The
Whitehouse spin on Rove CIA leak White House press secretary Scott McClellan responses to reporters on questions about Karl Rove being involved in the leak of a CIA agent's identity: Sept 20 2003 Oct 7, 2003 Oct 10 2003 July 11, 2005 July 18, 2005 July 21, 2005 July 25, 2005 Q: You said this morning, quote, ``The president knows that Karl Rove wasn't involved.'' How does he know that? A: Well, I've made it very clear that it was a ridiculous suggestion in the first place. ... I've said that it's not true. ... And I have spoken with Karl Rove. Q: It doesn't take much for the president to ask a senior official working for him, to just lay the question out for a few people and end this controversy today. A: Do you have specific information to bring to our attention? ... Are we supposed to chase down every anonymous report in the newspaper? We'd spend all our time doing that.'' Q: When you talked to Mr. Rove, did you discuss, ``Did you ever have this information?'' A: I've made it very clear, he was not involved, that there's no truth to the suggestion that he was. Q: You have said that you personally went to Scooter Libby (Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff), Karl Rove and Elliott Abrams (National Security Council official) to ask them if they were the leakers. Is that what happened? Why did you do that? And can you describe the conversations you had with them? What was the question you asked? A: Unfortunately, in Washington, D.C., at a time like this there are a lot of rumors and innuendo. There are unsubstantiated accusations that are made. And that's exactly what happened in the case of these three individuals. They are good individuals. They are important members of our White House team. And that's why I spoke with them, so that I could come back to you and say that they were not involved. I had no doubt with that in the beginning, but I like to check my information to make sure it's accurate before I report back to you, and that's exactly what I did. Q: Earlier this week you told us that neither Karl Rove, Elliot Abrams nor Lewis Libby disclosed any classified information with regard to the leak. I wondered if you could tell us more specifically whether any of them told any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA? A: I spoke with those individuals, as I pointed out, and those individuals assured me they were not involved in this. And that's where it stands. Q: So none of them told any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA? A: They assured me that they were not involved in this. Q: They were not involved in what? A: The leaking of classified information. Q: Do you want to retract your statement that Rove, Karl Rove, was not involved in the Valerie Plame expose? A: I appreciate the question. This is an ongoing investigation at this point. The president directed the White House to cooperate fully with the investigation, and as part of cooperating fully with the investigation, that means we're not going to be commenting on it while it is ongoing. Q: But Rove has apparently commented, through his lawyer, that he was definitely involved. A: You're asking me to comment on an ongoing investigation. Q: I'm saying, why did you stand there and say he was not involved? A: Again, while there is an ongoing investigation, I'm not going to be commenting on it nor is ... . Q: Any remorse? A: Nor is the White House, because the president wanted us to cooperate fully with the investigation, and that's what we're doing. Q Scott, the President seemed to raise the bar and add a qualifier today when discussing whether or not anybody would be dismissed for -- in the leak of a CIA officer's name, in which he said that he would -- if someone is found to have committed a crime, they would no longer work in this administration. That's never been part of the standard before, why is that added now? MR. McCLELLAN: No, I disagree, Terry. I think that the President was stating what is obvious when it comes to people who work in the administration: that if someone commits a crime, they're not going to be working any longer in this administration. Now the President talked about how it's important for us to learn all the facts. We don't know all the facts, and it's important that we not prejudge the outcome of the investigation. We need to let the investigation continue. And the investigators are the ones who are in the best position to gather all the facts and draw the conclusions. And at that point, we will be more than happy to talk about it, as I indicated last week. The President directed the White House to cooperate fully, and that's what we've been doing. We want to know what the facts are, we want to see this come to a successful conclusion. And that's the way we've been working for quite some time now. Ever since the beginning of this investigation, we have been following the President's direction to cooperate fully with it, so that we can get to the -- so that the investigators can get to the bottom of it. Q But you have said, though, that anyone involved in this would no longer be in this administration, you didn't say anybody who committed a crime. You had said, in September 2003, anyone involved in this would no longer be in the administration. MR. McCLELLAN: Yes, we've been through these issues over the course of the last week. And I know -- Q But we haven't talked about a crime. MR. McCLELLAN: -- well what was said previously. You heard from the President today. And I think that you should not read anything into it more than what the President said at this point. And I think that's something you may be trying to do here. Q Does the President equate the word "leaking" to a crime, as best you know, in his mind? Just the use of the word "leaking," does he see that as a criminal standard? And is the only threshold for firing someone involved being charged with a crime? MR. McCLELLAN: Well, we all serve at the pleasure of the President in this White House. The President -- you heard what he had to say on the matter. He was asked a specific question, and you heard his response. Q Is leaking, in your judgment of his interpretation, a crime? MR. McCLELLAN: I'll leave it at what the President said. Go ahead. Q What is his problem? Two years, and he can't call Rove in and find out what the hell is going on? I mean, why is it so difficult to find out the facts? It costs thousands, millions of dollars, two years, it tied up how many lawyers? All he's got to do is call him in. MR. McCLELLAN: You just heard from the President. He said he doesn't know all the facts. I don't know all the facts. Q Why? MR. McCLELLAN: We want to know what the facts are. Because -- Q Why doesn't he ask him? MR. McCLELLAN: I'll tell you why, because there's an investigation that is continuing at this point, and the appropriate people to handle these issues are the ones who are overseeing that investigation. There is a special prosecutor that has been appointed. And it's important that we let all the facts come out. And then at that point, we'll be glad to talk about it, but we shouldn't be getting into -- Q You talked about it to reporters. MR. McCLELLAN: We shouldn't be getting into prejudging the outcome. Go ahead. Q Scott, we don't know all the facts, but we know some of the facts. For example, Matt Cooper says he did speak to Karl Rove and Lewis Libby about these issues. So given the fact that you have previously stood at that podium and said these men did not discuss Valerie Plame or a CIA agent's identity in any way, does the White House have a credibility problem? MR. McCLELLAN: No. You just answered your own question. You said we don't know all the facts. And I would encourage everyone not to prejudge the outcome of the investigation. Q But on the specifics -- on the specifics, you made statements that have proven to be untrue. MR. McCLELLAN: Let me answer your question, because you asked a very specific question. The President has great faith in the American people and their judgment. The President is the one who directed the White House to cooperate fully in this investigation with those who are overseeing the investigation. And that's exactly what we have been doing. The President believes it's important to let the investigators do their work, and at that point, once they have come to a conclusion, then we will be more than happy to talk about it. The President wants to see them get to the bottom of it as soon as possible. I share that view, as well. We want to know what the facts are, and the investigators are the ones who are drawing those -- are pulling together those facts, and then drawing conclusions. Go ahead, Bob. Q Given the new formulation "if somebody committed a crime," would that be a crime as determined by an indictment, or a crime as determined by a conviction? MR. McCLELLAN: Again, Bob, I'm not going to add to what the President said. You heard his remarks, and I think I've been through these issues over the course of the last week. I don't know that there's really much more to add at this point. Q But the importance is the question of would -- if it is the latter, the strategy would be to run out the clock? MR. McCLELLAN: No, I indicated to you earlier that everyone here serves at the pleasure of the President. And the White House has been working to cooperate fully with the investigators. That was the direction that the President set. That's what we've been doing. We hope they come to a conclusion soon. Go ahead. Q Scott, going back to the President's statements from earlier -- if someone committed a crime, they will no longer work in my administration -- it makes me go back to the question I asked you last Wednesday, is there regret from this administration of what it has done to the Wilson family, with the CIA leak? And I talked to Mr. Wilson prior to going into the East Room, and he basically said, the American people deserve an apology, and that his family was basically collateral damage in a bigger picture. MR. McCLELLAN: All these questions are getting into prejudging the outcome of the investigation, and we're not going to do that. Q But if someone -- if the President acknowledged that there was a problem, and it could be a criminal problem, if he acknowledged that, isn't there some sort of regret? MR. McCLELLAN: It's a criminal investigation. We don't know all the facts to it. Go ahead. Q Well, is there any regret from this White House that it has caused an American family who worked for this government -- MR. McCLELLAN: I heard what you had to say and I've already answered it. Q No, you didn't. MR. McCLELLAN: Go ahead. Q Scott, the President talked about if a crime were committed. But a year ago and beyond, he also talked about -- he denounced leaks out of this executive branch, other parts of Washington. He said, things are wrong. If it's only a leak, will he take some appropriate action? MR. McCLELLAN: I think you should look back at what the President said again. I would not read anything into it more than what he said. The President has said for a long time that this is a very serious matter, and that's why he directed the White House to cooperate fully, so that the investigators can get to the bottom of it. Q Scott, first of all, I have a great respect for this White House press corps and they're very nice and kind to me. MR. McCLELLAN: I do, too. (Laughter.) They're doing their job. Thomas: "Why does Karl Rove still have security clearance and access to classified documents when he has been revealed as a leaker of a secret agent, according to Time magazine's correspondent?" McClellan: "Well, there is an investigation that continues, and I think the President has made it clear that we're not going to prejudge the outcome of that investigation." Thomas: "You already have the truth." McClellan: "We're not going to prejudge the outcome of that investigation through -- Thomas: "Does he have access to security documents?" McClellan: " -- through media reports. And these questions came up over the last week -- " Thomas: "Did he leak the name of a CIA agent?" McClellan: "As I was trying to tell you, these questions have been answered." Thomas: "No, they haven't." David Gregory, NBC News: "Let me ask -- " McClellan: "Go ahead, David." Gregory: "And they most certainly haven't. I think Helen is right, and the people watching us know that. And related to that, there are now --" McClellan: "Let me correct the record. We've said for quite some time that this was an ongoing investigation, and that we weren't going to comment on it, so let me just correct the record." Gregory: "If you want to make the record clear, then you also did make comments when a criminal investigation was underway, you saw fit to provide Karl Rove with a blanket statement of absolution. And that turned out to be no longer accurate --." Q Do Karl Rove and Scooter Libby still have top secret clearance here, access to classified documents? MR. McCLELLAN: You asked this question last week, and -- Q I did. And I'm asking again. MR. McCLELLAN: -- the President has said what our answer is to these questions. We'll be glad to talk about all these issues once the investigation is complete. Q Do they have a clearance? MR. McCLELLAN: We'll be glad to talk about all the issues relating to the investigation once it's complete. Q Why can't you talk about it now? MR. McCLELLAN: Well, that question I addressed a couple weeks ago. Go ahead. Go ahead, Jessica. # MR. McCLELLAN: I think the President has said that -- and the President directed the White House at the beginning of the investigation to cooperate fully with those overseeing the investigation. And that is exactly what we have done, and that's what we did in that context, as well. If you will recall, back on October 1st of 2003, these questions came up and I addressed it at that time. So you might want to go back and look at that discussion during that briefing. Q But in the spirit of cooperation, and you had indicted on October 1, 2003, that the reason that the Justice Department was asked, is it okay to wait until the morning, and the answer was that it was okay, but in the spirit of cooperation, why did the notification not go out until 11 or 12 hours later? MR. McCLELLAN: I talked about that in that briefing, and addressed all those questions at that time. And the President has made it clear that we should cooperate fully with the investigation. That's what we have done, that's what we continue to do. Q Yes, Scott, can you assure us that Andrew Card did not speak to either -- or did not tell the President or Karl Rove or Scooter Libby or anybody else about the Justice Department investigation? MR. McCLELLAN: Yes, again, those questions came up back in October of 2003 and I addressed them at the time. Q May I ask one follow-up? MR. McCLELLAN: You may. Go ahead. Q I know that none of you are speaking about this because it's an ongoing investigation. Can you explain why Alberto Gonzales would go on TV yesterday and do that, and talk about it? MR. McCLELLAN: Well, what he said was already said from this podium back in October of 2003, and I don't think he got into commenting in any substantive way on the discussion. But the President has said that we will be glad to talk about this once the investigation has come to a conclusion, but not until then. And there have certainly been preferences expressed to the White House that we not get into discussing it while it is ongoing. # MR. McCLELLAN: I think that in terms of decisions regarding the investigation, those are matters for those overseeing the investigation to decide. Q Thank you. MR. McCLELLAN: Thank you.
|