been a number of deadlines already set in the past. Specifically, how much longer would the U.S. wait -- days, weeks, months? MR. SNOW: We're working with our allies. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Iran
Posted by WhiteHousePressCorps.org @ 5:26 PM Press Briefing by Meghan O'Sullivan, Deputy National Security Advisor for Iraq and Afghanistan 09/19/06 (Topic: Iraq) — Tuesday, September 19, 2006 — Q Can you elaborate on this point that the United States is going to support the government of Iraq as long as it's making the tough decisions? Can you explain that? I mean, it sounds like conditional love to me. (Laughter.) I mean, what's -- MS. O'SULLIVAN: Actually, the President had a very similar theme in his comments today in the speech. Q I know -- curious. MS. O'SULLIVAN: And there was -- I'm trying to think of the exact -- Q Can you explain what he means, though? MS. O'SULLIVAN: Sure. And I'll try to shed some light on that. I'm just going back to another speech that he gave -- I think August 31st. Anyway, that's something that has been in a lot of the President's comments. And I think it reflects the reality that the Iraqis have a lot of difficult decisions to do, these are hard decision to make, and that we need to both encourage and urge them to take on these decisions, because we look at something -- we look at the security situation and recognize that part of this has a security solution, but a security solution won't be the whole solution. It's got to be a political one, as well, it has to be an economic one, as well. And the issues that I described -- or I just listed very quickly, they're very political issues, and these are the issues that the leaders need to come together and figure out how -- and this, I'm actually characterizing President Talabani's comments -- how Iraqi leaders in communities are going to share the power and the resources of their country. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Meghan O'Sullivan | News Media | Bush Administration | Iraq | President Talabani
Posted by WhiteHousePressCorps.org @ 9:51 PM Press Gaggle by National Security Advisor Steve Hadley 09/18/06 (Topic: Iran) — Monday, September 18, 2006 — Q There was a lot of talk over the weekend about the EU3 meeting with Iran separately without the United States, and then they would agree to some sort of suspension of their uranium enrichment process, and then the United States would come to the table. What do you think is going to come out of that? MR. HADLEY: The question is there's some speculation in the press that the EU3 might meet with Iran, talk about a suspension, and once that was achieved, the U.S. could join the talks. Look, the conversation with Solana are ongoing with Larajani. Obviously, it's useful for those conversations to be somewhat confidential. The framework of those conversations is very clear. We've all said -- the EU3, the U.N., the IAEA -- we have all said we need to see a verifiable suspension of the enrichment program, and then the United States would be prepared to join the negotiations to talk about the proposal that the EU3 plus the United States, China and Russia put on the table. And that is a proposal that, if accepted by Iran, will have a lot of benefits for the Iranian people in terms of bringing them prosperity and a better way of life. So we would hope that Iran would see their way clear to agree to a verifiable suspension so we can then begin to negotiate the details of that broader path. Q Is that likely? MR. HADLEY: We don't know. Q -- you said verifiable suspension. Can it be a temporary suspension and still have talks? MR. HADLEY: That's what it is, is a verifiable suspension so you can have discussions. One of the issues in those discussions will be what happens to their enrichment program over the long-term. We've been very clear what our view is on that. But it would clearly be -- a permanent solution to this problem, is what you negotiate about. So what we've always said was not permanent suspension; what we've said is, a verifiable suspension so we can then have a discussion. And you know the proposal that we put down to the Iranians has a lot of ideas in it about how they can meet their enrichment needs in a way that would reassure the international community that is not a route to a nuclear weapon. That would be a subject of the negotiations. Q I just want to make sure I'm clear. It could be a temporary suspension. That is what you're saying would be okay, and that would -- MR. HADLEY: Look, you know, what we've said is a verifiable suspension so that talks can get started. And that's what we have in mind. There is an issue of, on a permanent basis, what happens to the enrichment activity that Iran is doing, and that is an issue that is addressed in the proposal we all put down to the Iranians. I'm not trying to make news here. I don't think there's any news here. It always was a verifiable suspension. Q On a temporary basis? MR. HADLEY: It doesn't say termination, it says suspension - you suspend White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | EU3 | Iran
Posted by WhiteHousePressCorps.org @ 6:10 PM Press Briefing on President's Participation in 61st United Nations General Assembly 09/15/06 (Topic: Middle Eastern Democracy) — Friday, September 15, 2006 — Q Hi. We've heard the President talk at length about his vision of spreading democracy to the Middle East. Are there any new twists this time, or is it pretty much the same or an extension of what he said before? SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Why don't I let my colleague comment on that? SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Oh, okay. I think that many of the elements you will have heard before, but this is the attempt of the President to put forth a kind of a comprehensive vision, tying together all of the different arenas in the Middle East and explaining how he understands them to be -- to fit together. As my colleague said, we have two kinds of states in the region. We've got those that are -- those in which there's an absence of freedom, and we have those in which, I would just say, weak states in which we need to help them build the institutions of freedom. And the three cases would be Iraq, Lebanon, and the Palestinian Authority -- of states that need our assistance. And I think, in a way, he'll be saying, you know, the international community needs to come forward to help Middle Easterners realize their desire for freedom. He would say that very much what we are seeing across the region is a struggle for freedom. There are states, like Iran and Syria, that sponsor terrorism and they do so in order to stop the region from reforming and allowing people to realize their desire. He'll have in each case -- Iraq, Lebanon, and the Palestinian Authority -- I think he will have very concrete suggestions about the path forward for realizing his vision of freedom and role that the international community can play in that. I don't want to preview for you right now exactly the steps that he's going to suggest, but in terms of what is going to be new, I think that's where you should be looking. You should be looking at the comprehensive vision, and then the immediate steps. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Middle East | Democratization
Posted by WhiteHousePressCorps.org @ 6:10 PM Press Briefing by Tony Snow 09/14/06 (Topic: Interrogation Laws & Geneva Convention) Q I think it would be fair, then, for some people in the world to look at this process as a questioning of defining how close you can go to Common Article III before you reach cruel and inhuman, until you put that stuff into play in an interrogation? MR. SNOW: Explain to me how that would work. Explain to me how they would draw that conclusion, because I don't get it. Q You don't understand how someone could draw that conclusion? MR. SNOW: No, I don't. Q By trying to create a definition of an article -- MR. SNOW: So what you would rather have is a law with no definitions so that people would go into the field not knowing whether they're obeying or not obeying the law? I mean, that's the whole point here. You've got to know what the law says; nobody knows. Q That's what you guys say is the point here. I'm saying people around the world could view this process very differently, and, frankly, through a much more sinister lens, that you're actually -- MR. SNOW: Well, no, I think what you're trying to do is to import a sinister -- I don't think -- there's nothing sinister about trying to say what the law is. Do you disagree? Q It's not for me to agree or disagree -- MR. SNOW: Well, wait a minute, of course you are, and what you're doing is that you're putting a highly cynical interpretation on what should be an open and transparent attempt to try to figure out what the rules are. Q There are people -- I think it's fair to say there are people around the world who have questioned this administration's commitment to the Geneva Conventions, starting with GITMO, some of the questions on POWs versus -- MR. SNOW: Would these people have visited GITMO? Would these people have firsthand experience with GITMO? Q A lot of people have been through GITMO at this point, and seen it, and come away -- MR. SNOW: And you know what, it's -- a number of you have been down there. I mean, it was described by a recent delegation as a model prison. I don't think -- what you're getting at is vague smears about the United States, which quite often are reiterated by cynical interpretations of what we're trying to do, which is to be absolutely straight and up front about making sure the rules are clear. What's interesting is, a lot of people say, you guys are lawless, you want to do whatever you want. No, this is a way of saying, we don't want to be lawless. We want to tell people exactly what they can do, because if you have vagueness about it, you do not have the proper conditions for the discipline you need and the protections of people who are going to be questioned, and furthermore, you run the risk that your own people are going to be put in harm's way. They put their lives on the line, they risk everything, they think they're obeying the law, and next thing they know, they're being indicted by somebody. You can't have that situation, and that's what we're really trying to address. Far from being cynical, it's an attempt to really -- to implement the ideal of being open and honest with everybody. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Geneva Convention | Torture
Posted by WhiteHousePressCorps.org @ 3:40 PM Press Briefing by Tony Snow 09/13/06 (Topic: Campaign Ad Ethics) — Wednesday, September 13, 2006 — Q Thank you, Tony. A follow-up question on Mark's question. In that race in Rhode Island, the National Republican Senatorial Committee spent, by its own statements, $1 million in attack media on Mayor Laffey, questioning his record as mayor and in private business. And he, himself, described the ads as despicable, although he did endorse Senator Chafee in the end. Is this the kind of campaign that the President would countenance or support against people who back him on most issues? MR. SNOW: The President understands that there is zesty ads in any political campaign. He's been the object of -- Q Of what? MR. SNOW: Zesty. He's been the object of a fair amount in his past. Q Zesty? MR. SNOW: Zesty, z-e-s-t-y. Axelrod has a dictionary. (Laughter.) Q Was he aware of the commercials? MR. SNOW: I don't know. I honestly don't know if he was aware. This was something that was not operated out of the White House, as you know, and the President is not -- the President, again, has been devoting himself to large matters. I sincerely doubt, but I will find out for you whether he was passing judgment on ads being used in particular campaigns. Q Would you also kindly find out if he was aware of what many say was an egregious stand by the Senatorial Committee -- that's spelled e-g-re-g-i-o-u-s -- that if Mr. Laffey was the nominee, they wouldn't support him? MR. SNOW: Egregious, though, often -- does not often modify an inanimate object like a stand, but I get your drift here. In other words, what you want to say is, is the President really unhappy that Linc Chafee won -- is that the question? Q No. My question is, was he aware the Senatorial Committee said they wouldn't give any money if Mayor Laffey defeated Senator Chafee? MR. SNOW: Okay. I will -- we'll get to it. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Lincoln Chafee | Campaign Ads
Posted by WhiteHousePressCorps.org @ 9:45 PM Press Briefing by Tony Snow 09/12/06 (Topic: Politics of 9/11 and Iraq War) — Tuesday, September 12, 2006 — Q But two things, are these people that the President is meeting with -- the families, the loved ones of 9/11 -- saying, yes, we are hurting, now go out and fight in Iraq? And, also, how can it not be political when the President knowingly knows that people are not for this? His poll numbers are way down, and then he's going to say, let's put aside our differences and unite. How is that not political? MR. SNOW: Simple. Your question contradicts itself. What you've said is, it's politically suicidal to talk about it, and yet -- yes, you did. You just said it's an unpopular war, people don't like it. Well, if he's trying to score political points he'll skip it, but you see, the point of this -- Q Some say it's arrogance; he's going to stick to what he wants to do. MR. SNOW: You know what, arrogance in what sense? Who is, "some say"? Some say -- Q Democrats, your critics. MR. SNOW: Which Democrats? Q There are a lot of them -- John Kerry -- MR. SNOW: Well, I know. We've been through John Boehner here. Q Do you want me to list them? You want me to list the number? MR. SNOW: You know what I'd like to do is, when you get back to the tonal issue, ask yourself, is it arrogance or is it maintaining fidelity to principle; is it being stubborn or is it being steadfast? You've got a President whose principle is the same. And April, neither you, nor I, or anybody else in this room will ever go through what the President had to do after September 11th, which is to know that Americans died, and that as President everybody is going to be looking at how you handle it and how you step up to the plate. The President has been absolutely steadfast from the beginning, I'm not going to let them win. And he has tried in many ways -- and part of what we did last week was to lay out various ways -- it is extremely broad. It is not simply a battlefield. As a matter of fact, that's one small portion of an overall battle. Ultimately, it involves a battle of hearts and minds, a philosophy where you allow freedom to take root so people know that hope is not only something -- is a faint wish, but it is an option that they have if they are free. And the President, far from trying to -- I know that everybody is -- the construct that's been laid out is the President was trying to make political points. No, he's trying to explain what we're doing to fight back. And understanding -- I mean it was understandable, and in some ways predictable that people were going to punch back. And now we're going to have a political season where we debate all these things, which is good. It's good that we're going to have a debate about this. But the idea that some say, "he was being arrogant," you cannot be arrogant when you're looking into the face of mothers, as he was saying last night, holding children who are never going to know their father. You can't be arrogant in a situation like that. There is nothing more humbling than being the President in a time of war. And you can ask any President who did it. And George W. Bush is no different than his predecessors, Democratic or Republican, who lies awake nights asking himself the question, how can I get this done and get our people home? It is the natural inclination -- you've seen how the President reacts and responds when he gets before the military. He gets choked up because he knows how tough it is. He knows what the atmosphere sometimes is politically. He knows that these people are committed to it. You've got an all-volunteer army; first war in which we've had an all-volunteer army because people are committed. And he wants to make sure that he can get as many of them -- he would love to get each and every one of them home safe. It is simply not possible to be arrogant as a Commander-in-Chief in a time of war. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Iraq War | War On Terror
Posted by WhiteHousePressCorps.org @ 8:01 PM Press Gaggle by Tony Snow 09/11/06 (Topic: 9/11 Memorial Events) — Monday, September 11, 2006 — Q Was the President surprised by anything, or was this day basically what he expected? Or has he talked about anything striking him as unexpected at either of the stops? MR. SNOW: I don't think there has been. My conversations have been cursory at this point. He's now -- he knew going in that this was going to be emotional, and it has been. You see people directly affected when we were at the firehouse. It's interesting because you sit around a table with people who mention -- matter-of-factly, but not casually -- the memorial services for people who died, how long it took to find bodies. For them, it's an incredible reality -- what's gone on with the family members, the ways in which, since September 11th, they've chosen to put together memorials, whether they be at hospitals or schools or neighborhoods. There have been people handing out pictures and cards and commemorations. It's very personal. And again, with Shanksville, you have family members who were weeping and recalling what had happened. There's an interesting little detail which I got at both sites. The people in New York said, the weather has been exactly the same every September 11th since September 11th, 2001; and the people at Shanksville said the same thing, the same kind of weather conditions have prevailed each year since. I don't know what you make of it, but it's one thing that people took pains to mention. So, again, going in, he knew this was going to be emotional, and it will be emotional at the Pentagon. We'll be talking -- for those of us who live in Washington, we have a lot more direct experience because we know a lot of the people, including survivors, as well as people who died. Surprises -- I don't know if you go in with fixed expectations to a day like this. You go in knowing that you're going to be commemorating, you're going to be reaching out to people. I don't think it's the kind of day where you're surprised so much as you've just got to be ready for whatever you encounter. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | World Trade Center | United 93
Posted by WhiteHousePressCorps.org @ 9:15 PM Press Briefing by Tony Snow 09/08/06 (Topic: Armitage Names Plame) — Saturday, September 09, 2006 — Q How long has the President known Richard Armitage leaked Valerie Plame's name? MR. SNOW: I don't know. I don't know if he knew. Q Could you find out for us? MR. SNOW: No. Q Why not? MR. SNOW: Because when you get into these things what you're asking about is details on which we're not commenting. Why don't you ask when everything has been fully litigated and when we're in a position to be able to say whatever we might want to say. But in the context of an ongoing investigation and ongoing litigation that involves Scooter Libby, as inviting as it may be to ask who ought to apologize, or who knew what when, or to do that sort of thing, it's best just to keep my mouth shut. And that's what I'm going to do. Q Who does know? MR. SNOW: You're the reporter. You're the reporter. You're asking me -- Q Well, you may not know because you came in late. But who in the administration does? MR. SNOW: Again, let me repeat what I said. We've got ongoing litigation. I'm just not going to get into any of this stuff. Ask Richard Armitage who he talked to. Maybe he'll be able to do it. He's writing op-eds now. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Armitage | Plame
Posted by WhiteHousePressCorps.org @ 1:26 AM Press Gaggle by Tony Snow 09/07/06 (Topic: Ahmadinejad at Uinited Nations) — Thursday, September 07, 2006 — Q What about the idea of Ahmadinejad -- speaking at the General Assembly on the 19th? Has the President heard about that? What does he think of that idea? MR. SNOW: Well, you may recall, President Ahmadinejad spoke last year at the U.N. General Assembly. I believe that's where he thought people perceived a halo. And it was standard practice at the General Assembly to have heads of state attend and, if they wish, speak. So it's standard procedure. Q Is he at all concerned about any kind of debate that might be -- pursuant to that? It's something that, obviously, Ahmadinejad is interested in. MR. SNOW: There's not going to be a steel cage grudge match between the President and Ahmadinejad. The President will deliver his speech and at some other juncture, President Amhadinejad, if the General Assembly so decides, will speak. This is not going to be a U.N. version of "Crossfire.' White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | Ahmadinejad | United Nations
Posted by WhiteHousePressCorps.org @ 9:59 PM Press Gaggle by Tony Snow and Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism Frances Townsend (Topic: War On Terror) — Tuesday, September 05, 2006 — Q Five years removed from 9/11, as you go about your work, do you sense a complacency in the American people about the possibility of attacks? MS. TOWNSEND: Thank you for asking me that. People often will ask me what I think the greatest threat to the American people is, and putting aside the quite obvious threat from Islamic extremism, I do worry about complacency. Look, I think we should be very -- we should take great pride and satisfaction in the fact that we've not seen an attack in the last five years, and that's a result of both our offensive actions overseas -- a combination of the offense overseas and our defense here at home. But we should not take that to mean -- and it would be tragic for us to take that to mean that we have been wholly successful, and that we will not see another attack. The best recent example we've seen is this U.K. plot, which was absolutely intended and designed to be an act of mass murder, a second September 11th. And so there should be no doubt in anybody's mind, while we have enjoyed safety over the last five years, there has been a lot of work and a lot of effort gone into it by men and women whose faces and names will never be known, and this is a long war. This is a long effort in which we need not just the federal government, we need our state and local partners and the American people to sustain it. White House Press Corps | Press Briefing | Tony Snow | News Media | Bush Administration | War On Terror | Frances Townsend
Posted by WhiteHousePressCorps.org @ 7:31 PM
|
|