MR. SNOW: Questions? Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: I borrowed them from Deckard. I'm not going to spend money on them, but I'll gladly wear them for this flight. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Well, I think right now, as the President said yesterday, it looks like there's considerable interest in Congress in going ahead and taking a good look at what the Supreme Court had to say and moving forward toward making sure that we can proceed with military commissions and bring to justice the people who are held at Guantanamo, as well as continuing to process or repatriating those who are going to be headed home. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Certainly a domestic issue right now is figuring out how to go ahead and continue handling -- Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: What? Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Well, again, you close it when you finish handling all the cases of people who are at Guantanamo. And as we've said many times, you don't simply shut it down. There are some people who you do not want on American soil, who you want to go ahead and conclude the process of bringing them to justice, and repatriating those to whom it is appropriate to repatriate. As we've also mentioned, some countries don't want their people back, and that is a complicated issue. At the EU summit, some of our EU partners said that they may be willing to work with us on that. I'm not sure exactly what that means, but that's something that we may consider in the future. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Well, we addressed that yesterday. What we said is that we want the -- there are two things: Number one, Hamas must return the soldier. And we know that there have been some offers, some public offers by Hamas today to do that. The Israeli government is reviewing that. The other thing we've said is that the Israelis need to practice restraint. And we are encouraged by the fact that the Israelis now are standing down in northern Gaza and that Hamas is talking openly about repatriating the soldier. And we'll continue to watch the developments. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: No, not that I'm aware of. Secretary Rice has been in Moscow, as you know, consulting with G8 foreign ministers, but I'm not aware of any direct consultations. Obviously, we've been kept informed. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: No, it's another bin Laden audiotape. It is what it is. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: No comment on that. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Actually, they are sitting in the forward cabin kind of enjoying themselves. The still photographers have had a picture. The Prime Minister has an Air Force One jacket now. And it's very interesting -- Senator Frist and Mrs. Frist have been up there in the forward cabin with them, and it's a pretty relaxed conversation. They've been enjoying themselves. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Probably a little bit of both. I mean, the first thing the President did was just pull out the map and show them where we're going today. And beyond that, I've not been privy to all the conversations, but I have a feeling that a lot of it is just informal. Again, these are two guys -- I don't know if you saw the Prime Minister's toast last night, but he talked about the first time they met, tossing a baseball together, playing catch, and moving forward to a very close relationship. I'm sure they'll be doing some business, but these are also two guys who like each other a very great deal. And this is going to be their last trip together and I think they're going to make the most of it. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: I don't know if you heard it, but there's Elvis -- we were playing Elvis music when you came on board. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Elvis music was being played through the PA. There are, but have not yet been played, there are DVDs of "Love Me Tender," and "Viva Las Vegas," and I am not aware that they have yet been requested by anybody in the forward cabin, or, for that matter, in the staff cabin, but they are available for viewing. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: It was an Elvis compilation album. I remember hearing "Love Me Tender," and "Don't Be Cruel," but I'm sure there were plenty more. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Well, I think they are going to view the alleged grave site. (Laughter.) Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: I'm not aware of it. I'll let you know if I find out. But what local -- what is it? You know more about this than I do. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: I don't know. (Laughter.) Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: I'm sure they did. I mean, with all the security issues, I'm almost certain that it's been closed at least for the duration of the visit. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: They will be in on the tour and they will also participate in the lunch -- The Rendezvous, the favorite barbecue place, ribs place. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: A lot of members of the Japanese delegation. There will be some Tennesseans joining at the lunch -- Fred Smith of Federal Express, and others. I think you'll get a full list, if you don't have it already. And, no, I'm not going to say it -- wait, wait -- the cheesy Elvis thank-you. Okay, here is the week ahead. Monday, he signs H.R. 5403, the Safe and Timely Interstate Placement of Foster Children Act. That will be at the White House. On Tuesday, Independence Day celebration in Fort Bragg, North Carolina, followed by a lunch with military personnel. Back to the White House for July 4th celebrations. Wednesday, he will participate in a meeting with the President of Georgia at the White House. Thursday, he will participate in a photo opportunity with the 2006 March of Dimes National Ambassador, participate in a meeting with the Prime Minister of Canada, and have a joint press availability with the Prime Minister of Canada. Will head that evening to Chicago. And on Friday, there will be remarks at Citizens For Judy Baar Topinka reception in Chicago, Illinois. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Overnight in Chicago on Thursday night. That is all the detail we have for now. I will continue to look for bits of color as they proceed. There ought to be plenty today, so we'll keep an eye out. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: No, I haven't, but I'm sure he's anticipating it as eagerly as the rest of us are. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: No. Neither of them is wearing Elvis-y regalia. That has been only staffers who have been reduced to wearing bad sunglasses. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: We'll have peanut butter and banana sandwiches which, apparently, have 36 grams of fat. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Up in the aft cabin, they have been -- that is one of the breakfast options. And some brave staffers have tried it. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: I think the President is having a healthier diet than the -- Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: I didn't see what the Prime Minister ate, but I'm willing to bet -- I'd rather not speak out of turn. I will inquire as to whether they tried and peanut butter and fried bananas. Although, on the menu it appears as "ripped" bananas. We are not sure what that means. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: They're working out or getting drunk -- we're not sure which it is. But in any event, it's 36 grams of fat and apparently those eating it feel each and every one of those grams as they eat them. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: All right, welcome. We've got a busy news day. Let me go through a whole lot of preliminaries here, and then we will get to the Hamdan case and others. First, we're pleased that the Senate moved quickly and confirmed Henry Paulson to be the next Secretary of the Treasury, and commends Senators Grassley, Baucus, and Schumer for their leadership during a fast confirmation process. Also, the President yesterday announced 10 additional judicial nominees: John Preston Bailey of West Virginia, United States District Judge for the Northern District of West Virginia; Mary O. Donohue, of New York, U.S. District Judge for the Northern District of New York; John Alfred Jarvey, of Iowa, to be U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa; Robert James Jonker of Michigan, U.S. District Judge for the Western District of Michigan; Kent A. Jordan, of Delaware, for the U.S. Circuit Judge for the Third Circuit; Raymond M. Kethledge, of Michigan, U.S. Circuit Judge for the Sixth Circuit; Debra Ann Livingston, of New York, United States Circuit Judge for the Second Circuit; Paul Lewis Maloney, of Michigan, U.S. District Judge for the Western District of Michigan; Stephen Joseph Murphy, III, of Michigan, U.S. Circuit Judge for the Sixth District; and Janet T. Neff, of Michigan, United States District Judge for the Western District of Michigan. In addition, as you probably have heard, the VA has announced that they have recovered the stolen laptop that had data on as many as 26.6 million veterans and military personnel. The FBI, in a statement from the Baltimore field office, said a preliminary review determines that the database remains intact and has not been accessed. We'll continue to bring you data as that becomes available. The President is concerned about the major flooding that has occurred throughout the Northeast and mid-Atlantic. As of 5:45 p.m. last evening Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff had called Governor Rendell of Pennsylvania; FEMA Director David Paulson has had conversations with Senators Schumer and Clinton, and Representative Sherwood of Pennsylvania. So far, no formal disaster assistance request, and we ought to be congratulating state and local authorities not only for rapid, but effective response. FEMA has activated a regional response coordination center in Philadelphia to integrate federal support for state and local response efforts, and they have provided approximately 30 FEMA personnel. Maryland: FEMA has deployed four teams of three members each, and FEMA also remains in contact with emergency officials in a number of states. On the economic front, real GDP growth in the first quarter revised up to 5.6 percent. Profits up, as well. Unemployment claims up -- let's see, they're up 4,000, to 313,000. That's still in line with market expectations. One or two more things here. Scheduling -- the President is going to spend this weekend at Camp David. He's going to arrive Friday night, return to the White House on Sunday. On July 4th, he will travel to Fort Bragg, North Carolina, and make remarks at an Independence Day celebration before returning to the White House. Obviously, the Hamdan case has come down from the U.S. Supreme Court. Maybe you are interested in that. We'll go to questions. Kelly. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Yes. I conducted that. I helped conduct it. What we did is -- and he only had about three minutes -- we got a quick brief. The case, I guess, came down, what, about five or ten minutes after 10:00 a.m. The President had been in continuous meetings with Prime Minister Koizumi and their national security teams, so we were able to give him a very quick gloss on what we at that point had known. Even now, people are studying as carefully as they can what is a highly complex decision, trying to figure out what the ramifications are. But the President did point out, and it seems to be the point that Justice Stevens stressed from the bench today, that one of the most important things for the court, in the majority opinion today, was to get some congressional authorization. Members of Congress, including Senator Graham, on TV, have stepped forward and said that they'd be happy to work on that process. The President said he's willing to work with Congress on authorization to figure out how to move forward in a way consistent with the ruling handed down by the court. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: You know, it's -- overreached is the headline, it's not the way it's been written by the Court. I mean, I've got the opinion here, and I'd defy anybody to come up with a very quick and simple analysis of the varied holdings in here. You've got people agreeing and disagreeing in part. So I think what the Court is saying is that it wants to make sure that there's congressional authorization, and it also is concerned about comporting with the Geneva Conventions and also the Uniform Code of Military Justice. And those are matters that will be taken under advisement. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: The Court disagreed with that. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Well, you're talking about Guantanamo? Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Correct, and the ruling -- the President never said he wanted to -- he said he wants to close Guantanamo. He didn't say he wanted to close it quickly, because there are some practical considerations. There are approximately -- well, as quickly as possible, I believe. There's a difference, because you have a whole series of considerations. There are approximately a hundred prisoners we are still in the process of trying to repatriate. There is also a core of prisoners who are deemed so dangerous that their home countries won't even take them back. There are a number of prisoners, also, that we think need to be held to justice within the United States system. And now you have to figure out how to go forward with that. This will not mean closing down Guantanamo. There's nothing in this opinion that dictates closing down Guantanamo. We're studying very carefully what other implications there may be. I think the most important thing, at this point, seems to be -- I don't want to fake being a lawyer, but I've had some pretty extensive consultations with our lawyers, who are still pouring over this -- I think the congressional consultation piece is going to be pretty important. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Yes. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: No, because he wanted to see the decision, and I think what the decision has done -- for instance, in the case of Mr. Hamdan, is it's now reverting it back to the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. There is no strict constitutional interpretation. As a matter of fact, this opinion does not talk about the Constitution. And so what the President is trying to do, and what the attorneys are trying to do, both here in the White House and also at Departments of Justice and Defense, is to figure out precisely what the Court is saying here, and how to proceed in a way that comports with it. We will proceed as rapidly as we can to bring to justice those who have been held in Guantanamo, to repatriate as quickly as possible those who may be repatriated. And that's always been the goal. But this is not a decision that lends itself to a very quick disposition, because what it has now done is added the extra element of bringing Congress in, and saying to members of Congress, okay, congressional authorization. Section III of Justice Stevens' opinion deals with the issue of congressional authorization. And as I've mentioned, I think a number of members of Congress are going to want to weigh in on this. Jim. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Absolutely. Yes, that hasn't changed. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: It's not oversight, it's authorization. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: I wish I could. I think what it means is that they want to make sure that Congress authorizes, pursuant to Congress' obligations when it comes to declaring war and laying conditions for a war, it wants Congress to authorize the way to proceed forward in terms of bringing to justice those who have been brought in from the battlefield. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: I think it would say that the administration -- the Supreme Court has disagreed with the approach we've taken. You may -- I don't know how you'd say "overreached." Apply whatever adjective or whatever verb you want, the Supreme Court has said that it disagrees with the way in which the commissions were convened, and has laid down some guidelines for proceeding. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: You've got to keep -- the principle is, you bring to justice people who were on the battlefield or have been apprehended in the process of committing acts of terror or on the war fields of Afghanistan and elsewhere. And that principle remains the same; nobody gets a "get out of jail free" card. Instead now, what we're doing is addressing the issue which the Court sort of threw in the lap of both Congress and the administration, of figuring out what the Court has decided is the proper way to proceed in trying to convene hearings for those who are being held. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: No, it really is -- again, this is -- I'll just describe to you -- have you guys had a chance to look at this? Here is -- first we have -- we have Justice Stevens. Here's his majority opinion, it's 73 pages long. Parts I through IV have the concurrence of four other members of the Court, but parts V and VI-D-iv do not. Then you have Justice Breyer, writing for Justices Kennedy, Souter and Ginsburg. Then you have Justice Kennedy -- Justices Souter and Ginsburg have adopted everything what he has, but Justice Breyer says, no, I like parts I and II, but not part III. Then we get to the dissents -- Justice Scalia writing with Justices Thomas and Alito in full approval. Justice Thomas writes, Justice Scalia likes it; Justice Alito agrees with parts I, part II-C-i and part III-B-ii. Then you have Justice Alito writing and Justices Scalia and Thomas concur with parts I through III. It's very difficult to come up with a snap parsing of that. So I think it's worth saying that the first reaction is, what does this mean? And there are a lot of very smart lawyers trying to pore through each and every part of that to figure out precisely what it does mean. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Don't know and don't want to get into it, Jake. I would refer you -- I think the Justice Department is going to be trying to do a briefing later in the day. I would leave that to legal minds who have got far greater standing to speak on it than I do. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Okay. In addition to that, there was some strong rhetoric in some of these decisions, the majority decisions, Kennedy writing in a separate opinion, "It's a concentration of power" -- referring specifically to the executive branch -- "puts personal liberty in peril of arbitrary action by officials," "an incursion to the Constitution's three-part system is designed to avoid." Is there any feeling in terms of the administration's reaction to that? ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Well, I'm not trying to make this a political argument, but you guys -- the White House has put forward the argument that in extraordinary times, the White House needs to take extraordinary measures and act as executive power on its own. And the Supreme Court -- a majority ruling of the Supreme Court has said, no, you can't, not in this instance. ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Well, and so those are not going to be bypassed in the future, and there's a disagreement. The Supreme Court has rendered its decision. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Not when a justice says, Congress can do this. That sounds to me to be -- and by the way, there may be other means of dealing with this. I do not want to give you the impression that is the one and only thing. But that seems to be something Justice Stevens considered important enough to say, from the bench, that Congress could write authorizing legislation to deal with this. That's not circumventing the Court, that's responding to what the author of the majority opinion had to say. Sheryl. Oh I'm sorry -- Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: That is something we're going to have to study. I'm not aware that it would involve any changes in the procedures by which prisoners are detained. But I think -- I better be careful about that, because I don't know for sure. But I know people are looking at that right now. Sheryl. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Tony, this is an election year, and these issues are extremely contentious on Capitol Hill. Is the President confident that Congress would even act to give him this authorizing legislation, number one? And number two, what happens in the interim? ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Well, they will be held -- Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: That possibly could be the case, yes. That possibly could be the case. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Tony, back on the issue of alleged overreaching, you're saying there were no strict Constitution interpretations. If that were the case, why not have -- why did this administration handle the tribunals in a very conservative or restrained way -- ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: There were guidelines, and again, rather than getting into second-guessing, I'm just not going to do it, April. It's complex enough to figure out precisely what this whole thing means. And a lot of people are going to work very hard to do their best to figure out what it means. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: You're -- Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Well, one of the interesting things here is that there is no dispute that these are enemy combatants and not traditional prisoners of war. That's never been a matter of dispute. This is a different kind of war, and I think it creates a different kind of legal atmosphere. And I think trying to second guess in a situation like this might be an interesting academic exercise, but it's not something I'm going to entertain here. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Can I ask you about the larger debate in the international community? Does the decision today weaken the President's hand at all in trying to argue that he does have wide latitude, as he says he does, in conducting the war on terror? ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: The branch -- there are always disagreements between branches of government. I mean, that's kind of the way the system works. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Yes, but what the Supreme Court has not said, it has not said, you can't hold them; it hasn't said, you can't try them; it hasn't said, you have to send them back. So what you do have are matters of procedure. And, no, I don't think it weakens the President's hand. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: I don't think it's ever been the goal of the administration to expand executive authority. In a time of war, the President has tried to act in a way that meets the needs and obligations of a Commander-in-Chief against a dispersed and highly-unique kind of enemy. But we don't have "expand executive power" sessions. So nobody thinks in terms of, how do we expand executive power. This has been a time where the President has had to figure out how to maneuver in ways consistent with his obligations of Commander-in-Chief, and consistent with the Constitution. And I dare say it's raising questions that are fairly new and people are wrestling with. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Well, I missed the "expand executive authority" meetings. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q What's the President doing to try to get the Voting Rights Act renewal moving in the House? There are a lot of conservative Republicans in the House who are opposing its renewal for a variety of reasons. He said it's a top priority, but what is he doing? ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: I just told you. Typically, you dispatch people to go work on this, and there's been behind-the-scenes conversations. I'm not going to go -- Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: April, I'm not going to get into all the to-and-fro on the Voting Rights Act. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: He believes that it's important, as a matter of fact -- and I've said it before -- he considers it a top priority to renew in its present form the Voting Rights Act. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Yes. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Right. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q But a number of experts have looked at this and said the Supreme Court was also very concerned about inadequate procedures given to these detainees. Hasn't the Supreme Court now set a bare minimum for the rights afforded to each detainee? And isn't that really a bigger problem than authorization from Congress? ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: The sense from the White House is, it is what it is. It's a decision of the United States Supreme Court. It creates conditions under which you need to modify and adjust your policy when it comes to Guantanamo and to detentions. And we will proceed accordingly. You can't -- you don't sit around and go, oh, my gosh, the Supreme Court hearing. It is something you deal with. And the way -- the reaction here in the White House is to try to figure out what it means so that we can go ahead with the number one job, which is to go ahead and bring these people to justice. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Okay, what I'll do is, let's finish up Supreme Court, finish up Supreme Court questions. Then we'll come back. Victoria. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Okay. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q "Nothing in the record demonstrates that it will be impracticable to apply court martial rules here. There is no suggestion, e.g. of any of the difficulty in securing properly sworn and authenticated evidence, or in applying the usual courts of relevance in the possibility. It is not evident why the danger posed by international terrorism, considerable though it is, should require, in the case of Hamdan's trial, any variance from the court martial rules." Why not go with court martial? ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Well, it's now an option that's in play. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: I had a brief conversation with Senator Graham earlier. He has been arguing for some time that he thinks congressional authorization is required for military commissions, and therefore, he is willing to go ahead and proceed legislatively. Beyond that, I've got nothing. I think, again, there are so many different pieces to this that you have a general proposition that members of Congress are willing to get involved and to work with the White House, and the White House with them, on congressional authorization, if that is the proper way to proceed. But beyond that -- and Senator Graham, I'm afraid, was sitting in the chair at the Senate until right before this briefing began, so I didn't have time to follow up. But I know that he and others at least have expressed some interest to try to figure out some way. And as you also know, he has been critical of the policy to date. Go ahead. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: No, not yet. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: I think the number is between 50 and 100. But rather -- I'll tell you what, Peter, I'll try to get clearer guidance out of DOD. These are -- what you end up getting are ballpark figures, and so I don't want to nail that down as an absolutely precise figure because -- especially with repatriations. Obviously, that number continues to go down. I will try to get a good answer out of DOD, and if so we'll attach it as an asterisk to the transcript of this briefing. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: As you know, the people who are guards at Guantanamo and officials at Guantanamo have tried to take extraordinary precautions to make sure that the prisoners are safe, and they have gone back and revisited and tried to strengthen those procedures in the wake of the recent suicides. I don't think at this point -- the primary concern here at the White House and within the administration is to figure out where this ruling takes us. And as far as the ongoing operations at Guantanamo, again, you talk to the authorities there -- they are very concerned about making sure that the prisoners are cared for properly. And so that's something they care about every day. They constantly worry about that. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Before we get into North Korea, let me dispatch -- dispense with all the Hamdan case questions, and then we'll get to that. Yes. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: He was referring to judicial proceedings, or equivalent judicial proceedings, such as military commissions, perhaps courts martial, and then we'll see how we proceed. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: No, not necessarily. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: I'm sorry? Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Right.* Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: No. I mean, I think this is -- Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: The President thinks of the war on terror -- and I will, without having spoken for him -- without having had a direct conversation about this, but by observation, the President thinks in terms of his obligations as Commander-in-Chief, not his prerogatives, but his responsibilities and the best way to carry those out. And when somebody says, okay, this is the box within -- within which you must operate, then you operate within the confines. But the President -- so, the President's determination to prosecute and win the war on terror has not changed one bit by the Supreme Court opinion. He is still determined to do it, he's still determined to win. And he wouldn't be in it if he didn't think we could and would win. So, no, the answer is that there is -- there's not seen any sort of implicit curtailment of his ability to fight the war on terror. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Do you see a potential impact on things like the National Security Agency eavesdropping program and some of the other surveillance programs when the President used sort of the same rationale that he used with respect to Guantanamo when he talked about his constitutional authority perhaps being curtailed -- ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Well, yes, you are. You're talking about entirely different sets of legal authorizations, and without getting into the weeds on it -- Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: The Court -- well, the Court is addressing this in the specific instance of military commissions, going back and trying to take a look at the history of military commissions. So it really is a far more specific ruling than that. It has to deal with the institution of military commissions, which goes back to the age of the Civil War. Jim. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q I just want to make sure, before we leave this, in terms of the options and the roads that the White House is considering traveling on from this point, we've talked about courts martial or some parallel procedure, we've talked about the congressional authorization, is there anything else as a possible road, for instance, the civil courts -- ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: We thought it was an appropriate way to bring to justice people who are not enemy combatants in the traditional sense. The conventions of war, typically, have defined enemy combatants as people wearing uniforms of a sovereign country, clearly marked, not committing acts of violence against innocents, and so on. You know the Geneva Convention language. And it was the interpretation of the administration that military commissions were historically and legally an appropriate way to proceed. What the Supreme Court has not said is you can't try them; it hasn't said you can't bring them to justice. I think now it's a question of how properly to do that. So it doesn't tie his hands. What it does is it -- it doesn't serve as a rebuke. What it says is that the Supreme Court disagrees with the method that has been designed right now by the administration, and it says, we want you to go back and consult with Congress. As I mentioned before, Jake, a lot of this seems to have to do with procedure. And so everybody is going to go back, and the lawyers -- and I really would direct you back for further detail on this to the Justice briefing -- to figure out exactly what you need to do so that you can bring these folks to justice. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q I assume that the reason you were doing it the way you were doing it is because you thought that was the best way to win the war on terror. So doesn't, by definition, this decision weaken, in your opinion, your ability to wage the war -- ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: So at this particular -- you don't think about it that way. You think, what is the proper way to prosecute the war on terror. To move from one way doesn't mean that it's the only way, and so there will be different ways of bringing these people to justice. Lester, it's got to be on topic. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: First let's make sure: anybody else on the Hamdan case? All right. Now we may get the first -- I'm sorry, we start here. Sarah. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: No. (Laughter.) No, I mean -- well, if you want me to be specific, you have the Premier of China calling yesterday for the North Koreans not to launch a missile. We have had Japanese officials say the same thing, we've had contacts from South Korea -- the other parties from the six-party talks have made it clear that the North Koreans ought not to do this. We have been using diplomacy through our partners and friends to try to persuade North Korea to come back to the six-party talks. I mean, it's really no different than what I've been saying every day here. We have been pursuing diplomacy continuously. It was one of the topics that arose today in the conversations between Prime Minister Koizumi and the President. So there is an ongoing effort on the part of the President, and also his designees, including Ambassador Schieffer, including Secretary Rice and others. So a lot of people have been active in trying to get the North Koreans to come back so that once again they can -- so that they can join the community of nations and move forward on other parallel tracks as laid out in last year's September 19th agreement. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Tony, a two-part question. First, in Israel, WorldNet Daily reports that leaders of the 1,200-member Rabbinical Congress for Peace have called on President Bush to refuse to support Prime Minister Olmert's plans to evacuate most of Judea and Samaria. And my question: How is the President responding to this? ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Okay. Reuters reports that while the Pentagon no longer deems homosexuality a mental disorder, this reversal has no impact on U.S. policy prohibiting openly gay people from serving in the military. And my question: Does this also accurately report the position of the Commander-in-Chief, or not? ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: The President's positions on all these matters are well-established, Les. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: No, I can't, and I don't know.** Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: As we announced earlier, there has been, I believe -- and I'll have to go back, Sheryl -- but there had been an announced -- what was this, -- I know that there's been some discussion.*** Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: I was not in the restricted meeting, so I don't know anything specifically -- I'll try to find out. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: The message was that you cannot leave Japan unprotected, and Japan does not intend to remain unprotected. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q On Iran, Iran is now saying that they're going to not have a response to the offer until August. The G8 wants a response July 5th. What happens if they do not respond by July 5th? Will steps be taken, or will you just wait until August? ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Well, a couple of things. First, there's pretty much unified international reaction, which is that Hamas needs to give back the Israeli soldier and needs to renounce terror, and needs to do so immediately. The second thing is that we hope that Israel, in trying to retrieve its soldier, will practice restraint, and that both sides will practice restraint in trying to lower the temperature and develop a sense of security in the region. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: I'm aware of that. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: We are going no further than what we've said, which is, we are encouraging both sides to practice restraint. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Tony, a follow up, if I may. The President talked today about shared values in democracy in the Middle East, for elected officials, whether -- regards of what other countries think of them. Sixty-four officials have been arrested, including Cabinet members, members of Parliament. Is this a day for the United States to stand up for democracy in the Middle East, or should we get a free pass? ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: You don't have to do a lot of machinations when you say the President wants to come to Graceland. All you have to do is get out of the way, because everybody wants to be hospitable. Prime Minister Koizumi likes Elvis. He's made no secret of that, and so the President decided, yes -- he even did the -- by the way, everybody across the room heard you cackling today, Lester. That was some guffaw; that was terrific. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: But, as a matter of fact, the Prime Minister released a CD for charity of his favorite Elvis songs, at one point. These two guys get along well. They like each other. They've worked closely together. In many ways, Prime Minister Koizumi has been an incredibly effective partner with the United States in working together on issues of security, and trade, and cooperation. And not only has their professional association been warm, but their personal association -- the President likes him. This is a fun thing to do, and so they're doing it. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Well, that's a good question, and I will give you an answer, but I don't have one now. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Okay, I'll tell you what: bring it up here and let's -- do you really need it on camera? Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Well, they -- the Prime Minister had it for dinner last night, and the President said he had it. I don't know if they're going to have it tonight, but they both had it last night. That was the way the President opened the press conference today. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Good morning. Let me begin with housekeeping items. First, the President's schedule today: He will be -- he has already met with the Secretary of Defense. He will travel to St. Louis later in the day, meet with military personnel who have returned from Iraq and Afghanistan. There will be remarks at a dinner for Jim Talent's Senate bid. Then he will return tonight to the White House. Within the administration -- Energy Secretary Bodman is going to announce a $170-million solicitation over three years for cost shared public-private partnerships to advance solar energy technology. As you know, the President had talked often about the importance of innovation in ways -- as a way of trying to overcome the addiction to oil. As part of the President's Solar America Initiative, one of the ideas is to try to make the cost of solar energy systems, to make them competitive with conventional sources by 2015. Also today, at the invitation of Chancellor Angela Merkel, the President will travel to Northeastern Germany in advance of participation in the G8 summit in St. Petersburg, Russia. Chancellor Merkel will host the President on July 13, 2006, in the towns of Stralsund and Trinwillershagen -- you'll have to read it. (Applause.) Thank you, thank you very much. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: You'll be able to read the -- the visit, which will take place at what had been communist East Germany, will underscore our two nations' commitment to advancing freedom and prosperity, and to strengthening the transatlantic partnership. The two leaders look forward to discussing a wide range of global challenges, in particular, their consultations on Iran and preparing for the G8 summit. Also today of note, stories overnight out of Iraq. First, President Maliki has made clear what a number of people had been wondering about, which is that those who have killed Americans and Iraqis will not be eligible for pardon. Meanwhile, the U.S. military says that, in fact, it will meet its training goal for Iraqi security forces by the end of the year. And those are the preliminaries. Questions, please. Terry. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Let me be -- I'm going to be very precise on this, because, as you know, these things are reported carefully. The hostage-taking and the attacks by Hamas last weekend have precipitated the current events in Gaza. As we have said since the attack, Hamas should release and return the kidnapped Israeli soldier immediately. It's the responsibility of the Palestinian Authority to stop all acts of violence and terror. Hamas has done the opposite: It's been complicit in perpetrating violence, terror and hostage-taking. Israel has the right to defend itself and the lives of its citizens. In any actions the government of Israel may undertake, the United States urges that it ensures that innocent civilians are not harmed, and also that it avoid the unnecessary destruction of property and infrastructure. All parties ought to take every measure to restore the security situation in Gaza. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: I'm not going to characterize further than what I've told you. There's your statement of position. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Again, I'm not going to get into operational details here. Let's just point out once again, you have the Israeli -- the Israeli forces are trying to reclaim somebody who is kidnapped and is being held hostage in Gaza, and they are doing what they can to return him. It would be a lot easier if the Palestinian Authority and if Hamas simply returned the kidnapped soldier. I am not going to get into rendering judgment on any of the operational details of what's going on there. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Again, I will just simply refer to it. I'm not going to get into the midst of the characterizations. I'll repeat, the Palestinian Authority could make this very simple -- they could return the kidnapped soldier. And the most important thing is to try to restore some semblance of security as rapidly as possible, and we hope both sides will cooperate in that. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: I'm sorry, clarify that again. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q How will the U.S. receive assurances that those who may have been responsible for harming or killing U.S. troops would not in some way be given amnesty, and -- as the reconciliation program goes forward, how do you know that they won't be? And what assurances do you have that they're on track for this training program by the end of the year? ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: It's a regular meeting with the President. I mean, he comes in regularly and they discuss a wide range of issues. It's the Defense Secretary briefing. I do not have a specific agenda because, typically what happens is they'll cover a whole series of things, and the President will ask questions of things that are on his mind. Obviously, the Secretary will be talking about Iraq and Afghanistan and ongoing operations. But I don't have anything more specific in terms of guidance. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Tony, in terms of welfare reform, can I just ask you to flesh out a little bit of the administration's thinking behind the need to close loopholes in the welfare-to-work requirements? And this idea that there are people on sort of bed rest and that's not an appropriate use of the funds -- has the administration or anybody quantified how many people were talking about that -- and is there any time in which it's appropriate, a woman in her eighth or ninth month of pregnancy, that kind of thing? ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Philosophically, what we're talking about, the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program, the TANF Program is designed to do what we can to encourage two-parent families, because the research is awfully clear in terms of what happens when you have two-parent households, which is that the track record is better for children. Children have lower dropout rates, lower crime rates, lower rates of mental disorders later in life, lower levels of dysfunction, higher levels of graduation, higher levels of income, a greater likelihood of having intact families of their own. All those are important goals as policy goals. But in terms of drilling down into the specific kind of case you've cited, rather than, again, trying to tap dance around it, let me just get you as good an answer as I can. And we'll attach it to the transcript of the briefing.* Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: At this point we are still -- we haven't had a chance to review fully. The Supreme Court is coming out with a number of decisions, and I think rather than making a comment right now, we'll have an opportunity to give it a full look and consult with the lawyers. And probably tomorrow, we'll be able to give you a much fuller answer. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Yes. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: The American position has always been that Iran ought to be able to have the right for civilian nuclear development. We have also said -- and this has been the position of the EU3, and I think you need to stick with the EU3 official consultations, as well as the P5 plus one -- that Iran must suspend uranium enrichment-related and reprocessing activities. That has not changed. So you may be able to match up the statements. But our position is that Iran -- there have been a number of offers, for instance, to do enrichment out of country and also to take spent fuel out, as well. There are a number of options out there, but the key provision -- and this is the provision that would allow the Iranians to return to the table -- remains unchanged: They must suspend uranium enrichment-related or reprocessing activities, period. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: I'm not -- I'm simply repeating our position. And I think that remains the position of the EU3. And rather than reacting to comments from various players, I will stick with the stated position of the entire group. Victoria. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: The legislative branch to sue the executive branch -- I'm afraid I'm not familiar with that particular aspect of Senator Specter's plan. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Okay, well, that -- we have talked about many things dealing with Senator Specter, and let me simply say that, in general, the working relationship has all been constructive, but it's more been dealing with issues of the FISA court and so on. So I'll find out for you. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: You're welcome. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Tony, I was at the briefing at the Pentagon yesterday by General Dempsey, and it was actually a very sobering briefing, because when he talked about the Iraqi troops, he talked about their lack of equipment, the problems with attrition, and in response to my question, the biggest problem, leadership, not being able to find good leaders to lead the Iraqi troops that we train. And when he talked about them being equipped and ready for the end of the year, wasn't ready to do anything independently -- he said independent is not a word that applies now or anytime soon to these Iraqi forces. ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Well, you are defining it as a lack of progress. I think what you're talking about is basic training levels. But the President is perfectly aware of the need for developing leadership cadres. As you know, we have embedded teams working with training mid-level officers to, in fact, become capable of serving as unit commanders in Iraq. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Well, you do it as quickly as you can. And there is certainly no foot-dragging on the part of our guys, or I think of the Iraqis. And, again, I think you get an interesting new dynamic with the new government, because it becomes something more tangible also for Iraqi forces. They know that they've got a Minister of Defense to whom they answer. They know that they have a civilian chain of command that ends up with the Prime Minister. All those -- who knows what kind of impact they're going to have. The answer is, we are still determined to do everything as quickly, but as thoroughly and effectively as possible to enable Iraqi military forces to take full control of securing Iraq. This also includes the police forces, as you know, and that's also been part of the ongoing dialogue. But we are certainly -- Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: The President -- satisfied or dissatisfied, they're moving as quickly as they can. So the most important thing is our forces are doing everything they can to help Iraq get trained up as quickly as possible, period. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Correct. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: The President supports reauthorization in its current form. If Congress provides something else in its process of legislative deliberation, then we will examine what Congress sets before the President. I am not going to get into the position, at this point, of trying to give advice to either the House or Senate on particular measures -- or particular ways in which they may be reviewing the Voting Rights Act. But his position is, renew it as written, and obviously, he will consider whatever the two Houses put together. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Again, I'm not going to get into the court decisions. I will allow Texas authorities to handle what is within their proper purview. Goyal. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Tony, today and yesterday, Dr. Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State, is in Afghanistan -- Pakistan and Afghanistan. Two nations are at odds and they are blaming each other that Osama bin Laden is in Pakistan; Afghanistan is saying that he's not in Afghanistan, he's in Pakistan. And she's trying to get the rift between the two Muslim nations and neighbors. Is she carrying any special message from the President at this time? Because so much has been written about Afghanistan. ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Just to follow up, yesterday, also, the United States Institute of Peace, they had a conference there on Afghanistan especially -- what they're talking about that today, Afghan people do not need anything from the U.S. but human security, which is not there, because what they are saying is international community promised them that they will be there whenever and how long they will be needed. Now, the international security people, they only turn up once a month, and Talibans are there. And now what they're saying is, today you are here, tomorrow you are not here. ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Sarah, as you know, the administration has supported the flag burning amendment. And I don't think that you can accuse Senate leaders of not having tried. They got within one vote of passage yesterday. There was a very vigorous campaign within the Senate to secure the passage and it's the closest they've ever gotten in the Senate. So it is what it is. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Nice try. (Laughter.) Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Yes. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: As you know, the Fed is an independent agency, and it does not answer to the President, nor does the President try to influence deliberations of the Fed. And we will permit the Federal Reserve Board of Governors to do its job as it sees fit. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Tony, two questions. Both the Associated Press and WorldNet Daily report that U.S. Immigration and Customs at Palm Beach International Airport detained Rush Limbaugh for three hours on Monday because they found in his searched luggage one bottle of Viagra, which fact was revealed to the world. And my question: Does the President believe this federal treatment of Limbaugh was fair, and did he believe Rush was wrong to make references to both Bob Dole and Bill Clinton and to announce, "I was worried about the next election," as quoted by The Washington Post? ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Does the President believe that New London, Connecticut homeowners should have to give up their homes because of a reported National Guard museum -- National Coast Guard museum -- to be erected nearby with fundraising co-chairmen Arnold Palmer and the honorable George H.W. Bush? ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Is this part of the New London-Kelo? Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Okay, and the positions on takings. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: The last thing I want to do is to handicap, but, Dave, I'm glad you asked because it is important to realize that immigration not only is an important issue, but it's one on which we've received assurances from the House and Senate that they do intend to take it seriously and that there are going to be attempts to take up comprehensive reform. And now everything that we have seen -- you saw the Chris Cannon race yesterday, where he wins by a 56/44 margin against a well-financed challenger. That's only slightly smaller than his margin in a previous race. Comprehensive reform is something that Americans want, and it's something that if you start running down the list, you can ask opponents, which do you not agree with. And the fact is, everybody is agreed -- you want border security; you want to be able to figure out who the illegal immigrants are; you also want to figure out how to punish employers who have improperly and knowingly hired illegal immigrants; you want to find ways of creating a temporary work program so that many of the people who are here can leave and have a reason for doing it; you also want to find some way of dealing with the 11 million to 12 million illegals, including those who do want to return home. All of those things are issues that Americans want addressed, and the virtue of comprehensive reform is each one of those is addressed. And at the top of the roster is the issue of border enforcement, where, in the first year of the President's plan we've already put together $1.9 billion for not only getting National Guard forces to the border, but also starting to train more rapidly Border Patrol agents. I would remind you that that was originally the figure that the House of Representatives thought over the first five years of its plan. So the President is much more active and aggressive on those issues. So I think that, as I've said before, we welcome a chance for the American people to start examining the virtues and also the impact of comprehensive reform. I think you're going to find -- these are probably -- we're going to find out if they're House hearings or whether they're site visits. I mean, there is still some discussion of what it's going to be. But there's going to be -- Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: -- I'm sorry, what? Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: I don't think so. It's the House of Representatives, members of the House are going to be convening them. I think that they want to do it themselves and they ought to be permitted to. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: On an issue like this we continue to have conversations with members of the House and the Senate. I would also point you back to the fact that Chairman Sensenbrenner and Chairman Specter have been having conversations, and we welcome those. Rather than having the White House -- we've got our hands busy with the executive branch. The legislative branch, I think, can conduct its business well, and we will certainly remain in communication with them. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Well, let me put it this way: We already have. I mean, that's a statement, really, of reality, which is that the border security piece has begun. But also, Senator Specter has talked about -- publicly, about the need for addressing the issue comprehensively, so I'm not sure that there's a natural disjunction between the two. A number of senators have pointed out, for instance, that it takes longer to go ahead and do the biometric ID program and to get the temporary guest worker program up and running. We already have the border security piece first, it's underway. The President wants to make sure that you have comprehensive reform, period. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q But if there was a situation where what came out and what passed was simply dealing -- and they were going to do it piecemeal -- and you first were going to deal with this border issue, would the President sign a bill that just had to do with security -- ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Welcome. A couple of preliminary items of business, and then we will do questions. The President met a little while ago with a delegation from the United States Senate to talk about the line-item veto. Let me provide for you a list of those who were in attendance. Also, as you know, he gave a speech just a few minutes ago to the Manhattan Institute -- that was already announced earlier this morning. Those who attended the meeting with the President on line-item veto included: Senator Majority Leader Bill Frist, Senator Thad Cochran, Senator John McCain -- let's see -- I've got the wrong list here, so I'm going to switch until I get the right list. We also had Senator Kit Bond, Senator Judd Gregg, Senator Susan Collins -- I'm speaking from memory here. I'm trying to envision the room. I don't want to forget anybody, because then I'll create a big incident. Senator Ben Nelson was there. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Any consensus? Well, yes. The idea of a line-item veto, everybody wants to get a handle on government spending. (Laughter.) You laugh. Let me just -- I apologize, I thought I had the whole thing right in front of me, but naturally, I didn't. So let me just -- permit me to fidget here for a moment so that I can get all the names out and not -- make sure that we're not missing anything. Frist, Gregg, Thad Cochran, Susan Collins, Kit Bond, John McCain, Ben Nelson. How about that, I had them all. Okay. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: John Kerry was not there, although he is a supporter, and we encourage and welcome his support. Personnel note -- we have a personnel announcement to make. Nicolle Wallace, White House Communications Director, will be stepping down, effective Friday. We're going to miss her. Nicolle is not only a terrific professional, but also somebody who is just an absolutely wonderful colleague. As you know, she and her husband, Mark, have been separated since he became an ambassador and is serving in our U.N. mission, and they thought that they would decide to live together as a married couple. So we wish them both the very best. And that concludes the preliminary announcements. Now time for questions. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: We don't have a replacement yet. She is, of course, irreplaceable. But we are looking for somebody to fill the position. No, there's not a -- obviously, we'll do this as quickly as we can. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Yes. Hitting a little close to home, Kelly. That's absolutely right. Separated by distance, united by love. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: No. No. The President has never offered direct talks. Again, keep in mind what I've said many times, which is you're going to get a number of voices from Iran, as the Iranian government and factions within the Iranian government try to figure out how they are going to proceed with not only the United States offer, but also the EU3, a package of incentives if the Iranians agree to renounce uranium enrichment and reprocessing activities. At this point we've heard varying responses from different quarters, and as a matter of fact, if you take a look at the Ayatollah's remarks today, they are ambiguous. But we've been pretty clear here. The original set of incentives was transmitted from Javier Solana to Ali Larijani, and we expect Ali Larijani to transmit the response through Javier Solana. So we're going to let different factions within the Iranian government publicly and privately figure out how they're going to respond. We expect a formal response to come through the channel by which it was transmitted originally. Jim. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: He's not dismissed, but if you take a look, the comments are ambiguous. And again, we've been pretty clear about the proper method of transmission. He may not be one in the chorus, but as I've said before, Jim, we've been watching this since the original announcement was made, and we have seen different -- we have seen people provide different kinds of answers, sometimes different responses between morning and afternoon. We are waiting for a consistent, official response, and it would be conveyed through the channel, again, through Ali Larijani to Javier Solana. Yes, I know, he is a man of consequence in Iran, but you go back and read the statement; I don't think you see something that's absolutely definitive, and we expect the response to follow the proper channels. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Go back -- no, no. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: No, because we don't have an official response from the Iranian government. We will wait to act and to respond and to give you a state of mind when we have a proper, official response through the government. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q One follow on this, Tony, because I'm wondering in terms of the time frame how things like this, statements like this affect this squishy area -- are we talking weeks, are we talking months? And if you certainly don't get it by the G8, how do you see this unfolding, aside from we know -- we've made it clear the time frame in which you want to hear from them. They're making it just as clear that they don't care what you want. ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: The question is -- this is on the Iranians. The Iranians have to make the decision. And again, you go back and you parse all the statements, they vary -- there have been all sorts of different sort of shadings of meaning and whether they're for or against. The Iranians are going to have to decide. And the decision is not merely whether they're going to suspend enrichment and reprocessing activities, but whether they're going to go ahead and take the path that leads them toward the basket of incentives, which we hope they will do. But that debate, I think it's safe to say, is ongoing within circles in Iran, and they're going to have to make that decision. So, at this point, the government of Iran has not spoken with one official voice, and I dare say that various people speaking on behalf of the government of Iran have not spoken with a unified voice. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Tony, regarding the disclosure last week of the SWIFT monitoring program, I understand the theoretical argument that this impedes the ability to conduct intelligence, but does the White House know for a fact that it's demonstrably changed and lessened the ability -- ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q One quick follow-up. Two weeks after 9/11, or approximately two weeks after 9/11, the President announced that the U.S., through the Treasury Department, was going to be reaching out to banks all over the world and trying to freeze terrorist assets, and also get all information they can. And if the banks did not comply, the U.S. would stop doing business with those banks. So is it not -- I mean, wasn't the message sent right then and there that -- ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Well, but, again, I'm simply -- you're raising the question. I'm telling you that when you make a general construct about how you try to choke off financing, do all those things, you don't tell how you're doing it. And in point of fact, since September 11th, this particular program has been useful in helping us get Hambali, the mastermind of the Bali bombing. It got the fellow in Brooklyn for $200,000. It has helped to reveal terror cells. It has also been effective, at least according to the British, in helping track down some of the people responsible for the bombings there. So, in point of fact, regardless of what the President had said some years back, the program was working. It had results. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q I guess what I'm asking is -- and I'm sorry for not being specific enough -- but is there the belief that even though terrorists had clearly been tipped off from the very beginning by the President that there was going to be an aggressive attempt to get as much financial information as possible, that they did not know about the SWIFT Bank? ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q The Chinese and the South Koreans were meeting today, again, about the North Korean crisis. Given that China provides 70 percent of North Korea's oil supplies and the South provides large amounts of food aid to the North, what kind of pressure does the U.S. want these two countries to apply on North Korea? And also, has the administration given any thought that this may be a big bluff on North Korea's part to try to force the U.S. towards direct negotiations? ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: No, I understand. The Chinese -- they have enormous economic leverage over the North Koreans. Understood. Still not going to talk about anything they might say. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: I suppose what's happened is you've had different spokesmen with the Iranian regime who have given different shadings, sometimes appearing to sort of welcome, or at least be willing to think about some way of trying to reach out to the EU3. In other cases, you've had things that sounded categorical. So that's really what I meant; it's the approach. I've also cautioned repeatedly don't read too much into any of that. It is people publicly trying to figure out what their position is going to be, and in some cases, they're speaking to their publics and they're making their arguments. And what we expect is for the inner councils of the Iranian government -- which even though there's a lot of public statements, the internal activities of that government still remain fairly opaque, it's not a transparent government -- at some point, they are going to have to decide what their position is going to be, and they will have to transmit it through the proper channels. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Any of them speaking for him? I think he's speaking for himself. I don't know that he's deputized anybody to speak for him. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Well, I'm not at liberty to talk about back channels. Again, what I'm simply saying is the public statements that we have seen give you differing impressions about how people may be reacting, not only to what the United States has suggested it would do, but also to the package of incentives offered by the EU3. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Tony, two questions. Quick, one, the United States Congress is not very much happy with the United Nations, the way they are doing business, 191 members. This week the Congress is debating funding for the U.N. How much trust and faith you think the President has now in the U.N. and also General Secretary Kofi Annan? ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: I'm sorry, the Chinese expansion? Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Well, again, I think you're asking me to get involved in diplomacy that is beyond my brief. I'm just -- I'm not even going to try. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Not that I'm aware of. I know nothing of it. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Secondly, I know the U.S., for the most part, cut contact with the Hamas government. If the alternative is, on the one hand, a large-scale Israeli invasion, and on the other hand, a much more active U.S. involvement in talking to Hamas, is the U.S. willing to take that step? ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: No, because as far as -- we haven't seen anything in print. I mean, you've got to see something written out and you've got to find out exactly what they say. But it's pretty clear -- our position on recognition of the government, you've got to abide by the positions that's been taken by the Quartet. Once again -- we can all recite from memory now -- you will recognize Israel's right to exist, renounce terror, and abide by all past agreements. Those are the preconditions. So, again, we just got off the phone. We were investigating this right until we walked in here. We have not seen anything formal. What you have are a series of press stories, the most recent of which had Hamas, I believe, saying that it would not, in fact, recognize Israel's right to exist. We're just going to wait to see exactly what the case is. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Well, again, I'm not waiting for a press story with an implicit recognition. What we want to see is something written so that we can understand what there position is. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: No, no, public and private statements with the government of Iran. In other words, private communications where our allies would be communicating with Iran. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: No, no, what I said -- let me make it really clear. No, I'm not trying to characterize anything that happened publicly. What I'm saying is that you've had different shadings of meaning in the public statements of different Iranian officials at different times as regards the package of incentives and also the U.S. offer to join the conversation should Iran meet the nuclear conditions that we've outlined. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: What I'm talking about is the private communications between the Iranian government -- let's separate these. All I'm saying is that there have been talks, as you might expect -- Javier Solana having his talks with Ali Larijani -- those are qualified as private conversations. I did not try -- I make absolutely no attempt to characterize good, bad, or indifferent what the tone or texture or content of those conversations may be. So I'm not trying to tell you that there have been positive signs through those. All I'm saying is go back and read the public statements and you get differing impressions at differing times from differing speakers in Iran. And that's really -- I appreciate the chance to clarify -- that's all I meant to say, and I meant to go no further. Ivan. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Tony, yesterday, when my senior correspondent asked you if the President had ordered the shooting down of the North Korean missile if it's launched, you said you wouldn't tell her or tell us, even if you knew. There are naval assets in the area probably capable of shooting down that missile in its boost phase. Wouldn't it be useful for North Korea to know that if they launch it, it would be destroyed by U.S. forces? ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Tony, two questions. In accordance with your request yesterday, I'm asking again what the President is planning to do to stop the judge-ordered destruction by August the 1st of the 46-foot cross in San Diego that is a memorial to our nation's war dead? ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: That is correct. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q Heather Mac Donald of that Institute's City Journal writes the following: "Al Qaeda has long worked to manipulate the media in its favor. It can disband that operation now knowing that unbidden, America's most powerful newspaper is looking out for its interest," while Gabriel Schoenfeld of Commentary writes of, "The case for prosecuting The New York Times." My question: The President doesn't disagree with either Mac Donald or Schoenfeld, does he? ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: But the fact is -- no. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: No, but I have had -- the President has no comment on these. These are privately expressed -- or they're the views of Heather Mac Donald and Mr. Schoenfeld, and we'll leave it at that. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Exactly, yes. There are a lot of people speaking out strongly on the issue. Victoria. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Right. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: That is correct. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

Q So if that's the case, and the telephone records program was written about also in The New York Times and in USA Today, why not just go ahead and either confirm or deny the existence of this program and just lay the whole thing to rest? ... Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Well, no, I mean it was discussed that they want it to happen, but there was no, hey, Frist, are you going to do this for me? Really, it was a general conversation about the need for Congress and the President to work together to find ways to curb the natural impulse and temptation for members of Congress to be able to slip in spending that doesn't necessarily meet the standard of being a national priority. And one of the ways to do that is a line-item veto where -- that also meets constitutional muster. What has happened in this particular case, we've put together a measure in which the President can look at a budget, he can look at line items; then he resubmits those to Congress for an up or down vote that should meet the Supreme Court's guidelines on this. That, in and of itself, highlighting those kinds of spending items, should in some ways serve to discourage people who might come up with spending that otherwise would seem less than absolutely necessary for the nation's safety and security and for the ongoing operations of the federal government. So they conducted it at that level, and the President obviously made it clear that he thinks this is a priority. And you take a look at it. You've got an interesting bipartisan group. As Suzanne mentioned not too long ago, Senator Kerry is one of the co-sponsors here. So you've got a lot of people I think who have a vested interest in trying to make sure that there is some sort of fiscal sanity prevailing within Congress, and also that the President would have the ability from time to time to say no to something, and then have Congress have the final say. Congress may decide that it wants to go ahead with this kind of spending. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: No, none was asked, none was given. Ken. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: I think what they're going to find is that the President has done the same thing that his predecessors have. As a matter of fact -- let me see, just give me a moment here -- I want to get the first name correct. Michelle Boardman, who is Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Office of Legal Counsel -- I'd direct you to her testimony today before Senator Specter's committee, because she really does lay out not only the history of the use of these signing statements, usually to make points of constitutional interest, or constitutional import, but also to draw parallels with previous presidencies and the extreme similarity, for instance, between signing statements and the justifications and the circumstances under which the signing statements were issued between, say, Presidents Clinton and Bush when it came to things like national security and the presentment clause, and so on. So I think what they're going to find is this is really sort of business as usual, and that the volume of signing statements is really not that all out of line compared with previous administrations. Somehow people are now taking more notice. I mean, some people have been writing stories about it, but if you go back and you scratch at the surface, you'll find out that presidents generally had the same concerns about defending the presidential prerogatives when it comes to national security. Or to give you another example, sometimes there are reporting requirements getting back to Congress, seeming to get approval in the process of executing a law that, in the opinion of this and previous administrations, violates the 1983 Chadha Decision by the U.S. Supreme Court which talked about so-called legislative veto. I mentioned that in passing this morning in the briefing. So what you end up doing is finding different ways to meet the sort of desires of Congress, but doing it in a constitutional way. For instance, what you do rather than having a formal reporting to Congress, you have consultations that aren't formal, and therefore members of Congress stay in the loop. In some ways, you have changed the law. The President has done it in the following way. He has tried to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution as he is bound by the Constitution. But he also is enjoined by the Constitution dutifully to carry out the laws and to execute the laws of the United States. So those -- what the signing statements are designed to do is to make sure that both of those duties are kept in balance, and that the President is, in fact, faithfully executing the laws. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Well, that's because I have been reading some of these stories, and I guess what I ended up doing is going back and reading Michelle's statement. And I'll give you just some of the data she has. I will also give you the caveat, because I think sometimes it depends on how you count these things. But, for instance, during the course of the Clinton administration, there were 110 signing statements -- I'm sorry, 105 signing statements, 110 at this point in the Bush administration. We may be comparing apples and oranges, which is why I want to issue the caveat, but it is also the case -- and again, I'll just refer you back to this testimony. If you need a copy, I'll be happy to email it to you. You can go through that. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Well, in some -- no, what you're -- you're making constitutional points about how you execute -- how you can execute the law in keeping with the Constitution. I've got to say, some of the signing statements are -- this is a really great law, I'm really happy about it. I mean, some of the signing statements are also, in effect, "atta boys." But when it comes to constitutional statements, they do generally fall into a series of categories. And you will forgive me if I go back to Michelle's testimony. But she talks about not only national security concerns, but specific constitutional provisions -- the most common being the recommendations clauses, the presentment clauses, and the appointment clauses -- and also, to interpret specific holdings of the Supreme Court like the Chadha decision, which I just referred to before, with regard to the use of the legislative veto. So that's how he uses them. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: No, no -- Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: There will be -- no, there will be times when Congress may, in fact, have done things that it hadn't considered. And also Presidents -- you go back and you can read some of the things Walter Dellinger wrote when he was working for President Clinton because he faced the same problem and actually wrote fairly extensively about it, and said, you are not under an obligation every time you see one of these constitutional concerns to veto a bill. Sometimes, what you can do is to make your expressed concern known within the context of a signing statement and find ways to work with Congress, which sometimes will, unknowingly, have gotten itself into this sort of situation. And therefore, you can solve it that way. This way, you don't have -- you don't veto a bill, you don't create the kind of animosity or tension that you might normally have in the context of a veto, over something that is relatively minor and can be solved with a combination of a signing statement and cooperation with Congress to fulfill the will of Congress, and at the same time, abide by the constitutional injunctions that apply to the President. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: No, absolutely not. Read more Comment (0), Email this.

MR. SNOW: Yes. Read more Comment (0), Email this.