For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
May 7, 2001
Press Briefing by Ari Fleischer
The James S. Brady Briefing Room
Listen to the Briefing
- Energy
- China
- Macedonia
- Middle
East
- Bahrain
1:13 P.M. EDT
MR. FLEISCHER: Good
afternoon. I have nothing to announce, so I'm pleased to
take your questions.
Q Ari, why is a
temporary or permanent cut in the federal gasoline tax not a possible
option for the problem with spiraling prices?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President is
very concerned about the rise in gasoline prices. He's very
concerned about the impact that it's having on Americans, particularly,
lower income Americans, who need their vehicles to drive to get to work
and to enjoy their family lives. And that's one of the
reasons the President is pushing so strongly for a comprehensive energy
policy, and also for a tax cut, so he can get money into the hands of
people who are being hit by rising gas prices.
During the campaign last year there was much
made about the possibility of repealing the federal gas tax, or
limiting the federal gas tax. The President did not join in
that call. I would alert you just to wait until the final
recommendations come out of the task force.
As I indicated this morning, the President has
not joined that chorus before -- I do not rule it out, but I have said
very clearly that's not something the President is focused
on. His focus is on long-term solutions, not quick
fixes. Quick fixes don't work. He wants to have a
focus on that which is long-term, that will work.
Q Well, wouldn't this
quick fix certainly work in shaving a little bit off the
price? What's the detriment of doing it?
MR. FLEISCHER: Again, the focus of
the President is to move forward on a long-term solution to a problem
that's been very long in the making. And one of the things that's
wrong with Washington, in the President's opinion, is people too often
move from one quick fix, one short-term, non-solution to the next
short-term non-solution, without focusing people's attention on the big
matters that really count.
And in the case of energy, that's a focus on
how to conserve energy, conserve fuel, develop more resources, have
better infrastructures so that electricity can move across transmission
grids and natural gas can move across pipelines in a manner that gets
the market to the market, in a manner that lowers costs on a full-time
basis for the consumer.
Q Is one of the
problems with this, and the entire energy field, American
lifestyles? Does the President believe that, given the
amount of energy Americans consume per capita, how much it exceeds any
other citizen in any other country in the world, does the President
believe we need to correct our lifestyles to address the energy
problem?
MR. FLEISCHER: That's a big
no. The President believes that it's an American way of
life, and that it should be the goal of policy makers to protect the
American way of life. The American way of life is a blessed
one. And we have a bounty of resources in this
country. What we need to do is make certain that we're able
to get those resources in an efficient way, in a way that also
emphasizes protecting the environment and conservation, into the hands
of consumers so they can make the choices that they want to make as
they live their lives day to day.
Q So Americans should
go on consuming as much more energy than any other citizens in any
other countries of the world, as long as they want?
MR. FLEISCHER: Terry, the President
believes that the American people are very wise and that, given the
right incentives, they will know how and they will make their own right
determinations about how much they can conserve, just as the President
announced last week that the federal government, as part of its
consumership in California will reduce energy needs -- for example, the
Department of Defense facilities in California, by 10
percent. He believes the American people, too, will make the
right decisions about conservation and the program he will announce
shortly will also include a series of conservation items.
But the President also believes that the
American people's use of energy is a reflection of the strength of our
economy, of the way of life that the American people have come to
enjoy. And he wants to make certain that a national energy
policy is comprehensive, that includes conservation, includes a way of
allowing the American people to continue to enjoy the way of life that
has made the United States such a leading nation in the world.
Q Ari, would he
recommend, then, to people, as a President exercising his moral
leadership, that they're more conscious of the amount of energy they
use, that they scale back, that people conserve more?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think you'll hear
a rounded and comprehensive proposal very shortly from the President
that includes several items that hint at what you're suggesting.
Q -- use the word
"conservation" in selling the energy plan, the reality is that the core
of this plan to be unveiled is a call on finding more energy
supplies. And everybody has emphasized
that. There's a growing chorus now of not just environmental
activists, but also scientists within the government who say that, in
fact, conservation and renewable energies could do a lot more to cut
demand than is being given credit for or even being given a
try. Do you dismiss the recent DOE study that came to that
conclusion?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, we do not
dismiss it. But you can't prejudge what the President is
going to propose because you don't know what he is going to propose in
terms of conservation.
Q Well, I think we all
know some of the really core outlines of it.
MR. FLEISCHER: There's also a
reflection of the fact that 88 percent of America's energy comes from
fossil fuels. The remaining 12 percent come from renewables,
biomass, wind, solar. It's a very small
percentage. And among that 12 percent -- you also have
nuclear in that mix. And so the amount of energy that can
come from -- let me put it to you this way.
The place that the American people get most of
their energy that we are dependent on to preserve the American way of
life does come from fossil fuels. And within the remaining
portion of the energy that the American people use, the President is
committed to a conservation program to help Americans to conserve
more. And that's reflected in the President's priorities,
the weatherization program in his budget, for example, to help people
have more energy-efficient homes. And it will also be
reflected in some other things you're going to learn in the next week
or two when the President unveils his policy.
Conservation is, indeed, an important part of
getting America energy-independent. Conservation alone is
not the answer. Nothing alone is the answer, and that's why
the President's proposal will be a very well-rounded one.
Q Ari, you said a
moment ago that the President still believes that it's important to get
tax relief into the hands of the American people because of the rising
energy costs. Does he still support a retroactive tax cut
for this year?
MR. FLEISCHER: Of course he does.
Q So that's a quick fix
to a long-term problem in conjunction with a long-term
fix. Does he not see the need for a short-term fix in
conjunction with his long-term energy policy?
MR. FLEISCHER: The singular reason
that gas prices are rising is because of a problem with refinery
utilization in this country. Our refineries are running
full-bore. It's not just that we have a problem with supply;
it's more a problem that no new refineries have been built in the
United States in the last 25 years. You can cut taxes
retroactively and get money in the hands of low-income consumers who
have been hit by the rising price of gasoline. You can't
retroactively build a refinery; it takes years. So the two
are not comparable.
Q But you can take some
bridging steps, if you will, to try to cover the time between now and
when the refineries are built, or when the peak demand for energy tails
off. Why is he not considering any of that?
MR. FLEISCHER: I would urge you to
await the report that's going to come out soon.
Q Ari, does the
President believe the sudden increase in gas prices in certain areas of
the country is justified?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President is
always concerned, as I said, about the rising price of
energy. And that's why his administration is the first
administration in quite a little while to push to make certain that our
country has a comprehensive energy policy. Of course the
President is concerned about it. He thinks the price is too
high, and he wants to do everything in his power to bring it down.
Q He doesn't follow --
he doesn't see any suggestions of price gouging or that type of thing?
MR. FLEISCHER: Oh, this
administration will be vigilant, to make certain that if there is price
gouging, we are able to track it down and put an end to
it. The administration will remain vigilant to make certain
that is not the case.
Q Ari, you've sent a
pretty clear signal that there doesn't seem to be anything in the short
term the President is inclined to do, even if gas prices go to $3 a
gallon in prices like California and the Midwest. Does that
mean that he feels gas prices going to $3 a gallon would not imperil
the economy, would not imperil the recovery that we may be in now?
MR. FLEISCHER: There will be things
that can be done in the short term to affect conservation, for
example. There will be a series of actions that can be
short-term helpful to America's broader energy needs. But the focus of
this program is going to be what the American people have been looking
to Washington to do for so long, which is to demonstrate long-term
leadership. If five or 10 years ago people in Washington had
focused on these issues, the United States would not be in the position
it's in today.
Q So he does not see
the possibility of gasoline prices at $3 a gallon as a threat to the
economy?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think he is
worried about it, and that's why he wants to have a national energy
policy in place, to prevent this from becoming a continuing
problem. And it's also why he wants to cut taxes, so that
the effect of this gasoline, in effect, tax hike, can be reversed by
getting money back into the hands of consumers.
Q Besides the fact that
it's a short-term fix, why did the President, when he was governor,
support reducing the federal gas tax? And why doesn't he
support it now?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, during the
campaign this issue came up and, frankly, it was a politically
sensitive hot spot for the Vice President who was running and for
President Clinton, at the time. And the President just chose
not to join in on something that he viewed as much more short-term
political than long-term policy.
Q He supports lowering
taxes. What's wrong with lowering this tax? Why not do it?
MR. FLEISCHER: Again, because the
focus the President wants to concentrate on is how to solve a permanent
problem. And that is where the core of this matter lies.
Q If he could
permanently reduce, immediately reduce the cost of gasoline by 18 cents
a gallon, why not do it?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, if you reduce
it by 18 cents a gallon, of course, then you're going to wreak havoc
with America's road infrastructure and airline and plane
infrastructure. The ability of the United States to build
roads and repair roads and bridges depends on the amount of revenue
that comes in from a dedicated tax source.
So the President is not unsympathetic to those
who want to provide an immediate reduction. But he wants to
remind everybody that the solution is long-term and that the risk in
Washington is everybody focuses so much on short-term, quick fixes, to
the expense of long-term solutions that Washington never gets around to
the long-term solutions that the American people have elected people
here to do.
Q On price gouging, how
does the government go about monitoring that? Does someone
have to make an allegation to the Federal Trade Commission or to
FERC? Or is this something they do on their own?
MR. FLEISCHER: This is not a new
issue. This is something that has risen virtually every time
in the last 20 years that gas prices have gone up, and every time the
Department of Justice has looked at this matter and has issued its
report. And the Department of Justice has action on this.
Q It's a Department of
Justice matter?
MR. FLEISCHER: The Department of
Justice is vigilant on this. It's a Department of Justice
matter.
Q So they -- do they
have a group that regularly monitors gasoline prices and then launches
an investigation?
MR. FLEISCHER: They have been the
lead agency on this over the last, I think it's about 20 years.
Q Two,
Ari. One, quickly, to follow up on Ron. So is the
answer to this whole gas tax question that the President believes the
federal gas tax right now is at the appropriate level, that's where it
should be?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President
believes that the best focus on how to reduce America's over supply and
rising gas prices -- under supply and rising gas prices is by focusing
on a long-term, comprehensive plan.
Q So he supports a gas
tax of 18 percent?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, what he has said
is that he's going to resist short-term, quick fixes. He
wants the focus to be on the long-term solutions.
Q In the political
context of this argument, then, when this report comes out on the 17th
and the President is proposing tax incentives for oil companies that
will build new refineries; tax incentives to help people build
infrastructure, like pipelines; tax incentives for all sorts of new
development and putting the government on record of favoring new
development -- politically, aren't you worried that your
not-so-friendly people on Capitol Hill are going to sit up and say,
where's the tax incentive for the guy who is paying $2 a gallon or
more?
MR. FLEISCHER: Two points for
you. One is, I would not rush to conclude what's going to be
in the program that the President will propose. And, two, the
President is not going to focus on what Washington always focuses on,
which is political solutions to get you through the night. He's going
to focus on long-term solutions that get the American people through
both the night and the day.
Q Ari, you said last
week that President Clinton was going to China as a private
citizen. But it turns out he's been briefed by Condi Rice
and by the State Department, and he says you actually encouraged him to
go and said he could have a positive impact, possibly help win release
of the spy plane. Can you tell us, was this administration's
position on his trip to encourage it or neutral?
MR. FLEISCHER: The administration's
position is exactly as you heard. President Clinton is going as a
private citizen. He did talk to Condoleezza Rice prior to
his departure. That is typical of traveling Presidents, no
matter what reasons they go to, but especially when they go to regions
that are a little more sensitive, as China is at this
time. And the position of the White House is he's going as a
private citizen, and the White House has raised no objections to
President Clinton's travel.
Q Does that mean when
he said you encouraged him he was incorrect?
MR. FLEISCHER: I've answered your
question.
Q In recent months
President Bush has been inviting the foreign leaders, the Prime
Ministers and Presidents, to the White House. The Prime
Minister of India or anybody from that area on the list?
MR. FLEISCHER: As you know, we will
keep you informed of all announcements of visiting heads of state.
Q And going back to the
energy crisis, small businesses in the U.S. are worried; so is the
international community. Are we heading to the 1973 or worse
situation, long lines and --
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, the President
certainly hopes we are not. But when you take a look at the
amount of oil the United States imports, we are importing upward now of
60 percent of our foreign oil from foreign sources. During the height
of the 1973 Arab oil embargo, I think it was down in the 30s or 40
percents, and now it's up to a much, much higher level. The
amount of energy we are developing domestically has declined during
that same period of time, so we are more dependent on foreign supplies
of oil, even though the foreign supplies now are more diverse.
Back in 1973, they came principally from the
Arab OPEC nations; now it comes from foreign suppliers, but it includes
Venezuela, it includes Mexico, it includes a diversity of foreign
sources. So times are different. But one of the
biggest differences, though, that sets this era apart from the '70s is
the American economy's dependence on electricity. In the new
Internet-e-economy, electricity to power up people's PCs on their desks
and their laptops, which they take everywhere they go, is a very
different measure of use than it was in the 1970s.
I'm reminded when I was in college, for
example, we used to take notes on pads and use pens. Now you
see all the PCs in people's rooms and laptops that students bring to
class and plug in. We are a very different economy and that
ability to power that economy is the strength of America. The Internet
economy, the e-economy has been one of the ways that America has led
the world in growth over the last five, eight years. And the
President wants to maintain that way of life.
Q And how do you --
MR. FLEISCHER: You only get
two. New rule.
Q You took a question
this morning about whether the energy report was going to be printed
tonight. What's the answer to that?
MR. FLEISCHER: Don't have a good
update for you yet. It will be printed sufficiently ahead of
time that it can be released when we have announced it will be
released, which is soon.
Q Ari? Ari?
MR. FLEISCHER: Is everybody
ready? (Laughter.)
Q Thank
you. Thank you very much.
Q Can I ask one more on
oil before we take --
Q I will certainly
yield to --
MR. FLEISCHER: My question still
stands. (Laughter.)
Q During the campaign,
then-Governor Bush was talking about increasing supply by drilling in
ANWR, by speaking with our OPEC allies and getting them to open the
spigot. Was he just unaware of the scope of the
infrastructure problem at that time, or is this something new?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, but that
certainly is one element of fixing the problem, the ability to have a
steady and reliant supply. And as you know, Saudi Arabia
indicated, and so, too, did other OPEC nations, that they wanted to
keep the price of gasoline -- of oil -- capped at about $28 per
barrel. And there are a variety of factors which go into
keeping America's energy free and flowing, and it involves supply, it
involves infrastructure, it involves conservation, it involves
protecting the environment.
Q But he didn't make
infrastructure an issue, and I'm just wondering if he was aware of it
back then?
MR. FLEISCHER: No, he did in his
energy -- no, no, no, take a look at his Saginaw speech on energy last
September, and the President spoke extensively about infrastructure
problems. And if you remember the gas spike hike that took
place in the Midwest, some thought it may have been because of
gouging. The Department of Justice took a look at it and
concluded it was not because of gouging. It was created in
substantial part because of transportation issues involving gas
pipelines and infrastructure problems.
Q There were also some
examples there, though, of maximizing profits. And what will
this White House do in the next couple of months to make sure that none
of that goes on?
MR. FLEISCHER: I've answered that
question. The Department of Justice will remain vigilant to
make certain there's no price gouging.
Q On gas prices -- I'm
sorry, let me just see if we can close it. I'm intrigued by your,
"that's a big no" answer to Terry's question, and the blessed American
way of life. If Americans buying gas guzzling SUVs and using
oil in the way they do leads to $3 a gallon gasoline, is the President
going to say nothing about changing the way of life?
MR. FLEISCHER: Mark, I think when
you take a look at the fact that SUVs have been on the market for 10
years, and that the price hike is going only on now, there was a time
just five years ago where gas was available in Virginia, I remember,
for 70 cents a gallon. So it's not the presence of SUVs that
have caused the problem, it's a comprehensive problem that is caused
not by that factor alone -- rising CAFE standards have helped in the
past many years. But the problem comes from a fundamental
imbalance between supply and demand.
Q Just to be clear,
your "big no" means that he is not going to be suggesting changes in
the way of life --
MR. FLEISCHER: The point I was
making is that the President will focus on a series of initiatives that
involve conservation, that involve increased production, that involve
greater infrastructure building, to make certain that the energy can
flow. The American way of life is something that needs to be
protected as we enjoy our resources and we enjoy the American standard
of living.
In the 1970s there was somewhat of an effort
to make certain that Americans lowered their standard of
living. The President does not think we need to do
that. The President believes that America can enjoy a high
standard of living as we address America's energy problems.
Q He will not be asking
people to change the way they consume gasoline?
MR. FLEISCHER: There will be a
focus in the plan on conservation, as I've indicated several times.
Q But, Ari, how does it
lower the standard of living to drive a more fuel-efficient car?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think it all
depends on whether or not people will no longer be able to have access
to the cars at the price they want to pay.
Q Ari, two parts -- my
two. The Washington Post, page one, profile of Randy Weaver
quotes him as saying of the McVeigh execution, "There should be a bunch
of federal agents lying right beside him on the gurney." If the Post is
going to publish without criticism of such defamation, don't federal
agents deserve some expressed support from the Press Secretary to the
head of all federal agents?
MR. FLEISCHER: I can't, of course,
comment on anything that is printed. That's fair in our
country --
Q You've commented many
times on things that are printed.
MR. FLEISCHER: But on the question
of the law enforcement and their role in our society, I was reminded on
the day a shooting took place right in the first weeks of a new job
here in this White House. I think everybody in this country
owes a debt of gratitude to the men and women who every morning wake up
and don't know if they're coming home from work. And they're
very different from many other people, and our whole nation owes the
law enforcement community a debt of gratitude.
Q Since the President
strongly supports the death penalty for many who do not want to die or
who might be innocent, will he also support death for those who, being
terminally ill, yearn to die and ask for a physician's help in death,
just as they do a physician's help in birth? And does he
believe that Oregon and the Netherlands are wrong in so allowing it?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President
believes that we need to welcome and create a culture that respects
life in this country.
Q How can he be in
favor of showing how much we disapprove of killing, by killing?
MR. FLEISCHER: You're referring to
the death penalty?
Q I'm referring to the
death penalty.
MR. FLEISCHER: Because the
President's opinion is the death penalty ultimately saves
lives. And if he was not convinced that it saved lives, if
he was not convinced that it served as a deterrent to crime, than the
President would not be --
Q Has he ever looked at
the comparison of the death rate --
MR. FLEISCHER: You're up to
three. (Laughter.)
Q -- of the murder rate
in Chicago with the murder rate in Michigan, that has no death
penalty?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think I've
answered your question.
Q Quick question on
Macedonia. The government there has launched a major -- a
serious, major offensive against Albanian rebels. This
happened right after President Trajkovski visited the White
House. Did President Bush give a green light to this
offensive against Albanian rebels?
MR. FLEISCHER: Actually, Terry, the
escalation of the violence in Macedonia began prior to President
Trajkovski's visit to the United States. And the President made clear
in his remarks that he believed that the ultimate solution would be a
political solution. That's what the President said to
President Trajkovski when they met. But the President is
very concerned about extremists operating in Macedonia who are
threatening the peace in the region. And the President wants
to make certain that President Trajkovski is able to focus his efforts
on the extremists and protect the civilians.
Q And does the
government of Macedonia then have the United States government's
support in these most recent offenses against the rebels?
MR. FLEISCHER: As I just indicated,
to the degree that the President supports the efforts of the government
of Macedonia to fight the extremists who have brought the violence to
the region, the President has made clear to President
Trajkovski who, himself, said that he is dedicated to making certain
that we can protect the civilians. But you do want to take a
look at the chronology on that, because one of the biggest killings
took place prior to his arriving here.
Q Do you believe what
is happening in the last few hours in Macedonia is in an effort to
crack down on the extremists, as you were talking about?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think that the
whole history of that region has been very difficult for people who are
either in power, and the whole instability that has come from extremist
actions in Macedonia and other places in the Balkans. And
the President wants to make certain that Macedonia is able to take the
action they need to combat a problem that has been created by the
extremists.
Q You're talking about
conservation, and I understand the President has a long-term policy on
energy. But are you suggesting that there is something he
will do about energy efficiency that will have some impact over the
short- to medium-term?
MR. FLEISCHER: There have already
been a series of announcements. I think the Department of
Energy has announced a couple different programs that would affect
conservation and affect efficiency. And in the report that
you will see coming out soon, there will be passages in there dealing
with efficiency. Efficiency is also a
blessing. Efficiency has been a way the American people can
enjoy their standard of living, their standard of life, while using
less resources.
Q But this is -- but
your sense is -- well, I mean, I know you don't want to talk about
specifics, but your sense is, there will be something in there that
will help the increasing demand for gasoline over the short term?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think it all
depends on how you argue the short-term. It depends on how
significant measures can kick in. But I want to -- if
conservation alone could solve all of America's energy problems, I
think it's a given that the previous administration would have taken
those steps. It's never that simple. It's never
that easy. The President's report is going to be a
well-rounded one that focuses on the whole mix of items that America
needs to solve its energy problems.
Q There are states,
though, where the gas tax has accrued beyond where it's paying for new
roads, or it has accrued into the surplus. I mean, if we're
giving money back to the people that is theirs in the first place, why
not give this money back this summer --
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, of course, as
you know, the gas tax is collected by the federal government and there
are complicated formulas that determine the exact amount that it goes
back. It's not as if state governments can determine whether
they are sender states or receiver states. It doesn't work
that way.
Q On the Middle East,
there has been some very extreme anti-Israeli -- in the past few days
by Mrs. Arafat, which I cited last week, and by Asad of
Syria. Are you discouraged by this? Do you have
any response to the statements?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I answered
your question last week about Mrs. Arafat. And the
President, as he emphasized today in his meeting with the Amir of
Bahrain, is determined to continue his efforts to bring about a peace
in the Middle East. And his position will continue to be
that of a facilitator, helping the parties come together so that peace
can be achieved.
Q Does the White House
want to give a response to Asad?
MR. FLEISCHER: On what,
specifically?
Q About what he said --
statements last week?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President at all
times urges all parties to engage in measured statements and measured
tones so that peace can be achieved.
Q Can we get a readout
on the President's meeting with the Amir of Bahrain and specifically
whether Iraq sanctions -- a revision of the Iraq sanctions policy was
discussed? And can you outline -- because Tariq Aziz of Iraq
over the weekend warned his neighbors that if they go along with the
new U.S. sanctions policy they will be cut out of the trade
deal? And no one here seems to know what the sanction policy
is.
MR. FLEISCHER: Let me see if we're
going to have a readout on that. I don't have an update before I came
out here. That was a two-part meeting, I was in the first
part in the Oval. And then they went for lunch; I prepared
for you. So I don't have a read on the second part of the
meeting. But let me see if we're going to have a background
briefing sometime later today.
Q And a quick second
one. There is a report Harvey Pitt will be your new SEC
chairman.
MR. FLEISCHER: Is there a
question?
Q Do you want to
confirm or deny the report? Or dodge it? (Laughter.)
MR. FLEISCHER: As you know, I don't
confirm, deny or speculate on personnel announcements.
Q Ari, why did the
United States resume surveillance flights off China yesterday?
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm not going to
comment on any military operations other than to say that, as you know,
right from the beginning, it has always been the position of the United
States that it is our prerogative
and right to fly in international air space to preserve the peace by
flying reconnaissance missions. But I'm not going to
entertain any questions about any specific missions we may or may not
have flown.
Q Ari, Prime Minister
Sharon, in his comments on the Mitchell Report, said he has problems
with accusations against the Israeli Army and that they have no
basis. He also said he has problems with the freezing of
settlements.
Now, in the light of the these statements --
also in the light of today, Iman (phonetic), a four-month infant has
died, killed in a house in the occupied territories. Where
do we go from here? Especially in light of the refusal --
settlement, of freezing settlements, which the Palestinians are
demanding?
MR. FLEISCHER: The objective of the
Mitchell Report was to work constructively with the parties and to
provide an independent and objective review of the current
crisis. In general, the United States believes that the
Mitchell Committee's effort fulfills these objectives. The
report presents and calm and a measured effort to provide constructive
recommendations for consideration by all the parties involved.
I'm not going to get into any more specific
elements in the report right now. As you know, under the
process, it's not yet complete. It's still being shared with
the parties involved, and the United States is receiving input back
from the parties.
THE PRESS: Thank you.
END 1:39
P.M. EDT
|