The White House
Office of the Press Secretary
_____________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release June 17, 1996
Press Briefing
By Mike Mccurry
The Briefing Room
1:21 P.M. Edt
Mr. Mccurry: Good afternoon, everyone. We just have
distributed a statement on the President's meeting with President
Clerides. I don't think I need to add to that, other than to draw
attention to the fact that the President did dispatch his special
emissary, Ambassador Beattie, who will be departing next month,
looking at the key issues that will be necessary for a comprehensive
settlement to the dispute in Cyprus, with an emphasis on security
issues. Beyond that, I think the statement covers the read-out of
the meeting.
Any other questions? Good, all right. (Laughter.)
Q Do we know when the President is going to give his
testimony in the Branscum-Hill case?
Mr. Mccurry: I do not know, no.
Q There was a wire report that it would be later this
week. Is that --
Mr. Mccurry: I think that depends on what -- they're
still in jury selection, according to the news accounts I've seen.
So I think it will depend on what the timing is at trial.
Q Over the weekend there was a flurry of activity
among central bankers and finance ministers to stave off what
threatened to be a potential financial meltdown as a result of the
Sumitomo crisis. Has there been meetings at the White House to
monitor the situation?
Mr. Mccurry: Well, we certainly are aware of the
concern in the international financial community, but I'd direct you
to the Treasury Department and to Secretary Rubin for further
discussion of the specific things that we have been looking at.
Q What do you think of the Senate Whitewater
committee's report which makes some pretty harsh allegations against
the First Lady and other White House officials and friends of the
White House?
Mr. Mccurry: Well, you know, technically, it's not even
out yet, but it's leaking ad hominem at this point.
Q Well, what do you think about that? (Laughter.)
Mr. Mccurry: I think that's par for the course. That's
the way they do business up there when you're engaged in this type of
political vendetta. And that's all this is, because the facts have
long been known and there's nothing left except for them to attempt
to get further political mileage out of baseless charges.
Q Mike, do you think the committee's submission of
questions to Mrs. Clinton was a legitimate attempt to get the truth,
or something else?
Mr. Mccurry: I agree with everything Mr. Kendall has
said in his letter, which you have by now.
Q Do you know what the President thinks about this?
Mr. Mccurry: He agrees with the letter Mr. Kendall
sent.
Q Mike, did Mrs. Clinton or any White House aides in
any way try to limit or hinder Whitewater investigations?
Mr. Mccurry: We offered full cooperation, as Mr.
Kendall's letter indicates.
Q Mike, does the President not feel any need to come
to the First Lady's defense publicly in this -- in these charges back
and forth?
Mr. Mccurry: He has, but I think he trusts the American
people to see a political vendetta, political campaign, for what it
is.
Q Mike, now that's its become known that -- for
whatever reason -- the people who are handling the personnel security
specifically were involved in the acquisition of the Fbi files had
extensive background of political activity, does the White House now
think it might be a good idea to get the political operatives away
from the Fbi files?
Mr. Mccurry: The President thinks the policies and
procedures implemented by the White House legal counsel last week are
designed to protect privacy and are very well drafted and well
crafted, under the circumstances.
Q Wait a minute. That doesn't answer my question.
Mr. Mccurry: I think that it makes very clear the -- if
you look at the procedures that are underway, the consent that it
needs to be given and the oversight of any requests for files like
that very clearly puts it in the hands of --
Q No, but Mike, you've got files here. You've got
files here, still here.
Mr. Mccurry: Oh, the files that are here now, as you
know from Mr. Quinn's memo, will be reviewed by the Federal Bureau of
Investigation. And any that are not properly here will be
immediately surrendered. That was in Mr. Quinn's memo.
Q But you still have people with access to those
files, with extensive political backgrounds, who are not -- my only
question is whether it would be a good idea to get the political
operatives away from the Fbi files, regardless of these other
procedures.
Mr. Mccurry: Well, it is already the case now that the
only access to those files are those who are authorized to have
access and need to have access for the performance of their official
duties.
Q Mike, related to that, following up on a leftover
question from Friday, have you all been able to discern how it was
that this fellow who was identified as the Army investigator detailed
here arrived into this post?
Mr. Mccurry: I don't know the circumstances of his
detail.
Q And how it was -- how was Mr. Livingstone chosen?
Who brought him here?
Mr. Mccurry: I don't know the circumstances of his
detail.
Q Will you find out?
Q Yes, those questions were asked on Friday. Is
there some way to --
Mr. Mccurry: I will check and see whether or not they
are within the province of things that the investigators are looking
at. If so, I doubt that I'm going to be able to provide an answer.
Q On how the guys were hired?
Q Mike, one of the early explanations we got for the
list that was drawn up was that it was an outdated Secret Service
list. Over the weekend, the Secret Service told Republicans that is
not possible, that there is no such thing as an outdated Secret
Service list with people on the pass -- who haven't had passes for a
year. Is that explanation now to be regarded as inoperative, and do
you have a new explanation?
Mr. Mccurry: The White House legal counsel is working
with investigators from both the Fbi and the independent counsel to
determine the nature of the list that was used to request the files.
Because of that, I don't have anything that I can add. I don't know
the nature of the lists or how the lists were generated that were
used for the update project.
Q Mike, does the President still say it was all a
bureaucratic snafu?
Mr. Mccurry: Yes.
Q Is the White House going to amend any previous
comments about Mr. Marceca in light of things, like today's
Washington Post editorial which shows him to be more or less a
political veteran?
Mr. Mccurry: No.
Q Does the White House have hard copy of the list
itself?
Mr. Mccurry: Say again?
Q Do you have hard copy of the list itself --
presumably they were working from a list. Do you have it? Is it
dated?
Mr. Mccurry: I don't know the answers to that. That
clearly would be something that the investigators properly will be
looking at.
Q Mike, back to Whitewater. Are White House aides
mentioned in the leaks apprehensive about further investigations
regarding perjury and obstruction of justice for them?
Mr. Mccurry: I don't know how seriously they take these
baseless political charges that are emanating from the committee.
Q Will Mrs. Clinton -- will this have an impact on
Mrs. Clinton's role in the campaign?
Mr. Mccurry: No.
Q Does the White House consider it acceptable for
people with a political background to be in charge of the Office of
Personnel Security?
Mr. Mccurry: That has been the history of that office,
to my understanding.
Q Why is it necessary to have anybody running an
office of political security -- personnel security, I mean?
Mr. Mccurry: That office, historically, has the
assignment of assisting people as they go through the background
check process, as they get the necessary credentials to work here,
and as they maintain the security clearances they need to perform
their work here. So that is work that is not done within the
province of the Secret Service.
Q Mike, you mentioned on Friday that the President
would be wrapping G-7 tentative plans today. Are there any plans to
meet with the Japanese Prime Minister? And will he be discussing
trade issues?
Mr. Mccurry: They do have, I think, a scheduled
bilateral during the course of the meeting. We'll be able to get you
more on his full schedule for Lyon later on.
Q One of the news magazines today quotes three former
Clinton White House officials as saying that Craig Livingstone used
to say to them, I read your Fbi background report, alluding to that
he knew all about their own personal peccadillos or whatever. Is
anyone asking Craig Livingstone if he has made these kinds of
statements to former officials, because that does raise questions
about whether he is qualified to be in such a sensitive position?
Mr. Mccurry: I don't know whether that would be in the
province of the investigation that is underway.
Q Which investigation would that be?
Mr. Mccurry: Well, there's an investigation underway
-- the White House has dealt with both the independent counsel and
with the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Q What you're saying is the White House legal counsel
is working to find out the nature of the list and how it was
developed or where it came from.
Mr. Mccurry: We're working to provide answers to the
inquiry that is now underway.
Q Would that include the discussions, perhaps, of Mr.
Livingstone and Mr. Marceca by the White House counsel?
Mr. Mccurry: It would be those that the investigators
are required to complete their work.
Q But there's still no internal investigation?
Q Does that mean members of Starr's staff has been
over at the White House in the last couple, three days?
Mr. Mccurry: There have been contacts with the
independent counsel.
Q What kind of contacts?
Q When did they occur?
Mr. Mccurry: You would have to ask the legal counsel's
office.
Q Mike, the President had said in the past that he
wouldn't tolerate abuses of files and anyone responsible would be
fired forthwith. Can you explain to us why Craig Livingstone still
works here and why, if this is inexcusable, there's been no
disciplinary action against anyone?
Mr. Mccurry: In a sworn statement indicating he
understands that the penalty for perjury applies, he specifically
denies that any improper use was made of any of these files.
Q Do we know what he meant by the word "improper"?
Mr. Mccurry: If anyone has evidence to the contrary, I
think that you should come forth and provide it to the investigators.
Q Did the President have any visitors at Camp David
over the weekend? Were there any meetings at Camp David that you're
aware of?
Mr. Mccurry: None that I'm aware of. He had a nice
Father's Day with his family, but I'll check and see if he had anyone
else.
Q Mike, Billy Dale and the others weren't afforded
the same sort of courtesy when they were accused of mismanagement of
the funds. They were summarily fired and found not to have done
anything other than a little sloppy bookkeeping. Why is there a
different criteria for Mr. Livingstone?
Mr. Mccurry: Because personnel matters are different in
each and every case.
Q Can you elaborate on your comment this morning that
you're getting the job done on the Wisconsin welfare plan. What's
happening actually?
Mr. Mccurry: The Department of Health and Human
Services is working on the waiver request, and they intend to get it
done.
Q Do you have a time?
Q What does that mean?
Mr. Mccurry: It's currently within the 30-day review
period.
Q In hindsight, Mike, does the President regret
having spoken what might seem precipitously about that plan in the
radio address? Has he asked any aides to sort of say why they didn't
do a better job reviewing what was actually in the plan?
Mr. Mccurry: No, absolutely not. The Wisconsin welfare
reform experiment is an important one. It's an exciting one because
of all of the things that Governor Thompson has pledged to do and the
state legislature has now enacted. And the waiver request, though
it's a complicated one, is being worked on diligently by the
Department of Health and Human Services, and they're going to get it
finished so that the experiment can go forward.
Q So they're going to grant it.
Mr. Mccurry: They've made it quite clear that they're
going to get it done so that the experiment can move forward.
Q What does that mean?
Mr. Mccurry: They are going to get done a waiver that
will allow the kind of experiment that Wisconsin has put forward, put
it in place. Governor Thompson --
Q But not one which necessarily follows the Thompson
plan to the letter?
Mr. Mccurry: Well, that's the Wisconsin plan. The
state has submitted a waiver request pursuant to the action by the
legislature.
Q So, in other words, it will grant all of the
waivers that Wisconsin seeks?
Mr. Mccurry: It will -- there are specific waivers
sought in two separate sets of batches and it's a very complex
document that everyone at Hhs is working with, on the waiver request
with the goal of getting it done.
Qq So the President has no more reservations about it?
Mr. Mccurry: The President's fully supportive of the
Wisconsin model for welfare reform.
Q Does the President share the reservations about the
Wisconsin proposals that the Hhs officials have?
Mr. Mccurry: I'm not sure which reservations you're
referring to.
Q Medicaid --
Mr. Mccurry: I've seen a statement from Mr. Thurm
indicates as much as I've just told you, that they're working to get
it done. I'm not aware of any other --
Q But when you say, "get it done," you're saying
they're negotiating with Wisconsin on all the various details, they
have some problems with --
Mr. Mccurry: But we have to negotiate -- when a state
submits these waiver requests, we negotiate with the state and make
sure that we get something that meets the test of federal law. The
last administration failed to do that, and since they had a waiver
thrown out. And we don't want to see the welfare reform experiment
in Wisconsin challenged in the courts and struck down.
Q Well, picking up on that point, there is apparently
at least one aspect of this waiver request that it's not in the power
of the administration unilaterally to grant, because it would be
violative of federal laws, as I understand it -- I forget whether
it's the Medicaid provision. There's one provision, as I understood
it explained in the paper on Saturday, that the administration cannot
overturn an existing federal law by granting this waiver. There's
one narrow --
Mr. Mccurry: Can you specify that? I'm not sure what
provision --
Q Now, I can't remember, but it's one of these
Q It's the appeal for --
Q It's a fair hearing.
Q Yes, it's a fair hearing thing, yes.
Mr. Mccurry: I'll have to look into that. Maybe you
can contact Hhs and find out specifically about that.
Q Is the President going to take a train ride to
Chicago to the convention?
Mr. Mccurry: He certainly thinks that's a dandy idea if
it can be worked out.
Q From here or from --
Mr. Mccurry: We'll give you details when we have
details.
Q Mike, were you at all encouraged by Senator Lott's
comments over the weekend regarding Kennedy-Kassebaum and minimum
wage? And is there any follow-up today?
Mr. Mccurry: We've been encouraged by his conversation,
by his remarks, by our conversations with his staff over the weekend,
continuing today. There seems to be a good-faith effort to reach
some agreement that would allow passage of the Kassebaum-Kennedy
measure. And that would be good. We look forward to seeing if we
can't make progress on a piece of legislation that will make health
care coverage portable for those who are changing jobs.
Q Mike, one of the things we have learned in the Fbi
files story is that another invasion of Billy Dale's privacy took
place, which the White House says was inexcusable. Would the White
House like to encourage Senate Democrats to go ahead and approve the
bill that would pay Bill Dale's legal fees?
Mr. Mccurry: You know, I'm not sure what the status is.
The last I heard it was pending in the House. I don't know what the
status of that is.
Q No, it's passed the House. It's pending in the
Senate and caught up in the gridlock, and presumably if the White
House said it was interested, it would go through.
Mr. Mccurry: Well, it might -- you know, my
recollection is when it was in the Senate, or pending on the Senate
floor, the issue was the same one that has -- the Senate Democrats
have attached to every piece of legislation moving in the Senate,
which was the minimum wage. They want to see the minimum wage
increased. And we are, frankly, hopeful that we might get some
movement on that as well.
Q So it's okay with you if Billy Dale suffers in that
fight?
Mr. Mccurry: Well, he's got substantial relief pending
in a piece of legislation, to my knowledge, doesn't face opposition;
it's tied up in the strong support the Senate Democrats have for
raising the minimum wage. And the President, obviously, also wants
to see the minimum wage increased. And we hope that the legislative
impediments to a variety of pieces of legislation can be broken. And
the way to do that is to raise the minimum wage.
Q Mike, the Southern Baptists -- does the President
have any comment or any feeling about the Walt Disney boycott?
Mr. Mccurry: He hasn't expressed one publicly. Several
of us have talked to him about it, and he thinks that -- just as he
does from time to time in positions taken by his denomination, he
doesn't agree with that particular position. It doesn't change his
faith or his membership in the denomination.
Q Mike, you've talked about the President's response
to the Republican Whitewater report, but he's also Mrs. Clinton's
husband. As a husband, why isn't he out there today defending his
wife against those charges?
Mr. Mccurry: Well, because you have been suckered into
reporting selectively a leaked document coming from the President's
political opponents. And the President has got a great deal of faith
in the American people that they will see that type of political
campaign tactic for what it is. It's an unfair charge against her.
Now, he has spoken to his support of her, his love of her and his
utter confidence that she has told the truth. She has come forward
again today and provided additional answers to questions that were
submitted at the eleventh hour by this committee.
I mean, Senator D'Amato is, in our opinion, not a very
credible or trustworthy presenter of fact when it comes to matters of
ethics. So, you know, most Americans, the President believes, see
through a political charade when they see one as clear as this one.
Q But, Mike, this report is not just from Senator
D'Amato. It's from the entire Majority.
Mr. Mccurry: Well, it's clearly cooked up by Senator
D'Amato, who is very active in Senator Dole's campaign and this has
been a pattern and a part of their effort to make political advance
on these issues and matters that were raised and answered long ago.
Q Really? The question of what happened to those
files and why they didn't turn up all that time was answered a long
time ago? Really? Well, then who did it?
Mr. Mccurry: That's not what the question was about,
Brit, and you know that.
Q Well, is it how the files disappeared from the Rose
law firm? I mean, there are several questions involved in this that
have not been answered.
Mr. Mccurry: That question is specifically answered yet
again in the affidavit that you just got.
Q No, Mike, it's specifically unanswered --
Q It's not.
Mr. Mccurry: It's answered to the best of Mrs.
Clinton's ability to provide an answer.
Q That she doesn't know.
Mr. Mccurry: That's right. And neither does the
committee. So all the committee -- the Majority is left is doing is
speculating and raising innuendo that is designed to impugn her
character.
Q Mike, leaving aside the committee majority's
conclusion, do the President and First Lady think there are lively,
reasonable questions of fact that people --, whatever their partisan
politics -- might legitimately have about this ongoing matter? Or
are any questions about it, and the providence of these files and the
appearance of them and the disappearance of them, are they all
illegitimate political questions? Are there any legitimate questions
still on the table?
Mr. Mccurry: Those questions that are unanswerable that
everyone would like to have answers to, prosecutors or people working
for the independent counsel have examined. They have tried to do so
in an atmosphere of fairness and judicial prudence, unlike this
committee. This committee has operated, entirely almost, in the
political realm and have done their work in a very political fashion.
Would the President and the First Lady have preferred there had been
answers to all these unanswerable questions so we could get this
matter behind us a long time ago? Of course. Any sensible person
would have. But that's not possible based on what is known to be a
fact at this point.
Q Those are some -- many White House officials have
said that Kenneth Starr is also motivated by partisan feelings. You
just said that you feel that his prosecution is proceeding in an
atmosphere of fairness?
Mr. Mccurry: At times. They certainly -- in comparison
to the way this committee has conducted itself, they have attempted
to be more fair. Have they always been scrupulously fair? You
should ask the lawyers that work closely with the counsel's office
their opinion of that now.
Thank you.
The Press: Thank you.
End 1:40 P.M. Edt