For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
November 5, 2002
Press Gaggle by Ari Fleischer
Aboard Air Force One
En Route Andrews Air Force Base
12:25 P.M. EST
MR. FLEISCHER: All right, you are aware of what the President did
this morning. When we get back to the White House the President will
relax in the afternoon. In the evening the President looks forward to
having over for early dinner speaker of the House, the minority leader
of the Senate, Tom Davis, the head of the National Republican
Congressional Committee, and Senator Frist, the head of the National
Republican Senatorial Committee, along with Chairman Racicot of the
RNC. They'll have an early dinner, along with their spouses.
And the President will be kept up to date on election results. He
and Mrs. Bush of course are celebrating their anniversary, and they'll
also be receiving the election results into the evening.
And that is it, as far as any type of report on the Presidents
day. Im happy to take your questions.
Q Sorry, just go back over it. So it's Hastert, Lott, who
else? Frist?
MR. FLEISCHER: Frist, Davis, Racicot and spouses.
Q Can you talk logistics tonight, in terms of what we might
hear from you guys, how you intend to communicate with us about what
youre hearing?
MR. FLEISCHER: I do not anticipate any statement from the
President tonight at all. In terms of on staff, we have made no
decisions yet about whether or not there will be any type of staff
announcements, et cetera. I'll be available through the usual ways. I
will probably be out of my office, and spending most of the night with
Ken Mehlman, so I can just stay as close to results as possible.
Q So how do we keep in touch with you and come talk to you
guys? How do we -- what's the best way to --
MR. FLEISCHER: Call the office, and I'm just going to be in
constant communication with my office, if I'm not physically there.
I'll probably be shuttling back and forth.
Q Any clue how late you plan to stay and Bartlett and other
--
MR. FLEISCHER: I haven't figured it out yet. Actually, if you
have suggestions on how I can be helpful tonight, let me know. I don't
know if we're going to have a statement by the press secretary, if I'll
just be there. I think it's like a typical election night. We're
going to be, in effect, monitoring the results and seeing what they are
and making any determinations as necessary.
Q One thing that might be helpful is if when you guys are
planning to sort of decamp, I mean, you've decided that for the night
you've got what you're going to get, or at least things are too close
to call, and you're going to go home, it might be helpful to let us
know that you guys are doing that, so we don't just sit around sort of
wondering who is still around.
MR. FLEISCHER: Good point, good point.
Q Is the President actually going to watch TV, or is Karl
just going to call him with updates, or how is he --
MR. FLEISCHER: He'll watch TV. He'll observe the results, get the
updates from Karl, and see where it goes.
Q Does he ever tap into the Internet and look at the polls?
Remember during 2000, his brother was obsessed with kind of looking at
the ongoing -- he's not --
MR. FLEISCHER: I dont anticipate that tonight.
Q What did you say, he would be watching with Karl, or --
MR. FLEISCHER: No, I think hes going to get updates from Karl over
the phone.
Q And the dinner, the officials who are planning to dinner
then go home. In other words, hes not going to hang out and watch it
with them, is he?
MR. FLEISCHER: It's an early dinner.
Q So, other topics. Abu Ali, did the President sign off on
the Predator attack?
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm not going to comment at any level of
specificity about this one event, other than to say that the President
has made very plain to the American people that the war on terrorism is
not a traditional war, it's not a -- it's not traditional in the sense
that there is one known battlefield or one known nation or one known
region. The President has made clear that we will fight the war on
terrorism wherever we need to fight the war on terrorism. The
terrorists don't recognize any borders or nations. And the United
States will be dedicated to protecting the American people.
Q Does that statement mean that you are supporting what
happened or that the White House actually signed off on it and was
involved in making it happen?
MR. FLEISCHER: I am not going to address the specifics of any one
event. I am making clear, however, that the President has said to the
American people that this is a different kind of war, with a different
kind of battlefield, where known political boundaries, which previously
existed in traditional wars do not exist in the war on terrorism. The
President has talked about a shadowy war where terrorists are going to
try to hide, and terrorists will try to -- when they emerge, were going
to be on the lookout for them when they emerge. The President has been
very up-front about that.
The President has also made clear to the American people that one
of the best ways to fight the war on terror is political, diplomatic,
military, and that sometimes the best course is a good offense.
Q Now, the President was obviously pleased that Bin al Sheeb
was picked up. He uses it in his speeches all the time. How was he
feeling about this particular operation involving a guy who was said to
be heavily involved in the bombing of the Cole?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, Abu Ali has ties to al Qaeda. And the
President has made clear that in this war on terrorism it is important
to bring the leaders of al Qaeda to justice.
Q When was he notified about this episode?
MR. FLEISCHER: Again, I'm not going to make any comments at all
about any one specific event. My comments are general, Im not going to
comment on the specifics of this one event.
Q So let me ask you about that. By not addressing the
specifics, are you saying that the United States will engage in shadowy
war, that there will be killings around the world using military
equipment and personnel in the name of the American people that the
American people will not be told about?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President has made very plain to the American
people that the United States is going to bring to justice the
terrorists, al Qaeda terrorists particularly, as our way of protecting
our country.
Q Secretly, if necessary.
MR. FLEISCHER: And the President has said very plainly to the
American people that this is a war in which there will sometimes be
visible moments and sometimes there are going to be long lulls. And
there are going to be things that are done that the American people may
never know about. That is the very nature of the war of terror. And
the President makes no bones about it, he will protect the American
people in this war.
Q Ari, shouldn't justice involve a judge, a jury, a
prosecution, a defense?
MR. FLEISCHER: Absolutely, when it's a case of American citizens
and when its a case of anything covered under Americas laws and our --
America's Constitutional protections for America's citizens. When it
comes to terrorists who seek to kill us, the President will defend and
protect America.
Q On the U.N. resolution, I understand that revised language
from the State Department is going up to New York today. Are you
planning to present today to the Security Council or tomorrow? And how
did you fudge the language in material breach to get the French to
agree to it?
MR. FLEISCHER: Fudge, question mark, question mark, question
mark?
Q Yes, fudge.
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, the President began this course on September
12th, and this course is almost at its final day. The President
believed that it was important to go the United Nations and test the
United Nations to see if the international community could act in a way
that was strong, effective and in a way that results in inspectors
having the tools they need to do their jobs, to disarm Saddam Hussein.
The President chose a multilateral path. And we will ultimately
see now, shortly, whether or not the U.N. will be successful. It
didn't have to be this way. The President could have chosen to act,
probably with the support of the American people, in a different way,
but he laid out this course.
We are very close. I cannot tell you at this moment whether or not
something will be tabled today, tomorrow or the next day. But a
productive two weeks are becoming even more productive. But there are
no assurances about what will happen next, still.
Q Okay, then on the fudge question, how did you work the
question in, I guess --
MR. FLEISCHER: John, I think what I'd like to do is, until a
motion is tabled, I'm not going to describe any of the language. There
still are conversations going on with the members of the Security
Council about the exact language.
Q But you know what the French wanted, they wanted the
Security Council to decide what constituted a further material breach.
MR. FLEISCHER: Let me just say that this has been a very dedicated
effort by America's diplomats, and a very important one. The diplomats
have worked very hard to work with our friends and allies to find
agreement on language. It's a reflection of the path that the
President committed to. It's a reflection of the efforts made by the
U.N. officials, by the State Department officials, by others in our
government, to bring this to a point where we could keep the United
Nations Security Council together.
This has been a test of the Security Council. We still have a
final stage to go through with the Security Council. But I'm not going
to characterize any of the specific word changes at this moment. I
think that will all come out shortly, I'm just not prepared to do so at
11:30 a.m. central time.
Q But I take it, though, that this isn't a game of
brinkmanship. You work the language and you work with friends and
Russia to the point where everybody is comfortable with it. You're not
about to lay down something that will draw a veto?
MR. FLEISCHER: It's been a very healthy dose of good, solid
diplomacy, backed up by a clear understanding that President Bush was
determined to take action if the United Nations did not, and that he
would do so in a multi-lateral way.
Q How confident are you that there will be a vote this week?
MR. FLEISCHER: Again, I'm not prepared to make any specific
guesses about whether these will be tabled today, tomorrow or whatever
day. That's something that the diplomats will make a final
determination of.
Q And if it doesn't happen this week, when will the clock
that you've said all along is ticking, when will it run out?
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm just not prepared to make any guesses on the
final timetable. But it's abundantly clear that we are reaching the
point of finality.
Q Has he made any phone calls on this today?
MR. FLEISCHER: I'll let you know if he does. I don't anticipate
any.
Q And so far, has he been heartened or disheartened by the
process at the U.N.?
MR. FLEISCHER: The President will make his final judgement after a
vote is cast. This has been a slow process, but an important one. The
President committed to this process. One of the ironies of this entire
debate is the phony charge against President Bush that he would engage
in unilateralism. What President Bush has done is demonstrated
strength and determination, which has given multilaterialsm a chance.
Unilateralism was the way of the '90s, because the multilateral
organization known as the Security Council was slumbering, and the
unilateralist was Saddam Hussein. Thanks to the President's strength
and leadership by going up to New York and saying, this is your chance,
the United Nations, to be relevant, the President changed the equation
of what it means to be unilateral and what it means to be
multilateral.
The fact of the matter is it was the President's black and white
language, the President's moral standing and moral clarity that gave
impetus to the multilateral United Nations to finally wake up and look
at the Iraq situation seriously. We'll see ultimately what the outcome
is. That still is a question mark. We'll see.
Q On today's election, can your ground campaign to get out
the vote beat the Democrat's ground campaign? That's one of their real
strengths.
MR. FLEISCHER: That's a classic question, and it's an unknown. In
2000, you felt very good going into the election, and then we were
surprised by the strength of the Democrat's ground game. It's now in
the voter's hands. We'll see.
Q How does the President feel going into this? He's had a
very rigorous campaign swing over the last couple days.
MR. FLEISCHER: He feels good. He's pleased that he was able to go
out and help as many candidates as he has. The President hopes that it
makes a difference in these close races. He feels very good about it.
But he also understands now it has passed from the hands of the elected
officials and candidates to the hands of the voters, which is what our
democracy is all about.
Q -- reveal details about birthday and anniversary gifts?
MR. FLEISCHER: I am not, other than to say they were exchanged.
Q So in some of these tight races, that are within the margin
of error, even in states like South Dakota that show a small edge for
Mondale, do you think the ground game might be able to turn it in your
favor?
MR. FLEISCHER: Just I think that at this point, everybody looks at
these last polls and they recognize polls may or may not be right. In
several states there are conflicting polls, some showing Republicans
are up, some showing Republicans are down.
But it's an interesting election. This is one of the closest ones
we've seen. It's also interesting because there seem to be so many
Senate races in play. Typically there just aren't this many Senate
races in play. This cycle appears to be different.
Q So what are your predictions for tonight?
MR. FLEISCHER: My predictions are to have a nice dinner, to have a
little camaraderie.
Q Are you still thinking you're going to pick up seats in the
House?
MR. FLEISCHER: I've made no predictions. The only prediction that
the White House is making is that the historical trend that runs
against first-term incumbents looks like it will be broken tonight.
The only question is, will Republicans be able to gain seats, will the
Democrats be able to keep the Senate. It's possible the Democrats
will, it's possible Republicans will pick it up. Those are the
unknowns that will get settled in a number of hours.
Q And you think that this is going to turn on the President's
popularity, or is it going to be local issues?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think it's going to be a combination of the two.
And in fairness, the only way to really judge is to pour through the
exit polling data and to study what the voters say.
Q I have a question. What does the President think is the
basis for the 50-50 nation? What is the country divided about?
MR. FLEISCHER: I think that there's always a sifting sand of the
American mood. And we are in an era right now, at least -- and have
been for the last couple years, where the American people seem to look
at the government in a 50-50 manner. Will that get broken tonight,
perhaps. Will there be a trend that gets established tonight? We'll
see. But certainly judging from the 2000 election, which is really the
only data we can safely draw any conclusions from, the country was
evenly divided.
Now having said that, a very evenly divided country has swung very
strongly in terms of giving President Bush a strong, favorable job
approval. That's a shift and that's a swing. Whether that means
anything to the off-year elections or not, we'll see, although it
already has shown -- I think you can safely conclude that one of the
reasons the historical trend has been broken is because of the
President's popularity. That's a national factor.
Q Has he ever reflected on the cultural divide between the
red and blue states? Since 2000, which we saw so pronounced in his
Presidential election, we still see reflected today. Has he ever
talked about the divide --
MR. FLEISCHER: I really don't hear the President dwell on these
issues. The President views this as dealing with the hands that he's
been given, that he believes that whether he has strong support from
the American people, or it's a 50-50 nation, his job is to speak with
moral clarity, take strong stands, believe in what he believes and make
his case. He believes that if he makes a good case, the American
people will listen and follow. If he makes a wishy-washy case, he'll
get what he deserves. He believes in taking strong stands.
Q Any reason to believe at this point that Dean Barkley is
going to vote with Republicans in a lame-duck session?
MR. FLEISCHER: I have not heard.
Q Ari, when are we going to see the President? We haven't
seen him in quite some time.
MR. FLEISCHER: You've seen him every day in different states.
Q We haven't had Q&A; with him in -- going back to --
Q -- qualifies as a Q&A;?
MR. FLEISCHER: -- strong lead toward that thumb.
Q Seriously, when are we going to see him? We haven't seen
him in a long time, there are no crisis that we're aware of. We're not
getting even the rudimentary --
MR. FLEISCHER: Suffice it to say, I'm always pushing. And I will
make no predictions. But I understand your points well.
Q I think we -- the pool speak for our colleagues on this
point. There's been a lot of grousing about it lately. Some of it I'm
sure you've heard. Like this record of this --
Q The entire White House press corps.
Q -- pool or gaggle to reflect that a lot of people are
getting pretty upset about it. I mean, there's a lot going on, there's
a lot of issues we'd like to ask him about, and we're not getting a
chance. Why is that?
MR. FLEISCHER: Message received. I think a lot of it is because
of the logistics of this final swing. You know how available and
accessible the President is to taking a couple questions on pool
sprays. He hasn't exactly been meeting with a lot of foreign leaders
in the Oval Office as he's on this last campaign swing. That's often
been a way of getting the questions asked. Similarly, meetings in the
Cabinet Room with members, et cetera.
So some of it deals with logistics. But the bottom line is,
message received.
Q Send him back for five minutes.
Q Yes, we're here, he's up there. What's he doing?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, we don't see any of you armed with little
mini-cameras for Journeys with George, part two.
Q We can remedy that.
Q A couple of quick ones. The Washington Post report about
Iraq, U.S. officials saying that they believe Iraq has some small pox
stored and may have given it to al Qaeda.
MR. FLEISCHER: We don't know about Iraq. We do not think it's
likely that al Qaeda has small pox. But this general issue of small
pox does remain a concern that has been focused on and continues to be
the focus of the President, along with the Centers for Disease Control
and the Department of Health and Human Services, as well as others in
homeland security.
Q And a quick one on the Israeli -- Prime Minister Sharon's
decision to hold quick elections. Do you think that's a good thing,
helps peace, hurts peace?
MR. FLEISCHER: As always, this is an internal issue. Israel is a
democracy, and Israel handles its democratic decisions as any good
democracy should. These are internal Israeli issues.
Q One other thing on Sharon. He said in an interview that
after any war against Iraq that the U.S. should start leaning on Iran,
one of the other members of the axis of evil.
MR. FLEISCHER: The President's views on Iran are well known. I
would refer you to the statement that the President made about the
people of Iran, the citizens of Iran deserve freedom and opportunity.
Q But does he agree with Sharon, that we should start leaning
on Iran after we're done with Iraq?
MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I'm not sure what lean on means, so I'll
leave it expressing it as the President has expressed it.
Q Moving to the third member of the axis of evil, the New
York Times reports in a story buried fairly deep that KEDO plans to go
ahead with the next shipment of fuel oil to North Korea. One, is that
true, that they -- that KEDO plans to go ahead with the next shipment,
and two, why should that not be regarded as simply rewarding North
Korea for bad behavior?
MR. FLEISCHER: Two points. One, the United States is heartened to
note that there was a recent meeting in Cambodia involving the leaders
of the Asian community, including China, Japan, South Korea, where they
again called on North Korea to dismantle its nuclear program. That was
not a meeting in which the United States participated. This was action
taken by the neighbors themselves. That meeting was just concluded in
Cambodia.
Two, Secretary Powell will leave toward the end of this week to
visit with the allies in the area, to discuss what concrete steps to
take, vis a vis North Korea. And we look forward to having the
Secretary go on that visit. I note the timing of this delivery does
not take place for approximately 12 days to two weeks.
Q So it might not happen?
MR. FLEISCHER: It's impossible to predict the future.
Q You're not saying whether it's going to happen or not? For
now, is it going to happen?
MR. FLEISCHER: It's impossible to make any predictions about the
future.
Q So I remember being on this aircraft not too long ago,
where a senior administration official said, if North Korea came to us
and said they were willing to dismantle their uranium enrichment
program in a way that was verifiable, we wouldn't shut the door on
them. They made that offer the other day. Where are we with that?
MR. FLEISCHER: We are at the point where the allies are continuing
to talk to them about it. The Secretary will go to the region. I'm
not sure that you can characterize what North Korea said as a
verifiable action to dismantle. We need them to take action.
Q But do we not shut the door on that? I read some comment
saying they've got to dismantle first.
MR. FLEISCHER: If you took a look at the transcript of what I
said, vis a vis North Korea, and then there was a recent newspaper
account. The newspaper account was a little bit at variance with what
I said. I said what's important is for Iraq to dismantle.
Q North Korea.
MR. FLEISCHER: I'm sorry, what was important, is for North Korea
to dismantle its nuclear weapons program. I made no statement one way
or another about the ultimate -- whether or not there will be talks.
But the story indicated there would not be talks.
Q I've read some other officials who have said the
dismantlement process has to happen first.
MR. FLEISCHER: There's no question that North Korea must
dismantle.
Anything else?
Q Can I get a question in on Harvey Pitt? Given the
accusations from the accounting firm against Mr. Webster, doesn't the
White House think that it would have been smarter for Pitt, instead of
withholding information about Mr. Webster, perhaps even looking into
them further, sharing them more widely, trying to get the bottom of
it. Weren't his actions kind of opposite of where he should be going
in the tenor that he should be --
MR. FLEISCHER: The IG is looking into this now, and I'm not going
to go beyond that.
All right, don't forget to vote, everybody. Do you your duties.
Q So let me ask you this, just before you go.
MR. FLEISCHER: Are we done?
Q Has Pitt become a liability for this White House?
MR. FLEISCHER: The Inspector General is taking a look at this, and
I'm not going to go any beyond that.
Q Are you willing to restate the President's confident in
him?
MR. FLEISCHER: I have no new answers to anything we've talked
about on this topic.
MR. DICKENS: I'll stay behind and talk.
MR. FLEISCHER: That was former low level White House official.
END 12:47 P.M. EST
|