Text 3321, 842 rader
Skriven 2006-10-02 23:32:14 av Whitehouse Press (1:3634/12.0)
Ärende: Press Release (061002c) for Mon, 2006 Oct 2
===================================================

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

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
October 2, 2006

Press Briefing by Tony Snow



2006

PRESS BRIEFING

BY

TONY SNOW

White House Conference Center Briefing Room

12:35 P.M. EDT

MR. SNOW: All right, hello. Sorry for the delay, I will explain that
momentarily.

The President's schedule today, let's see, normal briefings in the morning.
He had a wildfire briefing about 9:00 a.m. He met with the Special Envoy
for Sudan at 9:25 a.m. Then a meeting with the Prime Minister of Turkey,
which actually went an hour over -- I'll read that out in a moment. An elm
tree planting on the north grounds. He'll depart the White House in a bit
and attend a Heller for Congress reception in Reno, Nevada, later today,
and spend the night in Stockton, California.

Tomorrow the President will sign S. 260, Partners for Fish and Wildlife
Act. The sponsor is Senator Jim Inhofe, of Oklahoma; the House version,
sponsored by Richard Pombo, of California.

The President also had a phone call this morning, from 7:39 a.m. to 7:56
a.m. -- that would be 17 minutes -- with Russian President Putin. He called
President Putin to discuss a range of issues -- the President did place the
call. They agreed on the need to maintain the united position of pressuring
Iran to abandon its nuclear weapons program, and they also discussed recent
tensions in Russian-Georgian relations.

As far as the meeting with Prime Minister Erdogan, Turkey is a very
important and valued strategic ally and partner and the two leaders have a
close working relationship and a good personal relationship. They talked
about a lot of things, including EU accession, which the Turks want, as
well as Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Israel, the Palestinian Authority,
Darfur -- I think I've covered the ground, but they covered a lot of stuff.

And with that, I'll take questions.

Q Tony, is the administration satisfied with the way the House Republican
leadership is dealing with the Foley matter? And what did you mean when you
said there have been scandals, more than simply naughty emails on the Hill?

MR. SNOW: No, no, I said there's a lot of gossip, as you know. Gossip flows
freely about members, and rather than retelling it, I was simply citing a
fact of life. I believe maybe even some has come to your attention once or
twice, Tom.

But having said that, look, this is an awful and disturbing story. And
anybody who sends children, young people to Capitol Hill for the privilege
of becoming pages ought to be assured that their sons or daughters can
learn about the noblest traditions of American politics and not about
something else.

I am told that Speaker Hastert will be doing interviews today and he will
be able to go through that. So as far as answering particular questions
about who knew what, when or what they knew or how they're going to deal
with it, I'll refer those questions to the Speaker.

Q But has the President heard any explanation from the Speaker, or anyone
in the senior leadership, as to why they did not act earlier? And why, for
example, no FBI investigation before this, when most of this was known
months ago?

MR. SNOW: The FBI at this point is still trying to figure out --
considering a preliminary investigation to find out whether any laws were
broken. As far as who, what, when, where why, I think what you need is the
facts. We have impressionistic stories; we need to find out what it is that
people knew at various times. And, again, I'll refer you to Speaker Hastert
for that.

Q But there is a risk that by taking this wait-and-see approach that it
leaves an impression that the White House thinks that the conduct of the
Speaker and other leaders was sufficient.

MR. SNOW: Well, we don't know what the conduct was, and we don't know what
they knew. So what we're not going to do is to leap to judgment without
finding out what the deal is. I mean, I called over to the Speaker's office
-- the question is, what exactly did they have. And the Speaker has turned
over emails and documents to the Justice Department, which they are
reviewing. And not having seen the documents, I'm just unwilling to try to
characterize what he knew or when, and, again, I think the appropriate
person to answer that is the guy who knows, which is the Speaker. He's
coming out today.

But let's make it clear, when you have allegations of this sort, for any
parent, and for most decent people, they're horrifying. There's no excuse
for that. But now the question is, how did they do it -- I mean, what did
they know about it, and what sort of measures will the House of
Representatives be taking, and if there are legal steps, one presumes that
the proper and duly constituted legal authorities will follow through on
them.

Q But even on a gut level, if the Speaker was aware that there were overly
friendly emails, are you satisfied that he allowed Representative Foley to
continue to work in areas like the Missing and Exploited Children?

MR. SNOW: Again, I've got to find out what he knew. There have been
characterizations of what "overly friendly" means, and I think rather than
getting myself into the position of second-guessing, I really would rather
know. Now it may be that at some point we'll come up and --

Q Did the President know -

Q But, Tony --

MR. SNOW: No, the President does not have --

Q But Tony --

MR. SNOW: Let me just finish answering the question. Not having seen it, it
places us in a peculiar situation. I think people are trying to put us in a
box, and say, you know what, unless you come out and you condemn Denny
Hastert, you're saying that this behavior is acceptable. It's not. Let's
get that part clear. Let's also be clear that people who have the privilege
of working in government ought to hold themselves to higher standards. The
House is responsible for enforcing its standards. That has always been the
case. And Denny Hastert will come forth, he'll tell you what he knew, and I
think everybody will be in a better position to render judgment at that
point.

Q Tony, do you think Americans should be confident sending young people to
Capitol Hill, given what you do know? And I know you don't know everything,
but surely there's been some communication. And it's these overly friendly
emails, which have been out --

MR. SNOW: I think --

Q How can Americans feel confident that they can send their young people to
the Hill, if that's what happened?

MR. SNOW: Look, I agree, Martha. You're not getting me to --

Q But I mean more so the investigation, or people saying, it's okay, they
were just "overly friendly emails," even though he asked for a picture.

MR. SNOW: I think -- you know what, I think people need to find out what
the -- first, Representative Foley has resigned. Second, the House is going
to have to figure out how to respond to this. Third, you're absolutely
right, the American people need confidence that this sort of thing is not
tolerated, and that affirmative steps will be taken to make sure it doesn't
happen again. That's a Capitol Hill matter right now. For those of us
working in the White House, we're horrified when we hear stories like this.

Q Is that the President's view?

MR. SNOW: Yes, absolutely.

Q But if the House leadership essentially dismissed something like overly
friendly emails and didn't investigate further, that's acceptable?

MR. SNOW: As I said, let's see what the documentary trail is. You're asking
me an impressionistic question. Until I have more data -- no, and I'm
serious, because --

Q Do you know anything from the Speaker, does the White House have any --

MR. SNOW: I had a brief conversation today with the Speaker's office, and I
was told the Speaker will answer the questions. Wait until the Speaker
answers the question and come back.

Q But did you get them answered? Because we're not going to be able to come
back today and talk to you.

MR. SNOW: You can -- well, no, I'll be on the road today. Let me put it
this way -- let me just be clear, once again. I thought I was clear, but
I'll be clear again. Young men and women who are sent to Capitol Hill --
let me repeat myself -- for the privilege of serving in our government
ought to be exposed to the noblest traditions of American government, and
not to the kind of behavior that was outlined in the emails, period,
exclamation point. Put the exclamation point before the period, just for
emphasis.

Q -- sending overly friendly emails.

Q Should that have not happened in the Republican leadership so much
earlier? If you're calling this horrifying, these allegations are
horrifying, and it comes out now -- it seems that there is somebody who
dropped the ball in there, whether you know who, what, when, where and why,
exactly now. Somebody is --

MR. SNOW: Then you've drawn that conclusion.

Q Tony, what does the President know? What does he know about the emails?
Has he spoken to the Speaker, actually spoken to Hastert?

MR. SNOW: I do not believe he's spoken to the Speaker -- look, the House
has to clean up the mess, to the extent that there's a mess. The President
is not responsible for going back and conducting his own personal
investigation on this. The House has an obligation, and House members, I
think, are talking pretty vociferously about this on both sides of the
aisle.

Let's figure out what the facts are, let's figure out what people are
doing. I know everybody wants a rush -- to come in with a conclusion, a
rock'em, sock'em conclusion. The behavior was reprehensible. I don't know
how much further I can go. I know that you want me to come out and have a
definitive statement, but I think as reporters, you understand that perhaps
before one draws a definitive conclusion about how one ought to talk about
the Speaker, Republican leadership, we need to see the documents. I haven't
seen the documents; to the best of my knowledge the President hasn't.
Speaker Hastert will be available, he'll be able to answer the questions.

Q Did Mr. Rove or the political arm know about this?

MR. SNOW: No.

Q Should voters, in the election a month from now, hold the Republican
Party accountable for not just one, but four members of the senior
leadership in the House resigning in the last year?

MR. SNOW: I'm going to let voters decide that.

Q I've --

MR. SNOW: I'm sorry, Goyal, is this on this topic? Okay, let's exhaust all
this, and then we'll go.

Q Tony, the Republicans are facing this scandal, plus the administration is
having to cope with these new allegations about the mishandling of the Iraq
war that have come out in Woodward's book. Is there any concern in the
White House that a sort of perfect storm is starting to build as you --
only weeks before the midterm elections --

MR. SNOW: No. I think a lot of people want to fabricate a perfect storm.
Mark Foley has got to answer for his behavior, right? Now this does not
affect every Republican in the United States of America, just as bad
behavior on the parts of Democrats in ages past has not been a reflection
of their entire party. These are things that happen, and they need to be
addressed and the individuals responsible. If you try to paint it with a
broad brush, I think you run the risk of tarring respectable people who are
living decent lives and serving their country well.

As for the Woodward book, you tried to slip a fastball past there, but the
fact is that there have been plenty of disputations about the book, and
we'll let people draw their judgments there.

But I'll tell you this. This is an administration that believes in
maintaining high ethical standards, and believes that we ought to be
setting an example, and, at the same time, also has been pursuing an enemy
in Iraq and around the world since September 11, 2001, and has absolutely
no intention of standing down.

As for many of the statements, Condi Rice has come up to dispute some, Andy
Card has been out. A number of other players have come out -- the First
Lady's office. And you know what? You've got a lot of juicy gossip in the
book, and people will have all the time they want to go through it. But the
fundamental question about whether the President is "in denial" -- flat
wrong, absolutely wrong.

Q When will the President come out and actually say that?

MR. SNOW: Why does the President -- he's not going to come out and say, oh,
by the way, I'm not in denial. How stupid is that, to have a President
coming out and say, I'm sorry, I'm not beating my wife anymore?

When you're faced with charges that are either, in some cases baseless or
out of context, you don't dignify them with a response because you dig a
hole for yourself. Come on, you know better than that.

Q On the Woodward book, you dealt with it a lot on Friday, but Democrats
are focusing on this meeting in July 2001, allegedly between the CIA
director and Secretary -- now-Secretary Rice. Are there other meetings
about the terrorist threat that happened that did not get to the 9/11
Commission? That is the question.

MR. SNOW: Well, they're, first, taking a look at the documents right now.
And, secondly, I think you may be hearing from some people in the meeting
who are -- Condi Rice has already disputed the account, and I think others
in the meeting may be prepared to dispute it as well. What appeared in the
book simply does not comport with their recollection.

Okay, go ahead.

Q Tony, going back to the myth that you're disputing, myth number three,
back to that question -- how can you dispute it, when in August 2001
there's a document that was declassified by this administration, "bin Laden
determined to strike in the U.S. and" --

MR. SNOW: Oh, you're talking about the PDB.

Q Yes, I am.

MR. SNOW: You're talking about the PDB that was discussed ad nauseam before
the 9/11 Commission and had a general characterization as some of the
things bin Laden may do. It is something that the administration obviously
pays attention to.

Let me make a simple point, April, which is that administrations -- and
I've said this about the prior administration -- if somebody presents you
with a compelling piece of evidence that says American lives are going to
be at risk, you don't sit around and say, oh, it's inconvenient, I'm going
to ignore it.

Condi Rice, I think, was pretty vociferous on that point yesterday. And
it's grossly irresponsible to assume that anybody in a position of power
and a position of responsibility is going to look askance at such things.
As you know, you can go back and look at the PDB, and it is something that
talked in general terms about something that may happen.

Q Tony, I'm sorry, this is not general. It says, "Nevertheless, FBI
information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in
this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of
attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York."
Is that --

MR. SNOW: Understood.

Q -- just vague?

MR. SNOW: No. But it also does not say that people -- if you recall, April,
before September 11, 2001, when somebody mentioned hijackings it meant
taking a plane, taking it to another place and trying to hold up people for
ransom. It did not mean flying an airliner into a building and killing
3,000 people.

I am not going to sit up here and tell you everything this administration
or prior administrations may or may not have done. But the second-guessing
game gets a little bit silly when, once again -- and what I'd have you do
is go back and read through all the 9/11 Commission stuff, because a lot of
people are trying to grandstand, rather than realize that people --

Q But, Tony, it's not silly when you're talking about people's lives,
thousands of lives were lost --

MR. SNOW: Absolutely.

Q -- and it was a month before, there was a lot of chatter leading up to
9/11. And some people want to know why was it not placed as a high priority
to move -- to make a movement so that even if it was vague, as far as
hijackings, you could have at least been looking at the airports in some
kind of way, or the Transportation Administration could have been doing
something in relation to this possible hijacking.

MR. SNOW: I appreciate the second-guessing. The fact is that this
administration realizes that the preparations this country had made before
September 11th were inadequate. It happened. And it happened as a result of
people who were trying their best to secure the country having not been
apprised of all the facts -- in the Clinton years, and in the Bush years,
and in years before. This is not a threat that simply materialized a month
before September 11th.

As a matter of fact, the videotape that came out the other day had bin
Laden and his guys -- Mohammed Atta and others -- posing for the cameras in
the year 2000, before the election of George W. Bush. And the 9/11
Commission, itself, says that the attacks were years in planning.

Please, feel free to second guess. Everybody feels horrible about September
11th, but the other thing that's important is to understand in the wake of
September 11th we learned to take the terror threat with utmost seriousness
and we need to continue to do so today.

Q But, Tony -- and this is my last question -- I understand you keep
talking about the Clinton administration, but let's talk about August 6,
2001, this administration, this PDB. Let's talk about why it was not placed
at a high level. Why not?

MR. SNOW: It's a presidential decision brief, for heaven's sake, it goes
before the President. What higher level do you have? Members of Congress --

Q Well, why wasn't it acted upon?

MR. SNOW: Precisely what piece of actionable intelligence is there?

Q Department of Transportation, you could have gone the gambit, CIA, FBI,
you've could have done a little bit more.

MR. SNOW: Okay. Again, thank you for the second-guessing.

Q I just want to follow up. My question -- mine's not second-guessing of
September 11th, it's about the 9/11 Commission. Now you have commissioners
outraged, they say that they didn't know about this meeting. You're saying
that the meeting did take place --

MR. SNOW: The meeting did take place.

Q -- but it's out of context in the book?

MR. SNOW: Yes. And I will --

Q And is there a reason why, I guess, the 9/11 Commission didn't know about
the meeting? That's the bottom-line question.

MR. SNOW: The answer is, I don't know. And people are taking a look at all
the documents to find out what was reported and what was not to the 9/11
Commission. As a matter of fact, there's a trip to the Archives right now
to try to sort through all that.

Q If there were other meetings, will you let us know about those, if they
didn't get to the 9/11 Commission as well?

MR. SNOW: "Other meetings" regarding what? The fact is that this is a
meeting, as I've just told you, was mischaracterized, at least in the
opinion of people who attended it. Therefore, they are not likely to be
able to come up with other mischaracterized meetings. This is an
administration that went to extraordinary lengths and went through two
different commission hearings -- actually three different commissions that
have been involved in the matter of global terror, and will continue to do
so.

And we would also encourage people to look forward, as well as back,
because right now there seems to be a lot of attention to going back and
looking at old meetings that began after January 20, 2001, and to realize,
as the President has been stressing, is that there is an ongoing terrorist
threat, and we need to take it seriously. It is not something that has gone
away, and the President remains committed to it.

Helen, I've jumped past you several times, it's your turn.

Q That's all right. It's in the context of the book, but is Henry Kissinger
a regular advisor to the President? And did he tell the President to stick
it out, and that any withdrawal would be like eating peanuts?

MR. SNOW: No. As a matter of fact, Henry did not talk to Bob Woodward. I
spoke with Henry on Friday. So there are some second- or third hand
recollections. Dr. Kissinger appears fairly -- he appears from time to
time. I don't want to say "fairly regularly," but he's been in the White
House, as have Jim Baker and Lee Hamilton and any number of people, in
contrast to those who say the administration sort of puts on blinders and
puts wax in its ears. Dr. Kissinger comes in quite often -- it's when he
disagrees with the administration on policy. He told me, what's the purpose
of coming here when I already agree.

But he is somebody whose counsel is valued, but he is not a surrogate for
anybody in the administration, nor are the advisors that have come in at
various junctures, whether they be scholars or military experts, or people
from Iraq, or various sectarian groups. They've all been in, and they all
help the President try to shape, in as comprehensive a way, his view of
what's going on, on the ground, so that he can be most effective in trying
to move forward.

Q Did he urge the President to stay the course?

MR. SNOW: The President -- no, stay the -- I'll tell you what --

Q Stick it out, I think were his words.

MR. SNOW: No, I didn't ask him about the phrase. I'll tell you what he told
me, and I'll just repeat it that way. He said that he supports the overall
thrust and direction of the administration policy.

I think what -- he had a line in an op-ed piece which ended up being
quoted, but -- what was it -- "Victory is the only exit strategy," I think.
I'm paraphrasing. That was an op-ed piece that he wrote, and that is his
view. But then, again, victory was the only exit strategy after the Civil
War, and after World War I, and World War II. Typically, in a time of war,
that is the exit strategy. That's when you know it's over and you can move
forward.

Q I wanted to return to Tom's first question. What you said exactly was,
"There have been other scandals, as you know, that have been more than
simply naughty emails." And my question is, do you think that "simply
naughty" in any way describes or captures --

MR. SNOW: No, I really don't. You're right. That may sound a little bit too
glib. I think I've already said -- I've used the words "horrifying,"
"appalling," "disturbing," fill in the blanks. It's absolutely
inappropriate.

And thank you for that, because I'd only get socked with that later in the
day. Go ahead, Goyal.

Q Two questions. One, there's another book General Musharraf has written,
it's now President had a hand on (inaudible) and said there is a lot of
stuff about 9/11 and also (inaudible), including the famous one that U.S.
--

MR. SNOW: All right, Goyal, I'm just going to stop you. We haven't read the
book yet. We did hear about it in the press conference, but I don't think
the President is going to be doing book reviews on President Musharraf. He
is satisfied that President Musharraf is a very important ally in the war
on terror. They're continuing to work together.

And also the President is working both with President Musharraf and
President Karzai to make sure that they can address problems along the
Afghan-Pakistan border.

Q Second on, as President talking human rights in Iran. There's a story
here, horrible story, and hundreds of people --

MR. SNOW: Which paper is that?

Q India Globe.

MR. SNOW: Oh, okay. Yes.

Q Hundreds of people watching on the streets of Iran. The eight-year-old
boy, he stole a piece of bread, and his hands were -- he was crushed by a
heavy truck, and hundreds are watching. And this is a time for the Muslims,
a holiday that's giving and loving. I mean, talking about human rights in
Iran, can you answer how President can answer this eight-year-old boy was
crushed under the truck and hundreds are watching there?

Q Secretary Rumsfeld said today -- or yesterday, that he got a call from
the President, and I'm curious. Obviously, there is a lot about this in the
news, but what specifically prompted the President to make the call?

And, secondly, with all this stuff with Andy Card discussing the
possibility of his tenure, did the President talk to Secretary Rumsfeld at
all during that time, late '04 and into '05, about any of this stuff, any
of these concerns that were being raised?

MR. SNOW: You know, I -- look, they talk regularly. Did they put their feet
up on the table and say, Don, a lot of people want you to resign, or want
me to fire you -- I don't know if they had that conversation.

What the President does know is that there has been a lot of speculation
prompted by the Woodward book. But you can't -- look, Don Rumsfeld is a guy
who has ruffled feathers because he has been, in many ways, one of the most
transformational leaders at the Department of Defense in a very long time.

The constant complaint inside the building has been, the generals always
prepare to fight the last war. Don Rumsfeld began by trying to transform
separate military services that, in previous times, have been loathe to
work together at all times. And he stressed interoperability and joint
operations. He beefed up special operations. He ruffled a lot of feathers.

And, as a result -- again, I'll defer to Martha, my expert on this, but
there are certainly a lot of people in the building who are very unhappy
with what he's tried to do. The people who are not unhappy -- and when he
came in he started talking about something that, at that juncture, was
relatively unknown. It was called asymmetrical warfare, which is exactly
what we're facing in Iraq today and generally in the war on terror.

So I think what the President simply wanted to do is, given all the press
attention and everything that's been going on, to say, Don, I still have
faith in you, and I support you.

Q Tony --

Q -- according to Card, was raising the possibility of moving Rumsfeld out
in November '04 because he was trying to transform the Army? I think it had
something to do with Iraq more specifically.

MR. SNOW: I'm not -- I'll let Andy answer the characterizations. I'm not
sure he's characterized it -- what Andy was doing -- and there had also
been suggestions, as you know, of replacing "the entire National Security
team." You do that sort of thing at the end of a term.

What you want to find out -- you want to make sure that everybody has got
fresh legs for a second term. And the President, you know, took a cold look
at it, and still supports Don Rumsfeld.

Q Did Karl Rove run afoul of any White House ethics policies when he went
to a basketball game with Jack Abramoff?

MR. SNOW: According to Karl -- and, again, we're still looking through all
this -- he paid for any and all tickets. If you pay for a ticket, and you
have a pre-existing social relationship, as everybody in this room knows,
the pre-existing social relationship rules. But as I said on Friday, we are
looking very carefully through all of it.

I don't want to be presumptuous about doing it -- the laws are actually
fairly complex in sorting through this stuff, and the Office of Legal
Counsel and others have taken a good, hard look.

Q But even if he paid for it, he was using one of the most powerful
lobbyists in Washington like a valet service -- here, I'll go get you some
tickets. I mean, is that permissible?

MR. SNOW: Again, what the characterization -- he was using it as a "valet
service" -- that's colorful, that's good, that's really good.

Q That's why people read my column. (Laughter.)

Q Tony, much has been made about President Bush's relationship with Prince
Bandar, who was the former Ambassador of Saudi Arabia, in the book,
specifically saying that it was his father who recruited him to act as some
sort of advisor, quoting the President, telling him, "I don't have" --

MR. SNOW: You mean, President Bush 41, who had recruited Bandar to be an
advisor?

Q Yes, that's what Woodward alleges, saying that Bush said, "I don't have
the foggiest idea about what I think about international foreign policy; my
dad told me before I make up my mind, go and talk to Bandar." What is the
relationship, what -- does that sound accurate? Is that true that he acted
as some sort of advisor?

MR. SNOW: Prince Bandar, for a considerable period of time, was the Saudi
Ambassador to the United States, and would obviously be somebody with whom
one would have a conversation, and to that extent, would be an advisor just
as Prince Turki, who is now the Ambassador to the United States, and would
be considered an advisor as well. We had the Ambassador of Turkey in today.
We have ambassadors in all the time. So it's not unusual at an
ambassadorial level to do that.

But, again, the quote has been cobbled together in such a way as to make it
sound like the President just fell off the turnip truck, and this is a
President who has been deeply engaged, and very smart about the people he's
dealing with, and also tries to be just as realistic in his assessments of
foreign heads of state and others in trying to form judgments, not merely
of their positions and their history, but also their character. You may
recall last week the President said before the meeting with Presidents
Musharraf and Karzai, he wanted to see the body language; he wanted to see
how the two men were interacting, so he could form a judgment about how
they best could work together, or how they better could work together. So
just to give you a little more context on the way the President approaches
these things.

Q Can I follow up on what you were answering to Brett's question earlier?

MR. SNOW: Yes.

Q You said you had gone back to the Archives --

MR. SNOW: No, somebody -- I was told that over at State they're looking --
they're going to take a look at the Archives and find out what was provided
and whatnot.

Q And then what will happen to the information you may or may not be able
to recover?

MR. SNOW: I don't know. I don't even know what the information is -- let me
put it this way --

Q Let me finish. Can you say that if you do recover some information, that
you'll make it public?

MR. SNOW: Yes. And, furthermore, if somebody comes out and says, I was in
the meeting and it's baloney, and I was in the meeting and it's baloney,
and I was in the meeting and it's baloney, that will also be made public.

Q And can I --

Q Tony?

MR. SNOW: I'm sorry, I'm cutting her off. I'll get to you, Les.

Q I wanted to follow up with one other thing. You were talking about having
to try to make the highest ethical standards in the executive branch. In
the past couple of weeks, you know that individual overseers -- whether
it's IGs or the House Government Reform Committee -- have indicated that in
four, at least four separate executive departments there have been problems
with conflicts of interest in grant-making. My question is, is the White
House, is the Chief of Staff concerned enough about the performance in the
executive branch that this is a maybe endemic problem, that there needs to
be some more oversight at the White House level of what the executive
branch is doing?

MR. SNOW: I don't know, but I doubt it. Les.

Q Tony, two questions. Nearly a thousand people inside and around a
Catholic church in Harford County, Maryland, on Saturday for the funeral of
Petty Officer David Roddy, who was killed in action in Iraq, which funeral
was threatened by potential disrupters from Kansas, who never showed up.
And my question: Does Petty Officer Roddy's Commander-in-Chief commend
those many who attended carrying U.S. flags as a dissuasive to those who
threatened to disrupt?

MR. SNOW: The President is not going to get into jostling over a funeral.
The President instead --

Q He's concerned about this, of course.

MR. SNOW: Let me finish, because it's the kind of question that is
wonderful and delicious, but he's not going to get into traveling bands
from Kansas trying to attend a funeral in Harford County, Maryland.

What he does believe is that the men and women who are serving this country
right now on a voluntary basis are second-to-none. And the sacrifices that
they make merely going into the theater of battle are absolutely -- they're
awesome to contemplate. And those who give the ultimate measure are people
who deserve to be remembered, and remembered not only fondly but
admiringly. And, furthermore, those who have been injured in battle have
their own fight, in some cases, that will last the rest of their lives. He
feels for them, he visits them, he cares about them. And I think that's the
appropriate context. And I think it's probably more respectful to the
servicemen who died than trying to talk about a political fight.

Q Does the President support Republican Congressman Todd Akin adding
language to the National Defense Authorization Act, which guarantees the
end of current regulations in the Navy and Air Force, which, in Akin's
words, "prevented chaplains from praying according to their faith and
conscience"?

MR. SNOW: The President has made his comments clear on freedom of faith.

Q Thank you, Tony. Last time, President Bush and South Korean President
Moo-hyun Roh had summit talks -- (inaudible) --

MR. SNOW: That wasn't my reading of the meeting. As a matter of fact,
President Roh had said that there had been some action taken against North
Korea, which was breaking news, in the conversation afterward. And I was in
the meeting, and it was -- it was a meeting where the two were cordial and
working together. President Roh, during the balance of his time in office,
has a lot of important concerns, probably chief among them trying to make
sure that North Korea does not nuclearize the Peninsula.

Sarah.

Q Tony, there might be a runoff election in Brazil. Does the President have
any favorite candidate?

MR. SNOW: If the President doesn't endorse a Republican primary, he's
certainly not going to endorse in -- (laughter.)

Q Tony, given the scandals in Congress and possible ties between Abramoff
and the White House, as well as the focus now on the strategy behind the
Iraq war, what are the chances of any kind of domestic agenda being carried
out at all, either in Congress or at the White House?

MR. SNOW: Okay, let me address, first, the scandal. You've got one person
who behaved badly. There are 434 others in Congress.

Q -- close to the Abramoff scandal.

MR. SNOW: The Abramoff scandal is what? Jack Abramoff ripped off a bunch of
people, he's breaking rocks for breaking the law, and he apparently got
nothing out of it. So to my -- no, to the extent that there are data
available, the data indicate that Jack Abramoff, when he was trying to make
contact with the White House -- and lobbyists do that, you know -- he got
nothing out of it. Now, as you also know, the vast bulk of lobbying in this
town goes elsewhere.

So what you're trying to do is draw a conclusion: Jack Abramoff, evil;
talked to the White House, therefore White House evil. I'm not accepting
the premise, because this is somebody who was well known to many people in
Republican circles, who had made phone calls, who had asked for things, and
he didn't get them.

Q Excuse me, first of all, an assistant to Mr. Rove apparently got
something out of this.

MR. SNOW: Well, there are -- we are taking a look. As I said, we're taking
a very careful look at what was in the House report. And without my trying
to play junior lawyer here, when the people have finished taking a good
hard look at it all, we'll let you know what they found out. That's an
important concern, and it's worth looking into.

Q My question was on the domestic agenda and whether or not that's been
blown out of the water.

MR. SNOW: I'm sorry, what?

Q My question was on the domestic agenda, and whether it's been blown out
of the water --

MR. SNOW: No, and I'll tell you why. The domestic agenda -- you know what's
interesting right now is that there seems to be an attempt to substitute
the politics of personality for the politics of ideas. And there are
important ideas right now at work in America about whether or not you want
high taxes or low taxes; whether you think that more extensive government
programs are better than less extensive government programs; how you want
to -- what the proper conduct of the war is. Those are things that people
are going to be concerned about, as well. And instead what you get is,
again, trying to go through and say, man, Abramoff really disappointed us,
he didn't get anything. Let's keep trying for it.

Well, you know what? This is a town where there are constant --

Q He got hard time.

MR. SNOW: Yes, he got hard time.

So the point here is that the President feels confident in a domestic
agenda for the simple reason that there is important business: extending
tax cuts, dealing with entitlements.

One of the things that the President strongly believes in is making life
easier for his successor, whoever that may be, by tackling hard issues that
everybody knows needs to be addressed -- hard issues such as Social
Security and Medicare, because they're going to bankrupt the country. So
the President wants to go ahead and deal with it so that the future
President doesn't have to deal with the political heartache, and at the
same time, can move ahead on a more satisfactory basis to deal with other
issues.

So the answer is absolutely we think we can move forward with the domestic
agenda.

Q Excuse me, though, with respect to taxes, the trifecta bill would repeal
or at least reduce the estate tax -- minimum wage, which is tied with that,
as well as extenders, as far as it's being reported, that is not going
anywhere after the recess. Are you predicting that it will?

MR. SNOW: I am telling you that there are two more years in this
administration after the new Congress has been seated, and in those two
years, the President intends to be aggressive.

Q But I'm asking about the lame duck session.

MR. SNOW: That's not the way you framed the question. You asked about the
President's domestic agenda, and I gave you an answer that deals with all
of it. As far as the lame duck session, we're going to have to see what
Congress is of an attitude to do.

Q Really quickly. On today's meeting with the Turkish Prime Minister, did
the President and the Prime Minister discuss the PKK and Turkey's recent
comments that they may cross into Iraq and strike PKK --

MR. SNOW: They did not talk specifically about that. They did talk about
the organization formerly known as PKK. It's got a new name now, I've
forgotten what it is.

Q Kongra-Gel.

MR. SNOW: Thank you. Our Turkish reporter does know -- and they talked
about the fact that it appears that some of the PKK offices are going to be
getting shut down within Iraq, and so they did have an extensive
conversation, but they did not talk specifically about what you mentioned.

Q About cross border --

MR. SNOW: That's correct. That's correct.

Q At this meeting of the Turkish Prime Minister and President Bush -- how
to accelerate Turkey's accession to the European Union?

MR. SNOW: Don't know. That is a matter, as you know, for the European
Union. The Prime Minister pointed out they're working through stage one,
that has to deal with certain applications. They're moving on to stage two,
and working through various things they need to work through with European
officials, and the United States is going to support them.

Q Thanks, Tony.

MR. SNOW: All right. Thank you.

END 1:12 P.M. EDT
===========================================================================
Return to this article at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/10/20061002-12.html

 * Origin: (1:3634/12)