Placeholder Image

Subtitles section Play video

  • Mr. Earnest: Good afternoon, everybody.

  • It's nice to see you.

  • I'm joined at the briefing today by David Cohen

  • from the Treasury Department.

  • We spent a lot of time over the last several weeks, even months,

  • discussing the strategy that the President has put

  • in place to degrade and ultimately destroy ISIL.

  • We have, for understandable reasons,

  • spent a lot of time talking about our strategy related

  • to the military -- military airstrikes

  • by our coalition partners.

  • We've talked a lot about our effort to train and supply

  • local forces on the ground to take the fight to ISIL.

  • We've talked a lot about our ongoing diplomatic efforts

  • to build a broad international coalition.

  • But another core component of this strategy is

  • our efforts to shut down ISIL's financing.

  • This is David's area of responsibility and expertise,

  • and so he's here to give you some brief remarks

  • at the top and to answer your questions about it.

  • So with that, David, why don't you get us started.

  • Under Secretary Cohen: Thanks, Josh.

  • Good afternoon, everybody.

  • So what I thought I would do is briefly recap a speech that

  • I delivered earlier today describing Treasury's role

  • in leading the effort to disrupt the financing for ISIL,

  • which is part of the, as Josh mentioned,

  • the overall effort to disrupt, degrade

  • and ultimately defeat ISIL.

  • So I began by sketching the key source of ISIL's current

  • revenue, and noted that ISIL presents a somewhat different

  • terrorist financing challenge for a couple of reasons.

  • One, it has obviously amassed wealth at a pretty rapid clip.

  • Much of its funding, unlike sort of al Qaeda and al Qaeda-type

  • organizations, does not come from external donations but

  • is gathered -- internally gathered locally in the territory

  • in Iraq and Syria where it currently operates.

  • But nonetheless, ISIL's financial foundations can be

  • attacked through the application of some tried and true

  • techniques that we've developed over the past 10 years

  • at the Treasury Department, and with some

  • modifications on some of these approaches.

  • So with respect to ISIL's sources of revenue,

  • obviously ISIL's sale of oil has gotten a lot of attention.

  • Our best understanding is that ISIL, since about mid-June,

  • has earned approximately a million dollars

  • a day through the sale of smuggled oil.

  • There's been some progress recently in beating back

  • ISIL's ability to earn money from the sale of smuggled oil,

  • in particular due to the airstrikes that have been

  • conducted on some of the ISIL oil refineries.

  • Second, ISIL has earned about $20 million this year through

  • kidnapping for ransom, through receiving ransoms

  • to free innocent civilians, often journalists,

  • that it has taken hostage.

  • Third, ISIL earns up to several million dollars

  • per month through its various extortion networks

  • and criminal activity in the territory where it operates.

  • And finally, as I mentioned, external donations are not

  • right now a significant source of funding for ISIL,

  • but it does maintain some really significant links to Gulf-based

  • financiers, as a spate of Treasury designations we did

  • last night -- last week, rather -- or last month, highlights.

  • So we are leading a three-pronged effort to combat

  • ISIL's financial foundation, closely linked up with

  • the other members in the U.S. government

  • of the anti-ISIL coalition,

  • as well as with international counterparts.

  • So first, we're focused on cutting off

  • ISIL's funding streams.

  • With respect to oil, we are looking very carefully at who

  • the middlemen are who are involved in the sale

  • of the oil that ISIL is smuggling.

  • At some point, there is someone in that chain

  • of transactions who is involved

  • in the legitimate or quasi-legitimate economy.

  • They have a bank account.

  • Their trucks may be insured.

  • They may have licensing on their facilities.

  • There is someone who our tools, our designation

  • tools can influence.

  • And so we are looking very carefully at identifying who

  • the people are that are involved in this chain

  • of transactions that we can apply our tools against.

  • Secondly, we are working to turn the growing international

  • norm against paying ransom to terrorist organizations

  • into a reality.

  • This year there were two U.N. Security Council

  • resolutions that very clearly came out and

  • said that paying a ransom to terrorist organizations

  • is something that no country, no member state should

  • be involved in.

  • This is something that has been longstanding U.S.

  • policy, longstanding U.K. policy, and something

  • that we're trying to get our partners around

  • the world to turn from a norm into a reality.

  • Third, we are looking at these external funding networks.

  • Although it is not currently a significant source of revenue,

  • there is obviously a big pool of money out there

  • that has historically funded extremist groups.

  • Very focused on ensuring that this does not become a more

  • significant means by which ISIL is able to fund itself.

  • And finally, on the crime and extortion networks,

  • the best way to address this, again,

  • is through the military activity and other activity

  • on the ground to push ISIL out of the territory

  • where it's currently operating.

  • But it does sort of play into our second line of activity,

  • which is to prevent ISIL from gaining access

  • to the international financial system.

  • So as it has funds at its disposal,

  • it's critically important that it does not get access to the

  • financial system through the bank branches that are

  • in the territory where it's currently operating.

  • There are dozens of bank branches in Iraq where ISIL

  • is currently operating.

  • We're working closely with the Iraqis and with others around

  • the world, both in the private financial sector and in the

  • public sector, to ensure that ISIL is not able to gain

  • access to the international financial system.

  • And the third line of effort is to apply sanctions

  • against the key leaders in ISIL.

  • It has a relatively sophisticated,

  • complex organizational structure.

  • We're going to look to designate the leaders,

  • designate the people who act in CFO-like capacities,

  • as well as to designate those outside of Iraq and Syria

  • who are providing support to ISIL.

  • So with that, why don't I take a few questions?

  • Mr. Earnest: Olivier, you want to start us off?

  • The Press: Please.

  • Thanks, David.

  • Do you have a sense of ISIL's overall net worth?

  • I realize that these analogies are not perfect,

  • but do you have a sense of where they are in overall net worth?

  • And could you maybe give us just where they rank either in income

  • or in overall wealth against other notable extremist groups?

  • Under Secretary Cohen: There's no question that ISIL

  • is among the best-financed terrorist organizations --

  • leaving aside state-sponsored terrorist organizations --

  • that we've confronted.

  • I can't give you a precise figure on what

  • its current net worth is.

  • But I think an important point, though,

  • is to not confuse funding with financial strength.

  • ISIL has massed millions of dollars in funding,

  • but a terrorist organization's financial strength turns

  • on its ability to continue to tap into funding streams,

  • its ability to use the funds that it has,

  • and also its expenses, ISIL, in its ambition to control large

  • swaths of territory -- cities, towns and millions of millions

  • of people -- has a significant expense side

  • of its balance sheet.

  • And as we work to cut off its access to revenue,

  • ISIL's ability to deliver even a modicum of services to the

  • people that it's attempting to subjugate will be stressed.

  • And so its ability to continue to hold that territory against

  • a population that in the past has shown a willingness

  • to push back against al Qaeda-types is going

  • to be stressed.

  • The Press: And one more.

  • You said that external donations are not right

  • now a significant source of revenue.

  • Again, I'm sorry, can you put a dollar amount

  • on what that means?

  • How much smaller is it than a million dollars a day from

  • smuggling oil, or $20 million this year from ransom?

  • Under Secretary Cohen: It is smaller.

  • In September, we announced designations that included

  • sanctions against a Gulf-based facilitator -- actually,

  • a Syria-based facilitator who received $2 million from

  • Gulf-based donors.

  • So I don't mean to suggest that this is an insignificant source

  • of financing, it's just in comparison to their other

  • revenue streams right now, it's not as important to them.

  • The Press: Which countries are most lenient

  • toward paying ransoms?

  • And how do you approach this problem?

  • Under Secretary Cohen: Look, we approach this problem by lots

  • of quiet diplomacy, working with the countries,

  • and making the point -- which I think is both logical and,

  • frankly, has borne out -- which is that the payment of ransoms

  • just encourages further hostage-taking.

  • And so we all have an obligation to protect our citizens.

  • And the best way to protect our citizens is to take away

  • the incentive in the first place for terrorist

  • organizations to take hostages.

  • The U.S. policy against paying ransoms has been longstanding,

  • and it applies across the board to any hostage-taker.

  • But in the context of a terrorist organization that

  • is taking hostages, this policy has even more force,

  • because we know that the funding that comes from the ransoms

  • is used by these terrorist organizations to fund

  • all of their violent activities.

  • And so the best way to translate what is this emerging

  • international norm into practice is really to make the case

  • to our partners around the world that payment

  • of ransoms ultimately redounds to the detriment

  • of all of our citizens.

  • The Press: Is it mostly European nations that are

  • lenient towards paying, or is it Gulf States?

  • Or who exactly?

  • Under Secretary Cohen: Look, I'm not going to identify

  • any particular countries that are involved here.

  • There are, as evidenced by the fact that ISIL has received

  • $20 million or so this year in ransom payments,

  • there are still ransoms being paid.

  • And I think it's incumbent on everybody and the anti-ISIL

  • coalition and more broadly to adhere

  • to the Security Council resolutions

  • and to not pay ransoms.

  • The Press: What would be an example of the external funding

  • sources that you talked about a minute ago?

  • An example or two?

  • Under Secretary Cohen: Well, an example are these donor

  • networks in the Gulf where money is collected.

  • There are bundlers, essentially, who collect funds and move

  • the funds out of the Gulf into Iraq and Syria.

  • I mean, one of the things we're concerned about -- and again,

  • we have recently designated some individuals who are involved

  • in this activity -- is the use of social media

  • to solicit funds, and the ability, frankly, to move

  • beyond sort of person-to-person fundraising and to use

  • social media as a way to raise funds, bundle those funds,

  • and move them out of the Gulf into Syria and Iraq.

  • And so that's something that we're very focused on.

  • The Press: You mentioned going after the middlemen when

  • it comes to dealing with the oil revenue generated by ISIS.

  • Do you know who is buying that oil ultimately?

  • Are there nations buying it?

  • Under Secretary Cohen: I don't think it's --

  • that's what we're looking into.

  • And our intelligence community and our partners are highly

  • focused on identifying exactly who it is in these smuggling

  • networks that are involved.

  • These smuggling networks didn't just pop up overnight.

  • These are historic, longstanding smuggling networks that

  • have been the way by which all sorts of commodities,

  • including oil, have been traded over the years.

  • But what's different now, frankly,

  • is that the oil that had previously moved through these

  • smuggling networks, we now know that that oil finds

  • its origin with ISIL.

  • And anyone involved in the sale of this oil is, frankly,

  • assisting ISIL, funding ISIL.

  • And so, in the past, if some of these people in these networks

  • were willing to sort of turn a blind eye as to where the oil

  • came from, that's no longer tenable because this oil,

  • everybody should know, is coming from ISIL-controlled territory,

  • and trading in this oil is just funding ISIL.

  • The Press: And do you know how much money is coming

  • from the West?

  • Is there any money coming out of the U.S.?

  • Under Secretary Cohen: Obviously it's something

  • that my counterparts

  • in law enforcement are carefully looking at.

  • I don't have any indication that there's any funding coming out

  • of the West, or certainly out of the United States for ISIL.

  • But it's something where we're looking carefully.

  • The Press: It was a problem during the battle against

  • al Qaeda during the Bush administration,

  • that there were organizations within the United States

  • that were targeted by law enforcement.

  • Under Secretary Cohen: I don't have anything on that.

  • The Press: What more can you tell us, David,

  • about the expense side of the balance sheet?

  • What is ISIS spending money on?

  • Under Secretary Cohen: Well, they spend money on fighters.

  • They pay for their forces to some extent.

  • But they also attempt to deliver something

  • approximating services, public services.

  • They are trying to provide electricity.

  • They're trying to provide water.

  • But recently, I think in Mosul, there has been serious problems

  • in the delivery of electricity and delivery of water.

  • But one of the things that ISIL has tried to do, which is,

  • frankly, different from terrorist organizations

  • of a sort of prior era, is to act as if they were

  • a real state, a real government in the area where they

  • are controlling; so to not try to govern entirely

  • at the point of the gun, but also through some effort

  • to deliver services.

  • And so that is expensive.

  • The Iraqi government's budget for the provinces where ISIL

  • is currently operating for this year was well over $2 billion.

  • Now, I don't mean to suggest that ISIL is intending to

  • deliver anything like the services the Iraqi government

  • was intending to deliver, but that gives you an idea

  • of sort of the scale of the expenses that ISIL,

  • if it's trying to sort of pretend to be a government,

  • would be facing.

  • The Press: Can you talk once more about

  • the donations they're getting on social media?

  • Are these small-dollar donations, big-dollar donations?

  • Under Secretary Cohen: Look, I think it's all of the above.

  • You see these appeals on Twitter in particular from well-known

  • terrorist financiers, ones that we've designated,

  • that have been designated at the U.N., asking for donations

  • to be made to -- and they're quite explicit -- that these

  • are to be made to ISIL for their military campaign.

  • And that makes the efforts of countries in the Gulf that are

  • quite intent on preventing funding from going to ISIL --

  • the Saudis, for instance -- it makes their efforts more

  • difficult, because these are appeals that are

  • made over social media and made broadly.

  • The Press: Just to go a little deeper into the expense side

  • of the balance sheet, and in particular given what happened

  • yesterday in Ottawa, can you give us a sense of how that

  • funding is used, either for the influx of foreign fighters,

  • or is there is any way in which is supports homegrown terror?

  • Under Secretary Cohen: Well, I think that's another element

  • of the expense side of the balance sheet,

  • which is to bring in foreign fighters -- and there have been

  • something like 15,000 foreign fighters that have come into

  • Syria and Iraq over the last several years from 80

  • or so countries, including a dozen or so from the U.S.

  • -- those foreign fighters -- it costs money

  • to bring in those foreign fighters.

  • Some of them are self-funded, but there is a serious concern

  • that ISIL can use some of the funds it has, essentially,

  • to pay for the fighters to come into the area,

  • which is one of the reasons also that we're focused on keeping

  • ISIL out of the international financial system.

  • Because their ability to fund someone who wants to travel from

  • wherever into Iraq or Syria, that's obviously made easier

  • if they can send a wire transfer, and more difficult

  • if they're not able to.

  • The Press: Is there any indication that that money

  • has been used with the dozen or so Americans?

  • Under Secretary Cohen: I don't have any indication on that.

  • The Press: David, in your speech today,

  • you also obviously offered condolences to Canada but

  • mentioned that we have to remain vigilant in the face of terror.

  • Were you saying specifically the administration

  • believes it was a terror attack yesterday?

  • Under Secretary Cohen: I wasn't, no.

  • I will defer to Josh.

  • The Press: Do your efforts against paying ransom extend

  • to private companies and families who might have

  • people taken captive?

  • And is that a tough argument to make?

  • Under Secretary Cohen: Look, what we're focused on is,

  • in any situation where someone is taken hostage,

  • first and foremost making efforts to do everything

  • in our power -- military, diplomatically,

  • through intelligence and law enforcement channels --

  • to free that person.

  • And I think the rescue attempt that was conducted earlier

  • this summer, an effort to free Jim Foley,

  • was an indication of how seriously this administration

  • takes the obligation to protect American citizens.

  • And what we're focused on, on the no ransoms policy,

  • is making sure that we reduce and hopefully someday eliminate

  • the incentive for these kidnappings to occur.

  • And we are highly focused on who it is that is receiving ransoms

  • and who's involved in the solicitation of ransoms.

  • And those are all people who are vulnerable to our actions.

  • The Press: Do they include families and private companies?

  • Under Secretary Cohen: Look, the bad actors here are the people

  • who are taking the hostages --

  • The Press: I understand.

  • Under Secretary Cohen: -- and that's who we're focused on.

  • The Press: What is the preferred currency of ISIL?

  • Under Secretary Cohen: Well, I assume the preferred currency

  • of ISIL, like the preferred currency of everyone

  • around the world, is the U.S. dollar.

  • I think mostly what they have access to are Iraqi dinars.

  • Mr. Earnest: Justin, I'll give you the last one.

  • The Press: I just wanted to drill down on the

  • million-dollar-a-day oil revenue.

  • You said, I think in your speech earlier,

  • that that was from mid-June to today.

  • But you also said that airstrikes have started

  • to degrade some of that.

  • So what I'm wondering is, is the million-dollar constant,

  • which represents both ISIL, gaining more sort of sources

  • of oil revenue, but being degraded by airstrikes?

  • Or is it something like they were maybe making $2 million

  • back in June but now it's half a million over time?

  • Can you just kind of explain --

  • Under Secretary Cohen: I would say it's

  • a pre-airstrike number.

  • The Press: Okay.

  • So you don't have a number for since

  • the airstrikes have started?

  • Under Secretary Cohen: Right.

  • Mr. Earnest: Thank you, David, for your time.

  • Under Secretary Cohen: Thank you, everybody.

  • The Press: I thought you were going to bring Hurricane

  • and Jordan in with you.

  • (laughter)

  • Mr. Earnest: That would have made

  • for a good photo op, wouldn't it?

  • All right, I actually don't have any announcements at the top.

  • So, Darlene, do you want to get it started with questions?

  • The Press: Sure.

  • Thank you.

  • On the attack in Canada yesterday,

  • the gunman there was said to have been a recent

  • convert to Islam.

  • The Prime Minister described him as "an ISIL-inspired terrorist."

  • So I was wondering if this individual had ever been

  • in the U.S.

  • Had any U.S. officials been monitoring him

  • or watching him?

  • And is there any reason to believe there might be some

  • sort of similar attack planned against the U.S.

  • -- Washington or anyplace else in the U.S.?

  • Mr. Earnest: Darlene, let me start by saying that

  • our hearts go out to the victims of the despicable terrorist

  • attacks that occurred in Canada this week.

  • Canada is one of our closest allies,

  • partners and friends in the world,

  • and we stand shoulder-to-shoulder with

  • them in solidarity.

  • We've been clear that we are grateful to Canada for its

  • steadfast commitment to countering violent extremism

  • wherever it occurs, whether overseas or here

  • in North America.

  • And we're going to continue to work closely with our

  • Canadian colleagues to combat this serious threat.

  • Prime Minister Harper said it very well yesterday.

  • He said that the Canadian people will not be intimidated.

  • In fact, they will strengthen their resolve and not allow

  • a safe haven for terrorists who seek to do harm.

  • President Obama yesterday offered Canada any assistance

  • that's necessary in responding to these attacks.

  • And our respective national security teams are

  • coordinating very closely, including again today.

  • As the President said yesterday, when it comes to dealing

  • with terrorist activity, it is clear that Canada

  • and the United States have to be entirely in sync.

  • We have been in the past and we will continue

  • to be in the future.

  • As it relates to the threat that we face here,

  • you have heard the President on a number of occasions talk

  • about the risk that the U.S. faces from

  • so-called lone wolves.

  • These are, again, individuals who, in some cases,

  • can be radicalized over the Internet.

  • You've heard David discuss the robust efforts that are underway

  • by ISIL to use social media to recruit and radicalize

  • people around the world.

  • I should have preceded this aspect of my answer by saying

  • that there continues to be an ongoing investigation in Canada,

  • so I'm not in a position to discuss any details about this

  • individual that is the subject of an ongoing investigation.

  • But what continues to be of continued focus here

  • in the United States are our ongoing efforts

  • to counter violent extremism.

  • It is a critical component of our nation's

  • counterterrorism strategy.

  • And there was a report that was released a couple

  • of years ago by the White House that was called,

  • "Empowering Local Partners to Prevent Violent Extremism

  • in the United States," and that was a strategy where the

  • administration at the federal level would work closely

  • with partners at the local level to ensure that we're

  • doing everything necessary to mobilize resources

  • and counter violent extremism.

  • That, of course, includes the use

  • of law enforcement resources.

  • But this goes beyond just enhanced community policing.

  • This includes efforts through schools,

  • through mental health professionals to make sure that

  • every instrument of government can be used to work

  • with local communities to combat this threat.

  • The administration at the federal level and at regional

  • offices across the country has also sought to engage community

  • leaders in this effort.

  • There are a couple of pilot projects that are underway right

  • now in Los Angeles, Minneapolis, and in -- I believe that it's --

  • actually, it's Los Angeles, Minneapolis and Boston,

  • where there are federal officials who are engaged

  • in a pilot program to work closely with

  • local law enforcement but also with community leaders

  • to make sure that the messages recruiting vulnerable youth

  • to engage in violent extremism are properly countered

  • by community leaders that have influence over

  • young people in these communities.

  • So this is an effort that has been ongoing for a number

  • of years at the direction of the President.

  • The President himself has identified the risk of a lone

  • wolf terrorist as something that is significant,

  • and this is something that the President talked

  • about before this incident in Canada.

  • It's something that he talked about before we saw

  • the emergence of ISIL as a significant threat

  • to the United States.

  • The President even talked about this risk prior to the Boston

  • bombing that occurred at the finish line of the marathon

  • a couple of years ago.

  • So this is something that has long attracted the attention

  • of the United States and the Obama administration.

  • And the administration has laid out a very multifaceted

  • strategy for combatting it.

  • The Press: So you can't or won't say whether

  • this individual was known to U.S. authorities?

  • Mr. Earnest: I'm not in a position to talk about any

  • details related to this specific individual.

  • The Press: On the fence-jumping incident last night,

  • Congressman Chaffetz said today that there may be some changes

  • needed to maximize the pain of climbing over the fence.

  • Is that something the President or the White House would agree

  • to if it were a recommendation from one of the reviews

  • that are currently underway of the Secret Service?

  • It seems like a simple solution.

  • Mr. Earnest: I guess it brings to mind a variety

  • of colorful images --

  • (laughter)

  • -- to pursue an approach along the

  • lines of what Congressman Chaffetz recommends.

  • The Press: Well, a higher fence.

  • Mr. Earnest: Well, fortunately --

  • The Press: Not necessarily a painful one, but higher.

  • Mr. Earnest: I see.

  • Fortunately, the Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security

  • is working closely with the General Counsel at the

  • Department of Homeland Security to conduct a review about

  • the security posture around the White House.

  • They're considering a wide range of things,

  • including the deployment of personnel,

  • the deployment of technology and even physical obstacles,

  • like a fence, that are critical to protecting the First Family,

  • the White House, and those of us who work here.

  • That is a review that we anticipate will

  • be completed in the next couple of weeks.

  • That review will then be considered by an independent

  • panel of experts that's been assembled by the Department of

  • Homeland Security to ultimately make some recommendations to the

  • Secretary of Homeland Security and to the leadership

  • of the Secret Service about what steps are necessary

  • to strike the proper balance between the top priority,

  • which is safeguarding the President and his family

  • and the White House complex, while also preserving

  • the White House's status as the People's House,

  • as a tourist destination where thousands of Americans

  • a day can come through the White House,

  • tour the seat of the executive branch of government,

  • and walk out the front door.

  • That is a very unique -- that is part of what makes the White

  • House such a unique building, but it also makes for a very

  • unique challenge to the agencies and professionals

  • who are responsible for protecting.

  • The Press: Last question.

  • Is the answer still no on Ron Klain testifying

  • at Congressman Issa's Ebola hearing tomorrow?

  • Mr. Earnest: Yes.

  • And the reason for that is, obviously yesterday

  • was his first day on the job, so he's very

  • focused on the task in front of him.

  • And we have heard expressions of concern from Democrats

  • and Republicans in Congress about the need for

  • the federal government and the international community

  • to deal with the very serious threat of Ebola,

  • and we certainly would welcome expressions

  • of bipartisan support for ongoing

  • efforts to do exactly that.

  • Mr. Holland.

  • The Press: What was the President's reaction

  • to this latest fence-jumper?

  • Mr. Earnest: I did not have the opportunity to speak to him.

  • I'll share with you my own observations, however,

  • if you're interested.

  • What I took note of is the way in which yesterday's incident

  • underscores the professionalism of the men and women

  • of the Secret Service.

  • These are individuals who literally at a moment's notice

  • are prepared to spring into action to protect

  • the White House, to protect the First Family,

  • and to protect those of us who work here every day.

  • And that is not [sic] a difficult task.

  • There is obviously no margin for error.

  • It is a task that they approach with

  • seriousness and professionalism.

  • And again, because I'm speaking for myself but I know

  • it's a sentiment that is shared by the First Family,

  • we're very appreciative of their efforts.

  • The Press: Back on Canada, when the President said there should

  • be renewed vigilance, what exactly was he talking about?

  • And if you could say, what assistance are

  • we providing the Canadians?

  • Have they asked for anything yet?

  • Mr. Earnest: Steve, the communications between the

  • federal government here in the United States and Canada have

  • principally been led by the State Department.

  • Obviously there is a significant U.S.

  • diplomatic presence in Ottawa that I understand is not that

  • far from where the violence occurred yesterday.

  • So there is a robust structure in place to lead those

  • communications and ensure that offers of assistance

  • reach their destination.

  • But based on the fact that the Canadian officials have

  • determined that this is a terrorist incident,

  • you can expect -- you should expect that U.S.

  • officials who are responsible for our counterterrorism efforts

  • have also been in touch with their counterparts in Canada

  • to offer assistance and to coordinate both in the

  • investigation and in any needed response.

  • The Press: So "renewed vigilance,"

  • what did the President mean?

  • Mr. Earnest: Well, I think he meant a couple of things.

  • The first is, as he mentioned and as I mentioned today,

  • there continues to be extremely strong counterterrorism

  • coordination between the United States and Canada.

  • We value that strong working relationship.

  • That strong working relationship enhances the security

  • of the American people and the Canadian people.

  • And there is a high priority that's placed on ensuring

  • that that relationship continues to be strong,

  • and we're going to continue to reinforce our

  • efforts to ensure that that's the case.

  • The second thing -- and I think this may be more directly about

  • what the President was referring to -- are our ongoing efforts to

  • counter violent extremism; that the risk that is posed by a lone

  • wolf terrorist is something that has been of significant

  • concern to the President for many years now,

  • and there's a strategy that we have put in place that goes

  • beyond just enhanced community policing,

  • but that efforts can be made at the grassroots level in

  • communities across the country to counter the violent messages

  • that are being sent by ISIL and other ideological

  • extremists to try to recruit vulnerable youth.

  • And there is a very important role for the mainstream Muslim

  • community in this country and around the world to play in this

  • effort as well, that there are respected religious figures

  • who can effectively counter the extremist messages that are

  • being widely distributed in an effort to appeal

  • to the youth in some communities both in this

  • country but in countries around the world.

  • And the Obama administration has made it a priority to engage

  • these local leaders and mobilize them in this effort.

  • We're pleased with the kind of strong partnership that's been

  • established in a number of communities across the country.

  • But it's important for us to continue to be vigilant both

  • about the threat, but also about our ongoing efforts

  • to counter it.

  • Jim.

  • The Press: Speaking of the social media aspect of this,

  • is there anything more that the administration can do?

  • Obviously you want to respect First Amendment rights,

  • but is there anything more you can do to crack down on these

  • social media efforts that ISIS is using to recruit

  • people in the West?

  • Mr. Earnest: Well, the question that you raise does raise some

  • constitutional questions.

  • And so I'd refer you to the Department of Justice that may

  • have some more insight into what that -- how best to counter

  • those messages while also protecting the First Amendment

  • rights of Americans.

  • But as a general matter, there are a couple of things

  • I can say about that.

  • It's not -- it doesn't have to be solely about essentially

  • shutting off the message that's coming from another country.

  • What also is effective is lifting up the message of,

  • in this case, mainstream Muslims that have an interpretation

  • of Islam that is much more in line with the vast majority

  • of those who practice that religion.

  • And that is part of why -- an important part of why we have

  • worked so hard to engage community leaders in cities

  • across the country, particularly in the Muslim community,

  • and that there are Muslim religious leaders that share

  • the administration's concern about youths in their community

  • being targeted and recruited by violent extremism.

  • And there is a natural overlap where we can work closely with

  • them to make sure that they have the resources and opportunity

  • to make sure that their voice is heard in this

  • situation as well.

  • Because I think that many of these youths will find those

  • voices and those messages similarly persuasive.

  • The Press: Are leaders in the Muslim-American

  • community doing enough?

  • Does the President want to see them do more

  • to make sure that message gets across?

  • Mr. Earnest: I think there's an opportunity for everybody

  • to do more to ensure that we are succeeding in this effort.

  • And that said, we have been very gratified by the kind of

  • response that we have seen from mainstream Muslim religious

  • leaders across the country.

  • Again, these are leaders of communities who understand that

  • there are youths in their communities who are being

  • targeted by extremists around the world,

  • and they are concerned about the wellbeing of the people

  • in their community, particularly children and young adults.

  • The Press: It sounds like this gunman in Canada tried to leave

  • the country or maybe wanted to leave the country,

  • but his passport was pulled at one point.

  • It sounds as if this concern about foreign fighters may

  • not come into play in every case, in every scenario,

  • because you don't necessarily have to travel

  • in all of these cases.

  • Some of these folks can be radicalized

  • in their own communities.

  • Mr. Earnest: Well, the details about this individual are still

  • under investigation, so I'm not in a position to confirm some

  • of reports that I also have seen about his attempts to travel --

  • The Press: Passport --

  • Mr. Earnest: -- or his passport, or whatever.

  • But you're right that based on what has been reported,

  • this individual would be in a different category

  • than a foreign fighter, right?

  • The foreign fighter threat that we have identified are

  • individuals who have already traveled to the region

  • and could return home to carry out acts of violence.

  • But there has been, long before even ISIL emerged on the

  • international scene, a concern about the risk that's posed

  • by individuals who live in communities in the West,

  • become radicalized or even self-radicalized through

  • social media, and carry out acts of violence.

  • And again, this is a scourge that has struck this

  • country as well.

  • The Boston bombing I think is a recent high-profile

  • example of that.

  • And this is a threat that is very difficult to counter,

  • because we're talking about individuals that are inherently

  • cut off from some of the other connections to society

  • that the rest of us I think take for granted.

  • That's why we're working so hard to work closely with the leaders

  • in these communities to try and spot these problems on the front

  • end -- because, again, it's in the interest of the government

  • as well as the leaders of these communities

  • to try to protect at-risk youth.

  • The Press: And there's been some talk about having

  • a CVE summit here at the White House.

  • Has any progress been made towards scheduling

  • that or having that?

  • Mr. Earnest: This is something that has been a subject

  • of extensive discussion here at the White House.

  • I don't have any announcements to make in terms of the status

  • of our ongoing planning on that, but I hope to have

  • an update on that soon.

  • The Press: And I'm sorry, I'm taking too much time,

  • but getting back to the fence-jumper -- do you agree,

  • though, that what happened last night,

  • not only the good work of the men and women

  • of the Secret Service but of the dogs,

  • the canine units of the Secret Service --

  • Mr. Earnest: I do.

  • The Press: -- that this was an example of lessons that

  • were learned from the previous incident in September,

  • and you saw an improvement in the performance

  • of the Secret Service last night?

  • Is that a fair assessment?

  • You may not want to say "improvement" because

  • they may not want to hear it that way.

  • Mr. Earnest: Well, I think what I would say is,

  • for -- it's difficult for me to talk about this without

  • talking about the security posture that's in place.

  • And there still is an investigation about what exactly

  • transpired last night, but I do think it would be fair for

  • anyone to conclude that the results of last night's

  • efforts were better than the results that related

  • to the incident that occurred last month here.

  • Let's move around.

  • Go ahead, Bill.

  • The Press: How can you say that when you put

  • up an extra perimeter of security after what happened

  • last month and the guy still gets over?

  • He was unarmed, but he could have certainly been armed,

  • he could have been much more dangerous than he was.

  • So why are we all happy about that?

  • It's good that they got him, I guess,

  • but isn't anybody concerned that he got over in the first place?

  • Mr. Earnest: Bill, I share your assessment

  • that it's good that we got him.

  • (laughter)

  • The Press: That's a courageous stand.

  • (laughter)

  • Mr. Earnest: It is.

  • It is.

  • It's a cold-hearted, clear-eyed assessment of the situation,

  • and it's one I'm prepared to deliver from here.

  • But look, there is an ongoing review of the security posture

  • at the White House, and if there are additional steps that can

  • be taken to improve the security posture at the White House,

  • to more effectively repel individuals who might be seeking

  • to jump the fence, then that's certainly something

  • that will be considered as a part of that review.

  • The Press: Another row of bicycle racks?

  • Mr. Earnest: Well, again, I'm not going to make any -- unlike

  • Congressman Chaffetz, I don't have any -- I'll leave the

  • security posture to the experts who will make their own

  • determination about what would be an appropriate measure to

  • safeguard the White House while at the same time balancing that

  • with the need to ensure that people understand that

  • the White House is something that is accessible

  • to the public.

  • It's a place that thousands of tourists visit on a daily basis,

  • that there is a free-speech zone that can be a pretty colorful

  • place right out in front of the White House, most days.

  • The Press: It's still accessible, clearly.

  • Mr. Earnest: Well, and it's still a place that

  • hundreds of us show up to work at every day.

  • And there are a number of precautions that

  • the Secret Service takes both to ensure our safety

  • but also to ensure that we can get in and out

  • of the complex in a relatively efficient manner.

  • So there are a lot of competing priorities here.

  • The number-one priority, however,

  • is ensuring the safety and wellbeing of the First Family

  • and the broader complex, and I think those --

  • that will continue to be the priority

  • of the Secret Service moving forward.

  • The Press: But isn't anybody surprised that last night's

  • jumper was able to make it over the fence

  • despite the extra precautions taken?

  • Mr. Earnest: Well, again, in terms of the security posture

  • that's in place and the risk that this individual may have

  • posed to the complex, I'd refer you to the Secret Service.

  • Ed.

  • The Press: Josh, on security, I just want to talk about Canada.

  • Obviously there's a lot of debate in Congress,

  • there's a lot of conversation within the administration

  • about the southern border, and rightly so.

  • But what does the administration think about -- and are there any

  • steps you're taking to make sure the northern border is secure,

  • especially in light of what happened yesterday?

  • Mr. Earnest: Well, Ed, we do have a very important

  • counterterrorism partnership with the Canadians,

  • and we work very closely with them to ensure the safety

  • and security of our two populations.

  • And that includes making sure that the border between

  • our two countries is properly monitored, and in a way

  • that protects the citizens on both sides of it.

  • The Press: On immigration, last year the administration freed

  • about 2,200 people from immigration jails.

  • And at the time, we were told by Jay Carney and other officials

  • that the reason we were going to save a lot of money and that

  • the people who were freed did not have major criminal records.

  • And USA Today has now gotten some of those records and

  • published a story saying that most of the people that were

  • released did not have criminal records -- that's true -- but

  • some of them had very, very serious criminal records --

  • charges of kidnapping, sexual assault,

  • drug trafficking, homicide.

  • Does the administration have any regrets about telling the

  • Congress, telling the public that we're not releasing people

  • with serious criminal records, and it turns out some of those

  • people were charged with sexual assault and very serious crimes?

  • Mr. Earnest: Ed, I can't speak to the individual cases

  • of those who were mentioned in that report.

  • But what I can tell you is that the administration continues

  • to place a priority in ensuring that

  • the American public is protected and is safe.

  • And that has been a top priority of the immigration reform policy

  • that this administration has pursued,

  • that strengthening --

  • The Press: But how can the public trust you

  • saying that when several months ago Jay Carney said,

  • don't worry about it, we're not releasing

  • anybody who's dangerous?

  • Mr. Earnest: Time and time again,

  • we've talked about why we believe it's important

  • for us to increase security resources at the border

  • to protect the border.

  • We've talked a lot about how we believe that the deportation

  • policy in this country should be focused on those

  • individuals that pose a risk to the community.

  • And that will continue to be the focal point of our efforts.

  • Again, I'm not in a position to discuss

  • individual cases, however.

  • The Press: A couple short ones on midterms, to wrap up.

  • In Atlanta, the President -- among the African American radio

  • stations that you have mentioned the President would be talking

  • to ahead of the midterms, he did an interview with an Atlanta

  • station where he said if Michelle Nunn wins that race,

  • the Democrats are going to keep the Senate.

  • And I'm wondering, usually the President doesn't

  • make it that specific.

  • I mean, he's pushing for votes in important -- but I guess I'm

  • trying to get at, is that just a device to turn people

  • out in that particular race, or does the President

  • really believe that that is the pivotal race?

  • That if the Democrats win that seat,

  • they keep control of the Senate?

  • Mr. Earnest: I think the President is mindful of the

  • electoral map and understands what will be required to elect

  • enough Democratic senators, reelect enough Democratic

  • senators or to elect enough Democratic candidates --

  • The Press: There are a whole series of these races

  • that are very pivotal --

  • Mr. Earnest: That's correct.

  • The Press: And he's saying, if we win this one we keep it.

  • So I'm just trying to understand,

  • is that just kind of an election-year, hey, let's win?

  • Or does the White House really believe that's the one?

  • Mr. Earnest: I think the message that the President was trying

  • to deliver, Ed, is that the challenge facing

  • Democratic candidates in a state like Georgia,

  • where Democrats on the statewide ticket at least in Georgia have

  • faced a pretty difficult electoral environment over the

  • last generation or so, that what he -- the observation that

  • he's making is that even in a difficult environment like

  • Georgia that a Democratic candidate can prevail,

  • that that might be an indication that Democratic candidates

  • in other races are faring well, too,

  • in environments where there is a stronger track record,

  • at least recently, of electing more Democrats

  • to statewide offices.

  • The Press: Last one.

  • A state right near there where there is another important

  • race is North Carolina.

  • The Democratic senator, Kay Hagan,

  • was asked in an interview about the President's leadership,

  • and she said that he's been late to the game

  • on a whole range of issues.

  • She mentioned Ebola and the CDC, and was pressed -- you know,

  • are you saying he hasn't shown leadership on some of these

  • issues -- a strong leadership -- and she said,

  • certainly there are issues that I think certainly not,

  • that he has not shown strong leadership.

  • I know that there have been candidates,

  • it's old news that they've been distancing themselves,

  • but for a Democratic senator to say a Democratic President has

  • not shown strong leadership -- how do you react to that?

  • Mr. Earnest: Well, I react to that I think by saying that

  • Senator Hagan is somebody that has a track record and

  • credentials for getting results for the people of North

  • Carolina, even if it means criticizing members of her own

  • party, even it means criticizing the leader of her own party.

  • I think that's a testament to her character and leadership

  • and her commitment to serving the people

  • of North Carolina.

  • It doesn't mean I necessarily agree with her assessment.

  • The Press: That may be what it says about Hagan.

  • What does it say about the President's leadership?

  • Mr. Earnest: Well, I think it says about

  • the President's leadership is that he takes

  • all these responsibilities very seriously.

  • And I think if you look at the situation related to responding

  • to Ebola, to putting in place measures that are driven

  • by his administration to counter violent extremism,

  • that there are a whole range of threats that the President takes

  • very seriously, has worked assiduously to protect

  • the American people.

  • Steven.

  • The Press: Josh, is there any concern here at the White House

  • that the two attacks in Canada this week will in any way weaken

  • the resolve of the Canadians in the fight against

  • ISIS or al Qaeda?

  • Mr. Earnest: I think I would take Prime Minister Harper

  • at his word when he says that the Canadian people

  • will not be intimidated.

  • And I think he delivered that message pretty forcefully.

  • And we certainly have valued the contribution that the Canadians

  • have made to our broader international coalition,

  • and that was a message that was very well received

  • by the President and by the American people.

  • And it is indicative of the kind of strong relationship

  • that endures between the United States and Canada,

  • and it will certainly be on full display as our friends

  • and allies in Canada are going through this

  • very difficult time.

  • The Press: I want to ask another question about

  • the midterms and about Georgia, specifically.

  • The state Democratic --

  • Mr. Earnest: A lot of interest in that race.

  • The Press: Well -- the state Democratic Party there this week

  • apparently sent out mailers with pictures of preschool-aged

  • kids with signs that read: "Don't Shoot."

  • These mailers I guess are meant to ramp up,

  • turnout of African American voters.

  • On the backs it says, "If you want to prevent

  • another Ferguson in their future, vote."

  • Does the White House agree that if African Americans don't

  • come out in large numbers this fall that there will

  • be more Fergusons?

  • Mr. Earnest: Steven, I haven't seen the specific mailer

  • in question and I'm not sure what was motivating

  • the individual who may have put it together,

  • so I'm going to withhold comment on it.

  • April.

  • The Press: Josh, I have three subjects I want

  • to hit you with fast.

  • Mr. Earnest: Okay.

  • The Press: On the jumper last night,

  • aesthetically -- you talked about there

  • could be some changes.

  • Aesthetically, should we expect to see some changes?

  • I.e., the fence that surrounds the White House has been

  • in question ever since we've been hearing most recently

  • with these jumpers.

  • Could we indeed see something aesthetically change

  • once this review is complete?

  • Mr. Earnest: It's possible.

  • It's the subject of this ongoing review

  • by the Department of Homeland Security.

  • I will just say that these officials,

  • as they conduct this review, are mindful of the need

  • to balance what is obviously the top priority,

  • which is the safety and security of the First Family

  • and the White House complex, with the need to preserve

  • public access to the White House because it is the seat

  • of the executive branch of the United States of America.

  • So I think the point is, it certainly would be possible to

  • build a multi-story, bomb-proof wall around the 18-acre complex

  • of the White House, but that I don't think would

  • be striking the appropriate balance that

  • I described earlier.

  • So this is the subject of an ongoing review,

  • and we'll have the professionals determine both what is necessary

  • to protect the First Family, but also what is necessary

  • to balance these other important priorities.

  • The Press: So the balance could be a fence with a curve,

  • or it could be higher, something like that?

  • Mr. Earnest: I wouldn't prejudge the outcome of the review.

  • We'll let the experts focus on it.

  • And after the review is issued and after the independent

  • panel of experts has had an opportunity to consider it,

  • then we can talk about it a little bit more.

  • The Press: All right.

  • Other two subjects.

  • On Ferguson -- we understand that the Attorney General

  • is "disappointed about the leaks from the grand jury,"

  • and he finds it irresponsible.

  • What are your thoughts about that,

  • as it kind of signals to some that the police officer,

  • Darren Wilson, is going to get off?

  • Mr. Earnest: April, I've seen the reports and I've seen

  • the reports about the leaked documents.

  • But this is the subject of an ongoing investigation and it's

  • not something that I'm going to comment on from here.

  • The Press: Even though your Attorney General

  • is saying that he's disappointed?

  • Mr. Earnest: April, I believe that the report that you're

  • citing is citing an anonymous official with knowledge of the

  • -- The Press: I talked to someone from Justice,

  • so I'm telling you what they told me -- disappointed.

  • Mr. Earnest: Okay.

  • So someone anonymously characterized to you the

  • Attorney General's views.

  • I'm not questioning the veracity of that person's comments

  • to you, but I am pointing out that I'm talking in a much

  • more public setting and I'm not going to do that

  • because there is an ongoing investigation right now.

  • The Press: And the last question.

  • With the frustrations and concerns in this nation about

  • Ebola, I'm thinking back a couple months ago when the

  • President made this big push for people to invest in Africa.

  • Has this Ebola scare kind of tapped down some

  • of the excitement about businesses going

  • to sub-Saharan Africa and investing in Africa?

  • Mr. Earnest: Well, I think the first thing I would observe is

  • that we were -- that this Africa summit that the President

  • convened here in Washington, D.C. in August occurred right

  • sort of at the beginning of public attention focusing

  • on this Ebola outbreak in West Africa.

  • And I think in the context of that summit we saw a lot

  • of excitement and interest about the opportunity that exists

  • for Africa -- not just for the African people,

  • but also for American businesses who are interested

  • in new markets.

  • So there continue to be very exciting opportunities

  • in Africa.

  • And I have not detected any reduction in the interest and,

  • in some cases, even passion for strengthening the ties between

  • the United States and Africa, and capitalizing on those

  • connections to benefit both the African people but

  • also the American people back here at home.

  • Jared.

  • The Press: Josh, talking about the midterms,

  • what's the President's reaction to Senator Begich calling

  • him not relevant?

  • Mr. Earnest: I didn't actually -- I didn't see those comments.

  • He certainly -- again, Senator Begich is certainly entitled to

  • his opinion, but I think the vast majority of Americans would

  • agree that whoever the sitting President of the United States

  • happens to be is relevant in a lot of important ways.

  • The Press: Sure.

  • This is the flipside, though, of the comment that a lot

  • of the President's supporters -- including Bill Clinton --

  • have said, that it's not about what's two years from now;

  • this is a six-year proposition.

  • So it's a sentiment that exists in both a positive

  • and a negative connotation.

  • These are senators running for a longer term, saying that,

  • please elect me for this longer term.

  • Does the President at least agree that there's a sentiment

  • there -- does he agree with the sentiment, rather,

  • that these are people who are running for a longer term

  • and that he's not going to be here for the entirety of it?

  • Mr. Earnest: Well that's a basic fact of arithmetic,

  • so I would concede that.

  • But at the same time, these individuals -- as the President

  • himself has said -- these are individuals that

  • have their own names on the ballot.

  • And that is what voters will evaluate.

  • And the President is interested in doing everything that

  • he can to support those candidates who

  • are passionate about prioritizing an agenda that

  • benefits middle-class families, because the President

  • believes that policies that support middle-class

  • families are in the best interest of the country.

  • Our economy grows from the middle out,

  • so the more that we can invest and support middle-class

  • families the better off our economy will be.

  • And so the President is passionate about that,

  • and the President will continue to passionately advocate for

  • the election of candidates who share that point of view.

  • Olivier.

  • The Press: A couple for you on different topics.

  • You talked about striking the right balance between security

  • and the traditional role of the White House

  • as a tourist destination.

  • Is there -- will there be -- one person whose job

  • it is to be, like, a public advocate?

  • The person who says to the security people,

  • that's fine but we need to do X, we can't do this,

  • we can't put up that 18-foot wall,

  • the moat with the alligators -- no way.

  • (laughter)

  • Is there one person whose jobs it is,

  • sort of like a devil's advocate or a public advocate --

  • is there one person whose job that is?

  • Mr. Earnest: Let me clarify one thing.

  • It's not just that the White House is a tourist destination.

  • So certainly it is and it's one that's enjoyed by I believe

  • it's thousands of tourists on a daily basis.

  • It's the fact that the White House stands as an important

  • symbol of our democracy, that it is a place -- that it's

  • the People's House, that it's a place that is so accessible

  • that thousands of people can tour it on a daily basis.

  • And so it's not just protecting a popular tourist destination;

  • it's about protecting the symbolism of that popular

  • tourist destination continuing to be accessible

  • to the American public and to the individuals who are

  • responsible for electing the person who lives there.

  • So I did want to clarify that.

  • That said, you'd have to check with the Secret Service to be

  • sure, but I think even they would tell you that they're

  • mindful of this need to protect the President,

  • protect the White House, but also to protect the symbolism

  • of the White House as the People's House.

  • I think even they would convey to you that that is a priority

  • that they share.

  • And I'm confident that it will be taken into account

  • as the ongoing security review is conducted.

  • The Press: Okay, so there's not one person whose

  • job it is to make this argument?

  • Mr. Earnest: No, I don't think that there is sort

  • of an ombudsman, if you will, in this matter.

  • The Press: A czar.

  • (laughter)

  • Mr. Earnest: That seems to be a popular word choice.

  • It would be a little ironic to have a White House czar,

  • though, wouldn't it?

  • (laughter)

  • So I can definitely rule out the creation

  • of a White House czar.

  • The Press: I appreciate that.

  • The Press: Moat master.

  • (laughter)

  • The Press: That's better, actually.

  • And David raised the issue of countries that are -- where

  • people are open to paying ransom for people abducted by ISIL.

  • Has the President ever raised that issue with another

  • world leader directly in his many phone calls?

  • Has he ever said, by the way, I also need you to maybe

  • do something about the fact that your businesses

  • or your government is paying ransoms?

  • Mr. Earnest: That is putting me on the hook to account for

  • a large number of phone calls, some of which aren't even

  • public, most of which haven't been read out

  • in a lot of detail.

  • But I will say as a general matter -- and I do think that

  • we've probably said this before -- that the President has

  • on a number of occasions made the case to other world leaders

  • about the benefits of the position that's taken

  • by the United States.

  • And that is specifically that no one should pay ransom

  • to extremist organizations or terrorists who

  • are holding hostages.

  • And as painful as that policy decision is,

  • it is clearly in the best interest

  • of the global community for that policy to be in place.

  • The Press: Do you have a sense of when the last time he would

  • have done that is, either to a group or to an individual?

  • Mr. Earnest: I'm trying to think about the last time

  • that might have occurred and I'm just not sure.

  • Justin.

  • The Press: Your guys' old friend, David Axelrod,

  • was quoted in Bloomberg Business Week today.

  • The story is kind of about the President's reluctance to maybe

  • embrace the optics or the politics of situations,

  • and Axelrod said there's no doubt that there's a theatrical

  • nature to the presidency that he, the President, resists;

  • sometimes he can be a little negligent in the symbolism.

  • And so I'm wondering what your reaction to that is,

  • and if you would concede that the President's reluctance

  • on that front has sort of hurt him politically

  • and Democrats headed into the midterm elections.

  • Mr. Earnest: Well, I would say that the President did an

  • interview with Chuck Todd on the first airing of "Meet the Press"

  • when he was the host and the President said

  • almost exactly this thing word for word.

  • So this is an assessment that the President has acknowledged

  • before in terms of his occasional inattention

  • to some of the optical aspects of his role.

  • At the same time, I do think it's a bit of a stretch to

  • suggest that there is any direct political consequence

  • for this, either in the upcoming elections or,

  • frankly, in any elections at this point.

  • But, again, I know that this is for the benefit of your reader,

  • something that you consider very carefully and you've

  • certainly considered it more carefully than I have.

  • But the general view about the President's attention to those

  • aspects of his job is something that the President himself

  • has discussed before.

  • The Press: Is there any effort to address that?

  • I mean, it's something the President mentioned then,

  • but also in his "60 Minutes" interview about golfing

  • after sort of -- after I think the death

  • of James Foley being announced.

  • Are there any steps that you guys are undertaking to maybe

  • play more politics, since it seems to be something that

  • is kind of a constant criticism and something

  • that the President has acknowledged himself?

  • Mr. Earnest: Well, I think the President is -- I don't think

  • I would characterize it as politics and I don't think I

  • would characterize the decision about the President's activities

  • after discussing the tragic death of Mr. Foley as politics.

  • I think it's something slightly different than that.

  • But I do think that the President, again,

  • in the context of that "Meet the Press" interview did discuss

  • his own desire to try to be more attentive to those

  • aspects of the job.

  • The Press: Is there a frustration among I guess you

  • guys -- I think maybe we hear it privately -- but a frustration

  • that there's these sort of shiny ball objects that come up again

  • and again that perpetuate this sort of criticism?

  • Another point in this piece is that lots of these crises seem

  • to eventually be resolved -- HealthCare.gov is an example.

  • A huge media criticism, but then a success

  • that maybe didn't get covered as much.

  • Is that something that you guys feel is unfair and has maybe

  • contributed to the President's declining approval ratings?

  • Mr. Earnest: I think the short answer is no.

  • But it has not escaped the attention of those

  • of us at the White House, that what the President

  • is focused on can, on occasion, be different

  • than what others might be focused on.

  • The President is the one that's focused on results

  • and the one that's focused on solving problems.

  • And there's an important role for the news media and for

  • advocates and for even other politicians to play in shining

  • a light on problems that need to be solved.

  • And there is -- this is probably even a core aspect of human

  • nature, that there is less attention focused

  • on the solutions, and some people observe that that

  • makes the news a little depressing sometimes.

  • But at the same time, there's also I think a pretty legitimate

  • reason for that, which is we should be focused on the

  • problems because we have a government and leadership

  • in this country that's focused on solving them.

  • So I think the attention to those is understandable,

  • but it is where there can sometimes be a slight

  • misalignment between our approach to these challenges

  • and the approach that's, again, taken by the news media

  • or by pundits or even other politicians who would rather

  • spend more time talking about the problems when we're actually

  • focused on taking those problems and turning them into solutions.

  • And I think the President's track record when it comes

  • to things like the issue of unaccompanied minors at the

  • border is a pretty good example of that -- that there was,

  • understandably, a lot of attention around this problem --

  • but because of the efforts of this administration to work

  • diplomatically with countries in Central America

  • but also to focus our resources at the border,

  • that this is a problem that has not been entirely solved,

  • of course, because Congress has --

  • congressional Republicans have been resistant

  • to passing comprehensive immigration reform.

  • But the situation at the border is now better than it has been

  • in a couple of years when measured by the number

  • of unaccompanied minors who are attempting to cross

  • into the country.

  • And then that's just sort of one example of where

  • there's persistent focus on the problem.

  • The President and his administration at the direction

  • of the President comes in and, through a lot of hard work,

  • puts in place a solution.

  • But by the time that solution is put in place,

  • everybody has sort of moved on to something else.

  • So that is, again, I think that's probably --

  • there's an aspect of human nature that's involved here,

  • but it does account for the different perspectives that

  • are sometimes on full display in this room,

  • at least.

  • Juliet.

  • The Press: A couple questions related

  • to last night's incident.

  • I know you said that you haven't discussed it with the President.

  • Do you know if he has been briefed, and by whom?

  • And regarding the dogs, who you omitted mentioning earlier but

  • then gave due credit to, are these animals something that

  • you and other White House staffers interact with?

  • Do you know -- are they integrated into the fabric

  • of White House life or are they largely -- they're doing

  • something else and you don't actually see them often because

  • they're really only deployed in these situations?

  • Mr. Earnest: In terms of the President's briefing,

  • I don't know the degree to which he has been briefed on this,

  • but we'll take a look at getting an answer to that question and

  • maybe we'll just append it to the briefing transcript when

  • we get it out tonight to make sure that everybody gets it.

  • So we'll get you an answer on that.

  • ** As it relates to the K-9 Unit of the Secret Service,

  • the animals that performed so bravely last night are not

  • something that we come into regular contact with here.

  • I think that there is probably a good reason

  • why these animals are kept at some remove --

  • (laughter)

  • -- from employees and others who frequent the grounds

  • of the White House.

  • The Press: Is that a reflection on them or you, Josh?

  • (laughter)

  • Mr. Earnest: Maybe both.

  • Maybe both.

  • But I think the individual last night probably saw

  • pretty vividly why we all keep our distance.

  • (laughter)

  • The Press: And then just briefly,

  • I know you can't comment in great detail -- you obviously

  • compared the handling of the incidents.

  • Can you say broadly whether there has been a change

  • in procedure in terms of handling potential jumpers

  • as a result of what happened in September?

  • Mr. Earnest: For a detailed accounting of that,

  • I'd refer you to the Secret Service and they may be able

  • to be in a position to give you a better update on that.

  • I do recall from earlier discussions about the security

  • posture at the White House that in the aftermath of the incident

  • from a month or so ago, there were some changes that

  • were immediately put in place to strengthen

  • the security around the White House complex.

  • Jim noted earlier the bike rack that is in place --

  • or maybe it was Bill that noted that -- in front

  • of the North Lawn of the White House.

  • So there are some measures that have been taken,

  • some of which are plainly visible to those of you

  • who frequent the White House, some of which

  • may not be readily apparent.

  • But for a detailed account of any of those,

  • I'd refer you to the Secret Service,

  • who may be able to share more information with you about that.

  • Alexis.

  • The Press: Josh, just to follow up on Juliet

  • and then a separate question.

  • As you know, members of Congress,

  • when this first happened a month ago, whatever it was,

  • their concern was not a single jumper but what would happen

  • if there were multiple jumpers who were in coordination.

  • So in a serious way, can you respond whether there are

  • now procedures in place where if that were to occur,

  • that what we saw last night would happen multiple

  • times along the fence?

  • Mr. Earnest: That's a pretty detailed question about our

  • security posture and I'd refer you to the Secret Service

  • in terms of what resources and strategies they

  • put in place to try to counter it.

  • I'm not sure that they're going to be in a position to talk

  • about that publicly I think for obvious reasons

  • but you should try.

  • The overall security posture of the White House is certainly

  • part of the review and I think that would certainly

  • be a threat that they would have to consider.

  • The Press: Secondly, on Ron Klain,

  • can you tell us whether the President is encouraging him

  • to talk to members of Congress as the new coordinator,

  • separate and apart from whether he can testify tomorrow,

  • to reach out to lawmakers, to talk to them about

  • the procedures in place, to discuss their ideas?

  • Mr. Earnest: I don't know if he's had any

  • conversations with members of Congress so far.

  • This is, of course -- he's a day and a half into

  • the new gig here, so --

  • The Press: (inaudible)

  • Mr. Earnest: Well, there obviously is a pretty

  • robust staff in place to maintain our relationships

  • with members of Congress.

  • So we have a Leg Affairs department, At the NSC,

  • there are a contingent of folks that are responsible for talking

  • to members of Congress about national security issues.

  • So there are people who are principally

  • responsible for that.

  • At the same time, I wouldn't rule out the occasional

  • conversation between Ron and a member of Congress.

  • He, obviously, is somebody who brings with him

  • to the job some well-established relationships

  • with Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill.

  • So I wouldn't rule out that he may put those relationships

  • to use over the course of this assignment.

  • The Press: Can you fill in any of the blanks about where he's

  • working, does he have a staff and what he's compensated?

  • Mr. Earnest: I don't know where his office is right now.

  • I've been in several meetings with him,

  • but he's not been in my office and I haven't been in his.

  • At this point, he's being paid as a consultant

  • to the White House, because, as I mentioned earlier,

  • this is a relatively short-term assignment that he's currently

  • focused on, on the order of five or six months.

  • So he's being paid as a consultant at a salary that's

  • in line with the salary that's paid to other assistants

  • to the President.

  • In terms of the size of his staff,

  • I don't know that he has anybody onboard yet,

  • but I assume that at some point he'll have at least an assistant

  • to help him take on this important role.

  • The other thing is that he obviously is stepping into

  • a role that is already at the hub of a pretty extensive

  • infrastructure; that as he works with other members of the

  • National Security Council and other folks at CDC and HHS,

  • there's a pretty robust infrastructure already in place.

  • So it's easy to plug him in there.

  • I would not anticipate that he'll need a large

  • contingent of staffers to help him do his job.

  • But we'll see.

  • The Press: And will you continue to speak for him,

  • brief us, or will he do that himself?

  • Mr. Earnest: As I have mentioned earlier, I do not,

  • and Mr. Klain does not envision the role that he has now as

  • being one that is what you would describe as a public face.

  • I wouldn't rule out the occasional, again,

  • the occasional conversation with a reporter,

  • possibly a briefing here, but that is pretty low

  • on his to-do list.

  • He's got a lot of other things that he's focused on right

  • now to ensure that the whole-of-government approach

  • that the President has pursued to dealing with this Ebola

  • situation is up to the standards that the President has set.

  • The Press: And he's is going to visit the CDC next week, right?

  • Mr. Earnest: I have heard that, yes,

  • that he's planning to travel down to Atlanta next week

  • and to meet with some of the officials at the CDC that have

  • been working on the situation for quite some time now.

  • Jared.

  • The Press: Two clarifications.

  • I think they're going to be quick.

  • (laughter)

  • Mr. Earnest: I'll try.

  • The Press: First on the White House fence-jumper issue.

  • So there's this investigation --

  • Mr. Earnest: First on the what?

  • The Press: The fence-jumper issue.

  • Mr. Earnest: Oh, yes.

  • The Press: So I know there's this independent panel

  • that's sort of looking at best practices,

  • and then that goes as recommendations

  • to the Department of Homeland Security?

  • Mr. Earnest: The way that this works

  • is the review is currently being conducted by the

  • Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security, Ale Mayorkas.

  • Typically, the Deputy Secretary at a Cabinet agency

  • is responsible for the functioning of the various

  • components of that agency.

  • Secret Service is obviously a component of the Department of

  • Homeland Security, so he has the responsibility for ensuring

  • that that component is functioning properly.

  • So he's going to conduct the review.

  • He's going to work closely with the general counsel

  • at DHS to conduct that review.

  • Once that review is completed, which should be the first week

  • in November, I believe, he will then turn over that

  • review to a panel of independent experts that

  • the Secretary of Homeland Security has named.

  • They will review his report and put forward a series of

  • recommendations to the Secretary of Homeland Security and to the

  • leadership of the Secret Service about specific measures that

  • should be taken to strengthen security at the White House.

  • They will offer up some recommendations about what

  • the permanent leadership of the Secret Service should look like,

  • and they will also make recommendations, if necessary,

  • about additional areas for review at the Secret Service.

  • The Press: So here's my question -- in sort of this effort

  • to strike the balance, if these recommendations come in,

  • and the President doesn't feel that it strikes the right

  • balance -- it goes too far one way,

  • they want to keep people on the other side of Lafayette Park,

  • whatever it is, would the President say,

  • you got to go back to the drawing board,

  • or is this a decision that would be made totally independent,

  • free of any influence or decision-making

  • from the Oval Office?

  • Mr. Earnest: No, I feel confident that as decisions

  • are made about how to implement these additional security

  • measures, that the White House will be consulted

  • and in the loop on that.

  • But this will be something that is driven, however,

  • by those with the most security expertise at the Secret Service.

  • The Press: And secondly, on these efforts to get at ISIS

  • financing, these sanctions that are potentially being plotted,

  • one of the criticism of the sanctions on Russian,

  • for instance, has been a lot of these individuals don't have

  • a great deal of assets in the United States.

  • There's only so much that the U.S.

  • Treasury is able to do on its own.

  • Is that a fair criticism in these types of potential

  • sanctions, as well?

  • How many of these ISIS financiers have assets

  • in the United States?

  • What can the Treasury really do on its down to try and limit

  • the flow of revenue?

  • Mr. Earnest: This is an excellent question.

  • I regret that David is not here to answer it.

  • The Press: I tried earlier.

  • Mr. Earnest: No, no, I know.

  • I'm not blaming you.

  • I'm not blaming you, to be clear.

  • But let me give you my understanding of it.

  • You may be able to get somebody at the Treasury Department

  • to give you a more cogent explanation.

  • What we have done to deal with the situation in Ukraine,

  • in terms of applying sanctions to Russia,

  • is that we've worked very hard to coordinate the application

  • of that sanctions regime with our partners in Western Europe.

  • And those partners in Western Europe are economies where some

  • of the targets of these sanctions do have some exposure.

  • And by working closely with our partners in Western Europe,

  • we have been able to impose a substantial economic cost

  • on the Russian economy and on senior members of that

  • government because we've been able to work in coordination

  • to maximize the impact of the sanctions.

  • A similar strategy is being employed

  • in this situation, as well.

  • David did make reference to the fact that we are working closely

  • with the other 60 members of this broad international

  • coalition to pursue this strategy.

  • And shutting down the financing of ISIL is part

  • of this strategy.

  • And he's working very closely with other members of our

  • coalition to apply sanctions in a way that will maximize the

  • financial impact of the regime.

  • And that is why -- he made reference to the fact that

  • he travels fairly frequently to the region of the world where

  • you would anticipate that individuals who are closely

  • aligned with ISIL would have significant exposure.

  • And so we are working very closely with our partners

  • in this international coalition to coordinate

  • and maximize the impact of this sanctions regime.

  • The Press: And you're confident that they'll go along with it?

  • Mr. Earnest: Well, that's something that

  • is obviously the subject of regular discussion.

  • I think that we have been quite pleased -- and again,

  • David would have a more tangible assessment --

  • but it's my understanding that we've been very pleased with

  • the cooperation that we've gotten from members

  • of the coalition because they understand that this

  • is an important part of the strategy.

  • Tamara, I'm going to give you the last one.

  • The Press: And it's really quick.

  • When that Homeland Security review of the fence-jumping

  • incident comes out, or is completed, will it come out?

  • Will we get it?

  • Will there be some amount of it that is released

  • to the public or not?

  • Mr. Earnest: Yes, I would anticipate that there will

  • be some aspects of the review that will not be made public.

  • They would relate to basic facts about the security

  • of the White House that we would understandably need

  • to keep private.

  • That said, I would anticipate that some

  • aspects of the review will be made public.

  • And that's something that we'll have to work

  • through once the review has been completed.

  • So, Chris, I recognize that I skipped over you.

  • I don't know if you had something that --

  • The Press: Well, yes, let me just ask you really quickly --

  • Mr. Earnest: There was no slight intended.

  • Okay.

  • The Press: -- because of something the President said

  • last night, which is that the facts weren't known

  • fully about Ottawa, but that it was something that

  • we have to factor in.

  • He said, in the ongoing efforts we have

  • to counter terrorist attacks in our country.

  • Is there, beyond that, always ongoing review,

  • any new meetings, any new strategies that they're looking

  • at as a result of what was seen yesterday?

  • Mr. Earnest: I think it's too early at this point to say --

  • after all these attacks have only occurred

  • in the last couple of days.

  • But I'm confident that our counterterrorism professionals

  • are very mindful of this risk that has existed for some time.

  • And I think this -- these latest incidents only

  • underscore the high stakes of the success

  • of the strategies that we've put in place.

  • And so if there is a need to refine or update or strengthen

  • that strategy, I'm confident that these -- that our

  • counterterrorism professionals have all the authority

  • that they need to do exactly that.

  • The Press: Kind of a subset of that,

  • is there a review ongoing now of security

  • at government buildings?

  • Mr. Earnest: There's not one that I'm aware of beyond

  • sort of the regular assessment and reassessment

  • that is done on an ongoing basis.

  • Thanks a lot, everybody.

  • Have a good afternoon.

Mr. Earnest: Good afternoon, everybody.

Subtitles and vocabulary

Click the word to look it up Click the word to find further inforamtion about it