President  |  Vice President  |  First Lady  |  Mrs. Cheney  |  News & Policies 
History & ToursKids  |  Your Government  |  Appointments  |  JobsContactGraphic version

Email Updates  |  Español  |  Accessibility  |  Search  |  Privacy Policy  |  Help

Printer-Friendly Version
Email this page to a friend

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
March 25, 2002

Press Briefing by Ari Fleischer

The James S. Brady Briefing Room

12:34 P.M. EST

MR. FLEISCHER:  Good afternoon.  Let me give you a report on the President's day.  The President this morning began his day with a briefing by the Central Intelligence Agency, followed by a briefing from the FBI to go over all the latest developments on the war against terrorism.  He convened a meeting of the National Security Council.  And then the President has a very warm and friendly meeting with the Prime Minister of Denmark.

The two leaders discussed their common efforts in the war on terrorism.  President Bush thanked Denmark, a strong NATO ally, for its contribution in Operation Enduring Freedom, and expressed sorrow for the loss of Danish soldiers there.  The two leaders covered their common transatlantic agenda, which included preparations for the upcoming NATO summit this fall, NATO enlargement, as well as their intention to develop a strong new NATO-Russia relationship.

The two leaders also had a good discussion about the situation in the Middle East, U.S.-European trade issues, and the common efforts to advance global economic development, especially through open and free trade, economic reforms and good governance with developing nations.  As I said, it was a very warm meeting.

Following that, the President signed a proclamation with a group of Lubavitcher rabbis in the Oval Office, in honor of Rabbi Menachem Schneerson's 100th birthday, that focused on education.  And then, later this afternoon, the President will make remarks concerning Greek Independence Day at a ceremony in the Old Executive Office Building.

With that, I'm happy to take questions.  Helen.

Q    Does the President believe that Sharon has the right to hold Arafat hostage and to tell him whether he can go out of the country, or not?

MR. FLEISCHER:  Helen, without accepting the premise of the way that question is phrased, let me tell you what the President thinks.

Q     --  is he a prisoner, or not, in his own compound?

MR. FLEISCHER:  The President does believe that in regard to the upcoming summit of the Arab leaders in Beirut that the Israeli government, Prime Minister Sharon should give serious consideration to having  -- allowing Chairman Arafat to travel there.  That's something the Vice President said on the shows yesterday, the Vice President indicating, of course, that we do think that would be constructive for him to go.  And that way, the summit can focus on the broader issue, which is how to bring peace to the region.  So the message from the United States is very clear on that point.

Q    Ari, how optimistic are you, though, based on the updates you've been getting from General Zinni at this point, today?  How optimistic are you that Arafat will be able to  --

MR. FLEISCHER:  Campbell, it's hard to say.  There will be another trilateral meeting this evening, involving General Zinni in his efforts with the Palestinians and the Israelis and, of course, the United States as a third party in those talks.  There was a meeting yesterday, so the talks continue.  But in all cases, the message that the President has given, the Secretary of State has given, the Vice President had given, remains unchanged; we do think that it would be constructive for Chairman Arafat to attend the Arab summit.

And the reason for that is the President thinks that the summit should devote its energies to focusing on how to bring peace to the region, and not discuss who is in or who is not in attendance.

Q    Has the President talked directly with General Zinni at all today --

MR. FLEISCHER:  I couldn't tell you if he's talked directly with the General.  He's, obviously, talked with the Secretary of State and others this morning in a couple different sessions.

Q    Ari, the conditions for Arafat to attend a meeting with Cheney and to attend the Beirut summit were the same.  How is it the United States can say he hasn't done enough to meet with the Vice President, but that  --

MR. FLEISCHER:  No, the conditions are not the same.  One is a meeting with the Vice President of the United States, and as the Vice President said when he traveled through the region, that he would meet with Chairman Arafat if Chairman Arafat took the necessary steps, if and when he performed as far as reducing the violence.  Those were the terms the United States had discussed for a meeting with the United States.  It's a different matter for a meeting of the Arab League summit.  And the Vice President addressed that on the show yesterday.

Q    But Prime Minister Sharon, standing right next to the Vice President, said the condition was the same for Arafat to travel, that they had to have a cease-fire.  Are you saying now that if there is no cease-fire in place, the Israeli government should still give serious condition to letting him travel  --

MR. FLEISCHER:  You've accurately said  --

Q     --  or should Prime Minister Sharon stick to his condition of no cease-fire, no travel?

MR. FLEISCHER:  The American position has been clear and consistent --  and the Vice President expressed it when he traveled through the region; it was expressed by the Secretary of State, and then the Vice President again yesterday, as well as the President  --  and that is, as far as a meeting with the Vice President is concerned, that meeting will take place if and when Chairman Arafat preforms, in terms of reducing the level of violence.  And then the Vice President will be happy to travel to the region to meet with him.  Separate issue from the upcoming Arab League summit in Beirut.  It's a different matter, and the United States position is different on that.  And it's been shared repeatedly.

Q    Separate issue to you, but to the Israeli government it is that no cease-fire, no lifting the travel restrictions.  Are you  --  is the administration specifically asking Prime Minister Sharon to change his condition?

MR. FLEISCHER:  The United States position has been made clear to Prime Minister Sharon.  And I don't speak for the government of Israel. That, of course, is a sovereign nation that will enact the policies and carry them out as they see fit.

Q    How does the President think they can pursue peace in Beirut without Palestinian participation?

MR. FLEISCHER:  The President believes that the best way to pursue peace, as far as the Arab summit, would be for Chairman Arafat to travel there.

Q    The President talked about giving foreign aid and having transparency and democratic government.  Yet we give about $3 billion a year, more or less, to the Egyptians.  They've had a President for 22 years who has not seen a lot of democracy.  Is the President thinking about using the same rules for Egypt?

MR. FLEISCHER:  The point the President makes is universal.  And the United States has never said that every nation needs to be an exact replica of the United States.  That is not what the United States believes is the best foreign policy around the world.  That's often impractical and not realistic, based on the history and the circumstances of various nations.

But what is universal and will be consistent, and is new, and it will be applied to aid around the world, is that nations follow a rule of law, that nations are transparent, that nations have democratic institutions. And that will be the formula that the United States will follow in its pursuit of aid programs around the world, and Egypt fulfills those requirements.

Q    The Energy Department today is turning over thousands of pages of documents pursuant to a court order on the workings of the energy task force.  Does this make it much more difficult for the White House to stick to its position that it will not turn over records to the GAO?

MR. FLEISCHER:  Well, I think they're actually turning over information that's a result of requests to the agencies that is broader than just the issue you mentioned, if I recall what the request was.  And that is contacts going back to  --  what was it, I think 1992.  No, that's a different issue, involving the timing of those documents and the transmission.

But from the President's point of view, what's important, Bill, is the issue involving separation of powers between the executive and the legislature that was put forward in the GAO suit, that they are seeking those documents.  And there has been no change in the administration position on that.

Q    But as a practical matter, many of those documents are about to be made public.

MR. FLEISCHER:  Well, we went through this before on an issue that I mentioned just previously.  We do not know precisely what documents will be brought forth, what documents are covered under this.  So we'll all see what those documents are.  But the constitutional principle that the President and the Vice President have enunciated remains in place, and the President will continue to fight for that.

Q    You have said from this podium on many occasion that Governor Ridge has met informally with members of Congress, God knows how many times, and they're trying to work out a way in which he could brief 100 senators, but not in a formal setting.  And yet there are still voices being heard on Capitol Hill that demand that the man comes to a hearing. And they're even threatening to subpoena him.  What would happen if the subpoena is issued?  What would the White House do?

MR. FLEISCHER:  Well, I'm not going to get into any hypotheticals.  I think the Governor himself addressed many of these issues yesterday.  And the President's position is clear that as an assistant to the President, as an advisor to the President, it is not proper, it is a change in the way Congress does its business to demand that Governor Ridge testify.  And the Governor indicated yesterday that he will continue to work with the Hill to reach some type of understanding of how best to convey information to the Hill without testifying.

Q    According to you, he has given them all the information they need.  Why would they be insisting on a subpoena?

MR. FLEISCHER:  I think that's a great question for the Hill.

Q    Ari, in USA Today this morning they report that according to an undercover test conducted by the Department of Transportation at the President's request, screenings at various airports failed miserably, knives going undetected in 70 percent of tests, guns in 30 percent.  What was the President's reaction upon reading this story, and what action do you guys see in the future?

MR. FLEISCHER:  That test was done at the request of the administration.  It was actually carried out prior to the federal government's takeover of aviation security, which, if you recall, took place on February 17th.  And this was done in order to provide the Department of Transportation with a realistic assessment of the needs that we have at the airports.

Since that was done, since the assessment was done and its findings were known, and were talked about today in the paper, the federal government has taken over aviation security.  And there's an additional period of time throughout the remainder of the year under the act by which the federal government will take on increasing responsibilities involving aviation security.

This week, for example, marks the beginning of a comprehensive training program for the first wave of senior federal security screeners who are now going to be deployed at airports around the country.  And that's going to be some 300 people per week for the next four weeks.  These new screeners have considerable law enforcement, military, and private sector security experience.

So I think it's fair to say that as a result of the legislation enacted by the Congress last year, and its implementation throughout the course of this year, security gets better at the airports every day.  It is an issue that will continue to be a top priority for this administration. But frankly, it's a recognition of exactly why we needed a law in the first place.  It's exactly why the President, when he traveled to Chicago to announce his proposal, which Congress largely followed and provided some additional items to strengthen airport security, was so important and necessary.

So there are issues that have to be dealt with forthrightly.  The President will continue to be very bottom-line, results-oriented, seeking Department of Transportation to test their systems to make sure they're as reliable as they can be, as we continue to make every effort throughout the year to beef up security in accordance with a law that's a helpful one.

Q    So does the President now see more clearly the need for the screeners to have been federalized, which he resisted during the process of that legislation?

MR. FLEISCHER:  Well, I think whether they are federalized or whether they are employees of the private sector, the job remains the same, and that is to effectively stop weapons or anything else that can do harm from being brought through metal detectors and in people's bags, et cetera. That's the mission of the screeners, whoever their employer is.  The President's concerns remain the same.  Nevertheless, he signed it into law, and he's going to do everything he can to make it work.

Q    Speaking of signing into law, is there going to be some kind of ceremony here for the campaign finance reform bill?

MR. FLEISCHER:  We still are waiting to receive the bill, and we're working out details of whatever arrangements will be put in order.  So we don't even have the bill yet.  It's still up on the Hill.

Q    The President meets tomorrow with Prime Minister Helen Clark of New Zealand.  Since New Zealand is now supporting the anti-terrorism efforts, and its troops actually work in tandem with American or British troops, is the U.S. considering modifying its military and diplomatic classification regarding New Zealand?

MR. FLEISCHER:  Well, New Zealand is an ally.  And the President is looking forward to his meeting with Prime Minister Clark tomorrow.  As for the issue, the ban continues to be a problem.  It is an impediment to full alliance relations.  But he'll discuss this tomorrow.  But I don't believe --  I see no circumstance in which this will get in the way of a full discussion about the number of issues, which are many, that the United States and New Zealand agree on.

Q    Ari, what's the type of criminal inquiry into the possibility of leaks that may have led to press reports in advance of some of the asset seizures?  Specifically, I think one of the ones was in Richardson, Texas.

Q    Ron, that was reported by the Wall Street Journal last Friday, kind of old news by now, accurately so.  I would refer you to the U.S. Attorney in Chicago who is conducting the investigation of any unauthorized disclosures which could have resulted in harm to an ongoing law enforcement effort.

Q    How are you all coming with that here?

MR. FLEISCHER:  There are a number of agencies throughout the federal government that have been asked to cooperate, including the White House and other agencies, that may or may not have any knowledge.  And of course, we're complying.

Q    How did it start, do you know?

MR. FLEISCHER:  You have to talk to the U.S. Attorney.

Q    To follow up on the Middle East, what does President Bush hope to see accomplished at the Arab summit, and can it be accomplished if Chairman Arafat isn't there?

MR. FLEISCHER:  Well, the President hopes that the Arab summit in Beirut will focus on how to bring peace to the region, and the President views the ideas of Crown Prince Abdullah as a very helpful way for the Arab nations to move peace forward.  The Crown Prince's ideas involved, for the first time, the recognition of the right of Israel to exist in secure borders, along with some other issues that the President wants to make sure are carefully thought out and discussed.

But the President welcomed those ideas, and he hopes that those ideas would be a real focal point of the Arab summit so that, for the first time, several Arab nations would focus on recognizing Israel's right to exist in peace and security.  As you know, the President, when he went to the United Nations for an international gathering, talked about the need to create a Palestinian state.  So you have some very helpful statements by the President of the United States, by the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia; the President hopes that that can be the message of the Beirut summit.

Q    And do you feel that focus would be blurred if Arafat was not there?

MR. FLEISCHER:  Well, the President believes that it would be constructive and that Israel should give consideration, that the best circumstance would be for Prime Minister Sharon and the Israel government to permit Chairman Arafat to attend the summit.

Q    Ari, the Palestinians are saying that the Saudi proposal also envisions a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital.  With that endpoint in there, is that a realistic starting point for negotiations?

MR. FLEISCHER:  Well, as I just indicated, the President welcomed the ideas about the recognition of Israel's right to exist in security, which is something, frankly, that Resolution 242 and 338 also focus on.  But as for the rest of it, I indicated these are things that need to be talked about.  This is exactly what the Mitchell Accords are focused on, is how, after security talks are successful and after the violence is brought down, the focus of the Mitchell plan is to address just the exact issues that you raised, which are the political issues, which are the lines of what the territory should look like, what the boundaries between states should be, how to deal with settlements.  All that is part of the Mitchell plan.

The trick  --  and this is where the summit can be helpful  --  is creating an environment in which the peace talks can take root and be fruitful.  That's the challenge of the Beirut summit.  That's what the President hopes can be accomplished.

Q    Is the White House going to take up the offer by Iraq to send a delegation there to investigate the fate of Mike Speicher?

MR. FLEISCHER:  The government is always interested in any information concerning those who are missing in action.  We are examining the  -- right now all that appears is the media reports concerning this issue.  We do not have enough information to evaluate what is or is not part of this statement or media report.  And DOD is looking into it, as well as State Department.

Q    Ari, what is the administration's view of the current state of relations between the Palestinian Authority and Iran, and specifically, do we believe or do we put credence into reports from Israeli intelligence that the Iranians and Palestinian Authority have recently adopted a very broad-based cooperation agreement that includes some pretty sophisticated weapons?

MR. FLEISCHER:  Well, here's what we know  --  and this is based on, of course, what the world has seen with the Karine-A, which was the ship that set sail from Iran with weapons that were destined for the Palestinian Authority.  That clearly demonstrated in that one instance, particularly, a troubling link between Iran funding, the delivery of weapons which would have been used in terrorist operations, which is very, very troubling.

To go beyond that, I do not have any more information to go beyond that.  I've seen the story that you are referring to  --  it talked about also a meeting in Moscow, which I'm not able to find anybody to confirm such a meeting.  So it's a source of concern and one of the reasons the President has spoken out as he has about Iran is because he is worried about Iran financing or providing arms for terrorists around the world.

Q    When you say you're unable to go beyond that one incident of the Karine-A, does that mean that the administration has no evidence that the cooperation went beyond that one instance?

MR. FLEISCHER:  No.  As I indicated, one of the reasons the President has said what he has said about Iran is because of his concern, his worries about Iran's role in terrorism.  I cited one specific about which we do know.

Q    So we think it's possible that there have been  --  that there is something more  --

MR. FLEISCHER:  I'm not indicating more than that; I'm just focusing on the one issue where I specifically said we do know.  Involving the Moscow meeting, specifically, I have not found anybody who can confirm anything along those lines.

Q    Ari, how strongly is Sharon being pressed to let Arafat go?  We know there have been some instances in the past where, let's say, Colin Powell has picked up the phone and in very blunt, frank language, pressed a U.S. position, and other times there's been more of an at a distance, whatever you guys come up with sort of stance.  How would you characterize how  --  the U.S. position on letting Arafat go?

MR. FLEISCHER:  Well, the American position is that it is better for Chairman Arafat to be there than not be there, in order for the summit to focus on peace.  That message has been conveyed, has been received by the Israeli government at numerous levels, and I leave it at that.

Q    Has pressure really been applied, hey, guys, this is a good idea --

MR. FLEISCHER:  I just resist the  --  you know, very often in diplomacy, there are normal contacts, there are conversations that take place.  And I don't know how to use the word, "pressure."  These are things that are just ongoing conversations that are important between sovereign nations.  And I think the message speaks for itself.  I don't seek to ascribe it any degree of volume one way or another.  The message speaks for itself.

Q    Ari, on another topic.  President Bush is set to travel to South Carolina soon.  Is there any concern from the President over the Confederate flag controversy there?  And if so, and if not, what is his position on it?

MR. FLEISCHER:  Well, April, as you remember, after years of controversy involving that issue, a compromise was reached by the people of South Carolina that was supported by, at that time, a Republican assemblyman in South Carolina, a then Democrat House in South Carolina and a Democrat governor in South Carolina.  And that was broadly agreed to by the communities that they represent, and that was a compromise that the people of South Carolina entered into freely on their own.  And the President, as he said prior to that, and as he believes today, believes this is an issue for the people of South Carolina to resolve  --  as they did in the compromise that was reached among these diverse parties.

Q    Well, Ari, a follow-up to that real quick.  Some people are saying it's a part of their history, and opponents are saying that it's definitely a racist symbol because it was erected in 1962 as something to counter civil rights.  What is the President's thoughts?  Does he lean more so to the fact that it's history for some family members who fought in the Civil War, who died in the Civil War, who fought under that flag?  Or does he think that it's racist from the 1962 standpoint?  What side does he more so lean on?

MR. FLEISCHER:  I think there's nothing really I can add to beyond what I said just now.  The President thinks that this is an issue that many parties feel very passionately about, and that's why the compromise that was reached brought together all those parties.  And the President said then and says now, this is something for the people of South Carolina to decide.  The compromise they entered into had decided it.

Q    To follow up on the Speicher question, how do we go about  -- how does the United States and Iraq go about with diplomatic channels at this point?  Does the President have to sign off on anything and any kind of contact along those lines?

MR. FLEISCHER:  No.  If you remember, there's a tripartite commission that is in place dealing with just these types of issues that involves our representatives in the region.  And that's the standard group that discusses these issues.  And that's really done through State  --

Q    The President doesn't have to okay  --

MR. FLEISCHER:  I'm sorry?

Q    The President doesn't have to necessarily give an okay  --

MR. FLEISCHER:  No, the tripartite commission is something that is done under the auspices of the Department of State as part of their ongoing efforts in diplomacy.  Department of Defense, of course, is involved as well.  They're the ones who make the classification in the case of the Lt. Commander involving his classification as MIA.

Q    Ari, two questions.  One, as for peace in the Indian Subcontinent is concerned, there have been many, many ups and downs and many high-level visits, including South Asian Affairs     --  who just came back from the region.  Where do you put the relations between the United States and India?  Because India still demands from the U.S. that President Bush  -- again, they're  doing their job as far as terrorism is concerned, but he should go beyond Afghanistan.  So where do we stand  --

MR. FLEISCHER:  Well, relations between India and the United States are indeed very important.  They always have been and always will continue to be.  And the issue particularly involving what's happening in Afghanistan makes it even more so because of the relations between India and Pakistan, the importance of a peaceful resolution of any of the differences involving Kashmir.  So it is a top priority, it's something that the President has focused on, continues to focus on, as well as the State Department, too, of course.

Q    Does the President share the State Department's views by ordering non-essential U.S. officials out of Pakistan because the State Department statement said that Pakistan is no longer a place after terrorism?

MR. FLEISCHER:  Well, as you know, these are issues that, unfortunately, the State Department must wrestle with from time to time in different regions of the world.  And after careful review of the security situation in Pakistan, Secretary Powell made the designation he made. That's a State Department issue that is based on their information that they have.  And of course, the President supports what they have done.

Q    Ari, since the President is a national role model who is known to be a devout church member who abhors child molesting, and since this morning's Washington Post reports a standing ovation at the Washington Shrine of the Most Blessed Sacrament when Father DiSilva said in the pulpit, "Cardinal Law is not above the law, he should say, I resign"  -- and my question:  The President does not believe that Father DiSilva is wrong, does he, Ari?

MR. FLEISCHER:  Well, Lester, the President has addressed this issue, himself, and the President has said that he has faith in the Catholic Church.  And the Church is dealing with this issue, and the President believes that they will deal with it well.

Q    So he doesn't believe he's wrong?

MR. FLEISCHER:  I told you what the President's position is.

Q    Ari, does the President believe that Yasser Arafat is in no way a terrorist; therefore, Israel should show restraint against Palestinian bombers and gunmen, when we show no such restraint against Taliban and al Qaeda?

MR. FLEISCHER:  Here's what the President believes.  The President believes in order for peace to be achieved in the Middle East, the violence has got to be reduced.  And the President believes that Chairman Arafat can do more, should do more, and must do more in order for that violence to be reduced.  The President is also looking at the Oslo Accords, which set in process a peaceful political resolution of disputes, which is not the case, of course, involving the Taliban or al Qaeda.  And so the President calls on Chairman Arafat to do more in the pursuit of peace, along with his obligations, along with the obligations of other nations in the region under the various accords they have committed themselves to.

Q    The Washington Post yesterday reported that environmental officials in Alabama are protesting an EPA new  -- what they call a sweetheart deal to intervene in a pollution case in Anniston.  The Alabama environmental officials say it's an unwarranted and unauthorized federal takeover and contrary to longstanding EPA policy.  This is where PCBs were dumped throughout the town.  Given the President's views on state's rights, I'm wondering how he can justify the EPA going in there and interfering with enforcement action.

MR. FLEISCHER:  Russell, I have no information on that.  You may want to address that to EPA.

Q    Second question.  Arthur Andersen is taking out these full-page ads in newspapers saying, injustice for all, one indictment, 28,000 Andersen U.S. men and women.  Two things on that:  Does the President believe this was an unjust indictment, given that no individuals were indicted?  And second, has he met with anyone from Arthur Andersen, any employees, any executives about this indictment?

MR. FLEISCHER:  Russell, the President broadly believes that the best way to have justice in this country is to have the Department of Justice evaluate information that it has at its disposal as it makes decisions about what cases should be prosecuted and the manner in which cases should be prosecuted.  That is the realm and the responsibility of the Department of Justice and the professional attorneys, and the President has faith in the people he has appointed to the Department of Justice that justice will be carried out, based on the information that they have.  Those are not issues that the White House micromanages.

Q     --  he meet with Andersen employees and executives?

MR. FLEISCHER:  Anybody at the White House?  I have no idea.

Q    With the President.

MR. FLEISCHER:  With the President?  I'd have to check.  I really don't know off the top of my head.

Q    I want to follow on what you just said.  Is it the administration's view that Yasser Arafat can do more, should do more, and must do more, but even if he does nothing in the short-term, Israel should let him travel to the Beirut summit?

MR. FLEISCHER:  Again, the issue was would the Vice President meet with Chairman Arafat, which was a different measure than  --

Q    I'm not asking about that.  I'm understand  --

MR. FLEISCHER:  This is something we went over at the top of the briefing, and as I indicated, it's a separate issue.  And the President believes that it would be better for Chairman Arafat to travel to the Beirut summit than not to travel, so that the summit can focus on the important issues, which is how to bring peace to the region.

Q    Even if nothing changes?

MR. FLEISCHER:  That's the President's view.

Q    To follow up, does the White House want Arafat to be able to return to Israel?

MR. FLEISCHER:  And if you're asking the hypothetical I got this morning, it's just a hypothetical that I'm not going to get into.

Q    Did you get anything on the Vice President  --  or the President's cousin, rather, who was seeking  --

MR. FLEISCHER:  No, I do not have anything on that.

Q    Will the President allow former President Carter to travel to Cuba to seek improved relations?

MR. FLEISCHER:  Well, the law is clear on that.  That's a matter that is at the Department of Treasury that sets out the criteria for people to travel to Cuba for humanitarian missions.  And that's  --  and the law is clear.  The law will be obeyed.

If President Carter were to travel to Cuba, the President hopes that his message would be a very direct and straightforward message, that in order to have human rights in Cuba, it's important for Fidel Castro to allow democracy to take root, to stop the repression and to stop the imprisonments, to bring freedom to the people of Cuba.  He hopes that would be a message that would be taken directly to President Castro is President Carter were to go.

Q    Tomorrow, is he going to Philadelphia, the President?

MR. FLEISCHER:  Tomorrow?  No.

Q    Another note about the Oscars.  What's the President's thoughts about the wins last night, particularly the historic awards?

MR. FLEISCHER:  I really have not had a chance to talk to the President about it last night.  I talked to him this morning about some other issues, but I did not have a chance to talk to him about that.

Q    Do you know if he watched some of those  --

MR. FLEISCHER:  Well, remember, he was traveling back from South America last night  --

Q     --  watched any of those movies that were up for awards.

MR. FLEISCHER:  I do not have my list of President watched movies.  I don't know about all the President's personal habits.

THE PRESS:  Thank you.

MR. FLEISCHER:  Thank you.

END                              1:02 P.M. EST

Printer-Friendly Version
Email this page to a friend


More Issues


RSS Feeds

News by Date


Federal Facts

West Wing