THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
PRESS BRIEFING
BY COLONEL CROWLEY AND BARRY TOIV
The Briefing Room
1:54 P.M. EDT
Q Why so late?
MR. TOIV: I'm sorry, it is not easy getting up here and saying nothing. It takes a lot of preparation. (Laughter.)
Q This will be a pointless exercise?
MR. TOIV: No, I doubt that very much. Any questions?
Q Barry, could you tell us what the reaction is to the Iraqi decision to suspend cooperation with U.N. weapons inspectors?
MR. TOIV: I had a feeling you might ask that question.
COLONEL CROWLEY: Obviously, we are looking forward to hearing from Richard Butler tomorrow at the Security Council. What we've heard today from Iraq is a great deal of rhetoric. We've heard this bluster before. We've seen this petulance before. But at the end of the day we'll judge the situation by Iraqi actions, not by Iraqi words.
Q Well, what if this is what it seems to be, an end of cooperation?
COLONEL CROWLEY: Bill, you're asking me to speculate, but I think we have to get a report from Richard Butler tomorrow and then we'll judge where to go from there.
Q You said at the end of the day -- yesterday, you said at the end of the day Iraq will have to comply with U.N. resolutions. The question is, who is going to make them comply?
COLONEL CROWLEY: The sanctions that are currently in place that Saddam says he wants lifted are costing Iraq $15 billion a year. In the eight years since the end of the Gulf War, it's cost Iraq $120 billion. That's money that he should have invested in his people.
So these sanctions are costing Iraq dearly, but if Iraq thinks that this is the way to get sanctions relief, once again they are sadly mistaken.
Q But are you saying that it's only the sanctions that will be the penalty for non-compliance, that's it?
COLONEL CROWLEY: Since the end of the Gulf War, we have put Saddam Hussein in a very tight box. It's where he remains. Today he is not a threat to his neighbors. He has sanctions in place that are costing his country and his people billions of dollars. So Iraq is suffering penalties for their current situation, non-compliance. This is a clear violation of the Memorandum of Understanding that Iraq negotiated with the United Nations and Kofi Annan earlier this year.
Richard Butler negotiated a work program that would have brought closer to the day where sanctions would be lifted. They have, to date, indicated they are not willing to follow that work plan, that blueprint. So these are the types of issues we'll bring up tomorrow within the Council and evaluate where we go from here.
Q You seem to be saying that the United States would not do again what it did in February and move substantial forces into the area to make the point that he has to comply.
COLONEL CROWLEY: Bill, I think the important issue here is what we've heard today is political rhetoric. I mean, this is a city that is used to some posturing politically -- here in this town as well. So let's wait and see. Once we hear the full report from Richard Butler, we have a chance to evaluate what this rhetoric is. But we will in the meantime watch Iraqi actions, not listen to their words.
Q Is there some rethinking about the cost of the huge military buildup to bring this about? Is that now being reconsidered in terms of effectiveness?
COLONEL CROWLEY: We continue to keep the pressure on Saddam Hussein by a number of means. But to the extent that this is a continuation of a game of cat and mouse that Saddam has played for a number of years, we're not willing to play this game. We will continue to keep the pressure on Saddam. At the end of the day, he knows what he needs to do in order to get sanctions relief, and that is to fully comply with the Memorandum of Understanding with the United Nations, to fully comply with all relevant U.N. Security Council resolutions. The way forward is clear for him. And it remains a mystery to us, as it has since the Gulf War, why Iraq will not fulfill its obligations.
Q As far as you know, there have been no troop deployments or no moving of forces to the region or anything -- that would be premature to even talk about?
COLONEL CROWLEY: I think you're raising the temperature higher than is appropriate at this point.
Q Does the fact that Secretary General Annan was the initial guarantor, so to speak, of this agreement affect the U.S. calculations in how to respond?
COLONEL CROWLEY: I'm sure Richard Butler will have a chance to brief the Secretary General; he'll have a chance to brief the U.N. Security Council. Clearly we believe this is a violation of the Memorandum of Understanding and those will be the kinds of things we discuss in the Council tomorrow.
Q Do you see that -- does the U.S. see that the Secretary General's reputation is at stake in this confrontation?
COLONEL CROWLEY: I think I'll let the Secretary General speak for himself on that.
Q Do you have any concern that Saddam Hussein may be taking advantage of the President's political difficulties at home?
COLONEL CROWLEY: I think that kind of suggestion is absurd?
Q Why?
COLONEL CROWLEY: Well, first of all, it's always hard to figure what is actually, at the end of the day, in Saddam's mind. That has not been something -- that has not been a growth industry, as Jamie Rubin said yesterday. The United States has been resolute since the end of the Gulf War in insisting that Iraq comply fully with U.N. Security Council resolutions and now with the Memorandum of Understanding, and that resolve will continue.
Q But he might sense, theoretically, that -- he sees the President weakened by all of these investigations, that this would be a good time to make his move.
COLONEL CROWLEY: We've been down this road many, many times with Saddam, so I wouldn't say there is any special significance. As he has approached sanctions review in the past, we've heard this kind of rhetoric from him, and we'll just have to wait and see and judge as we go along, what this means.
Q After Butler's report will the U.S. put any timetable on Saddam?
COLONEL CROWLEY: I think let's wait and see what we hear from Richard Butler tomorrow and then we'll have a better picture of how to proceed.
Q But let's turn the question around -- is the President going to have a problem being able to respond firmly because of his political difficulties in this country, in either support on Capitol Hill or elsewhere?
COLONEL CROWLEY: I think, as you've seen throughout this year, the President has been extremely active on the foreign policy front, and he will do whatever is required in this particular instance.
Q When is Bill Richardson being sworn in as Secretary of Energy? And who is holding the fort at the U.N. right now?
COLONEL CROWLEY: That's a good question. I don't know the answer. I know he's been confirmed, but I don't know where he is today.
Q You mentioned that Saddam Hussein has been in a box, a very tight box for quite a long time, but every six months or so he seems to act up. Is there any U.S. plan to try to keep him more firmly in this box?
COLONEL CROWLEY: Again, these are expressly the kind of issues we'll consult with the Security Council in the coming days. But I think that we have maintained a tight rein on Saddam. He is not currently a threat to his neighbors. And we'll have to wait and see. But we've seen this kind of petulance before.
Q Is international support for the sanctions still as strong as ever? Is there still a unified front on this?
COLONEL CROWLEY: I think it's ironic that every time -- you sometimes see a sense that Saddam may be gaining some political measure through what people call sanctions fatigue, he turns around and pulls a stunt like this that I think can only help strengthen our resolve that there's no way for Saddam to achieve sanctions relief through this lack of cooperation with UNSCOM.
Q Is the U.S. assessment that the Republican Guard remains loyal to Saddam?
COLONEL CROWLEY: Clearly, he and his cronies, backed by some military muscle, have been the key to his longevity.
Q Can we get a readout on the President's meeting? What did the two discuss?
COLONEL CROWLEY: The President did meet today with Gerhard Schroeder. It was described as a good conversation. They talked about a lot of the domestic policy issues that the two leaders share in terms of how to maintain prosperity, achieve growth, protect the social contract of our respective peoples. They talked about the continuing importance of the European Union-U.S. relationship and stressed the continuity of the transatlantic partnership. They talked a little bit about the Asian financial crisis and how the world will have to respond and try to lead the region out of its current situation.
And they touched in the foreign policy area on Kosovo, Bosnia, and also issues in the Aegean. The President stressed how resolving the situation of Cyprus, for example, will be central to easing tensions in that part of the world, and stressed also -- as you know, Germany will assume the EU presidency coming up at the first of the year and it will be important to continue the progress in terms of the EU's relationship with Turkey.
Q Is there some difference between the two positions, between the U.S. and German positions on the possible outcome in Kosovo. Schroeder termed it as a debate over whether there should be total independence for the ethnic Albanians or some level of autonomy. Was there some debate over that or --
COLONEL CROWLEY: I can't speak for the German position. We do not support independence for Kosovo.
Q Does the President see Mr. Schroeder's brand of politics as a little more harmonious with his own than Chancellor Kohl's?
COLONEL CROWLEY: I think that the President remains neutral on the upcoming German election.
Q Why don't we support independence?
COLONEL CROWLEY: The international community does not support independence. We respect the territorial integrity of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.
Q Even if the people don't want this anymore? It's self-determination.
COLONEL CROWLEY: That's a different question. What we are interested in is restoring the autonomy that Kosovo has previously enjoyed prior to the late 1980s.
Q Reaction to the Japanese tax cut proposal?
COLONEL CROWLEY: I don't know that we have a particular reaction, other than, I think, to repeat what we said yesterday, and that we hope that the Japanese government -- the new Japanese government will take some swift action to provide an economic stimulus and lead their economy, and through that lead the region out of its current economic difficulties.
Q What assurances do you have that the Chinese aren't going to devalue, especially in light of the yen's further decline?
COLONEL CROWLEY: I think that there was a commitment when the President was in China that China did not want to devalue its currency.
Q Has that changed?
COLONEL CROWLEY: I'm not aware of any change.
Q P.J., on South Africa, Archbishop Desmond Tutu came out with some very strong statements saying that some of the white leaders in South Africa helped to further apartheid and that they lied to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Are there any statements from the White House in reference to that?
COLONEL CROWLEY: I think we have been very supportive of the Truth Commission and its importance to bringing South Africa out of its past. And we would hope that all African leaders -- South African leaders -- would continue to cooperate fully with the Truth Commission. It's very important to the future of South Africa.
Q Is that something that could come up today in the President's meeting with Thabo Mbeki?
COLONEL CROWLEY: Very nice, since we're here -- nice segue. The President's looking forward to his meeting later this afternoon with South Africa's Deputy President, Thabo Mbeki. He arrived in Washington this morning. Tomorrow he will meet with the Vice President and Co-chair of the Executive Session, the fifth session of the U.S.-South African Binational Commission. And we would expect a broad range of both international, regional, bilateral issues. And I would expect that issues involving the progress of the Truth Commission -- the economic situation of South Africa, regional issues, all will be discussed in their meeting.
Q Is Thabo Mbeki coming to the stakeout?
COLONEL CROWLEY: I think he will, yes.
Q Will you all give a readout?
COLONEL CROWLEY: I think we'll have -- in some fashion, either a piece of paper or some -- we'll be around afterwards.
Q And the meeting is how long?
COLONEL CROWLEY: Roughly a half an hour. He'll meet, I think, with the Vice President beforehand and then also with the Vice President tomorrow.
Q Barry, it would appear that Monica Lewinsky is going to appear before the Grand Jury tomorrow. Is the President still pleased that things are working out for her, as he relayed to us through one of you a couple of weeks ago?
MR. TOIV: I've heard of no change in his view on that.
Q Are you nervous about what she might have to say when she testifies before the Grand Jury?
MR. TOIV: We have no view on it.
Q You have no view on it? Surely, the President has a view if someone is accusing him of a crime?
MR. TOIV: Well, you must know more than I do.
Q Is the President concerned that the tanking stock market might affect his popularity?
MR. TOIV: You know, of course, that we do not comment on the daily fluctuations of the stock market. The important thing is that the fundamentals in the economy are very strong. We have continued strong growth, low inflation, low unemployment, and good prospects for keeping it that way.
I think it's very important that we maintain the kind of economic policy that's gotten us to this place, which is the policy that, coincidentally, five years ago today was enacted in the Congress. This is the fifth anniversary of the President's economic plan being enacted. And as you all know, it consists of fiscal discipline; it consists of investing in people; it consists of maintaining strong exports, which means -- in the current context, that means we need to maintain fiscal discipline, which means saving Social Security first and not enacting tax cuts that are not paid for as they're being proposed by some on the Hill.
We need to continue investing in people, which means, in the current context, investing in education and training in the appropriations process, as the President has asked for. And it also means passing IMF legislation, passing funding for the IMF, which is really important to maintaining or restoring the Asian economies so that they can become consumers once again for our products abroad.
So that's what the President thinks about when he thinks about the economy.
Q Barry, let me ask you this, when you say that you have no view of the possible testimony of Monica Lewinsky, does that mean that in the daily meetings that you attend at the higher levels in the White House, no view was expressed of her coming testimony? Or does it mean that you were told to express no view of her testimony? (Laughter.)
MR. TOIV: I don't think anybody here knows what anybody's testimony is going to be. So how can anybody have a view on it?
Q But I was asking about the view on it.
Q But you have to come out here every day and express what the President's feeling. I mean, we really are operating in the dark, a total black-out on how he's going to testify, what's the M.O. on it, everything -- just absolutely given us no details.
MR. TOIV: His testimony is almost two weeks away, Helen. There's plenty of time between now and then, lots of time.
Q Are you going to announce then how --
MR. TOIV: I don't know, because Mr. Kendall, as you know, has made an agreement with Mr. Starr as to how the testimony will take place and in terms of how to describe it. And I'm not in a position to describe it any further.
Q What's the agreement.
MR. TOIV: I don't know what the agreement is. The agreement was between the two attorneys.
Q Has the President been asked by the independent counsel for DNA material, a sample of DNA material?
MR. TOIV: Not to my knowledge, but that's a question you'd have to ask his attorney.
Q Barry, what's the President's mood these days?
MR. TOIV: The President's mood is great. Well, you couldn't see him this morning, of course, at the caucus, but --
Q We haven't seen much of him lately at all.
MR. TOIV: Well, I don't think that's true. I think you've seen him just about every day, actually. And his mood is great. He is spending -- obviously, he is spending some time on preparing for his testimony. He's also spending his time doing the work he was elected to do. And his mood is very good. And any time you see him, I suspect you'll see that.
Q If his mood is that good, let's get him out here and let him show us how good his mood is.
Q Who's preparing him?
Q Come on down. (Laughter.)
MR. TOIV: He's meeting from time to time, as you know, with his attorneys. I know you've seen Mr. Kendall and Ms. Seligman come in. And that will continue to happen. I don't know if it will happen every day or not, but --
Q Meeting with government attorneys, right?
MR. TOIV: Not that I'm aware of, but I don't know who sits in those sessions. But I believe that it's primarily Mr. Kendall and Ms. Seligman that he meets with, but I honestly don't know.
Q But you still hear guidance that he's not preparing any television address to the country?
MR. TOIV: Yes, I'm not aware of any preparations for such an address, no.
Q Barry, how is his schedule being changed or time being created for him to prepare for the testimony?
MR. TOIV: He's taking some time on some days to work on it, but I don't have details for you on what hours, what day, what time.
Q Today?
MR. TOIV: I don't know. He's around, but I don't know what he's working on at the moment.
Q Are events not being scheduled so that he has more time available?
MR. TOIV: Boy, look at our schedule. I'm not sure you could say we don't have a busy schedule. He's done something every day this week. We have an event planned tomorrow where he is going to talk about crime, focus on crime, and particularly on gun violence. And I think --
Q He's going to focus on crime?
MR. TOIV: Yes, he is, as he has very much for five and a half years now. He's focused on crime, and as a result, crime has come down dramatically in this country, Sam, in case you haven't noticed.
Q Could you get us a readout on how the First Lady and Chelsea are holding out and how supportive they are and what sort of advice they're giving? Can you perhaps take that?
MR. TOIV: Can I take that question? Sure, I can take that question.
Q What are you going to do with it? (Laughter.)
MR. TOIV: Mrs. Clinton is doing a number of public events as well. I know yesterday she did something in the District. They named the new Control Board, and I know she met with the Control Board yesterday. And I think she did an event related to charter schools -- creating charter schools in the District of Columbia. She's very active as well, as always.
Q Barry, what role is Mickey Kantor playing in this right now? Is he visiting the President? Is the President consulting him?
MR. TOIV: Well, Mickey Kantor, as you know, is serving as an attorney. In this case he has a relationship of an attorney to the President. I honestly don't know how often they talk, but I'm sure they talk fairly often.
Q Barry, we asked about this yesterday. Does the White House intend to use claims of privilege to avoid testifying? And can you tell us whether or not there is any intention of the White House lawyers to try to use attorney-client privilege, or is that essentially a dead issue as a result of the court decision?
MR. TOIV: Well, you're asking a question about matters that are under court seal.
Q No, I'm asking you about what White House policy and intent is going forward, about whether or not White House lawyers intend to claim attorney-client privilege, if they believe they can claim attorney client privilege, and if they do believe that they are still covered by executive privilege.
MR. TOIV: Well, you're asking about a matter that's under court seal. If you want any elaboration on that, you can give Jim Kennedy a call --
Q The only one that's under seal, I believe, would be the Lanny Breuer matter, would it not?
MR. TOIV: If you want further elaboration on that, I would talk to Jim Kennedy.
Q Do you have any information about whether or not any of the other lawyers have been subpoenaed besides --
MR. TOIV: No, I don't. No, I don't.
Q When the President testifies, will the White House release a videotape of that testimony afterward? And will the President in any way summarize his testimony to the American people?
MR. TOIV: I'm not aware of any plans to do either at the moment.
Q Will the White House be releasing any correspondence that might have taken place between the President and Monica Lewinsky?
MR. TOIV: I'm not aware of any plans to do so.
Q Barry, originally, the First Lady was supposed to spend the entire month up at Martha's Vineyard. Do you know now why she has delayed her departure and when she's going to go up there?
MR. TOIV: I don't think we ever announced when she was going to be up at Martha's Vineyard.
Q Do you know now when she's going to go up there?
MR. TOIV: No, I don't know.
Q There was a general -- details from McCurry that she would go up --
MR. TOIV: Yes, I know she was going to be up there during -- at some point during August, but I don't know exactly when she's going up, no.
Q Is she here?
MR. TOIV: Is she here today?
Q She hasn't gone to --
MR. TOIV: No, I don't think so, no, no.
Q Mike McCurry told us awhile back, the same day that he reported the President said he's pleased that things are working out for Monica Lewinsky, that Ms. Lewinsky was a pleasant person, that she did a good job here. Is that still the view?
MR. TOIV: No change in those views. None that I'm aware of.
Q Barry, did the President say anything about the reception he got on Capitol Hill this morning?
MR. TOIV: He was very happy with the reception he got on Capitol Hill. He got a very enthusiastic reception. They had a good -- the President and Democrats in the House had a very good dialogue on the agenda that they are -- that we're pursuing in the Congress: Social Security, patients' rights, public schools, a clean environment. The President addressed all those issues -- saving Social Security first, as well as the other issues. They also had some good discussion of the farm problem and what we've tried to do to address the economic problems facing farmers these days. But the reception he got was very warm and he appreciated that very much, as he always does.
Q No questions on Monica Lewinsky, we understand?
MR. TOIV: No.
Q Was there any prior agreement not to bring her up?
MR. TOIV: I don't know of any.
Q Barry, as you know, the President has to assert executive privilege himself. Do you know if he has authorized any of the White House attorneys to assert executive privilege?
MR. TOIV: I don't know if he has. I would check with Jim Kennedy with that.
Q To your knowledge, when the President does testify, he won't take the Fifth Amendment at any point, would he?
MR. TOIV: I don't know anything about how the President's going to testify.
Q Does the President plan to appoint a successor to McLarty for inter-American affairs?
MR. TOIV: I don't think there's a decision on that yet. I know you've asked that question before, and I don't think there's been any change in that.
Q Are you sure you didn't tell members of the Hispanic Caucus that there would be such an appointment?
MR. TOIV: Well, it sounds like you know something I don't, Josh. I don't know. I did not hear about that, but if we can -- I'll take the question, though, and see if there's -- see if he said that at that meeting. I didn't hear about that, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen.
Q The President now, apparently, we were told, wanted this thing over with. He said to his people, I want to testify, I'd rather get this done. Does he feel the same way about any report that Starr might hand in, that he'd like to see that done and over with?
MR. TOIV: I haven't heard him express any views on a report by Mr. Starr.
Q When the President met today with the Democratic Caucus, did he talk at all about the budget and the fact that it doesn't appear to be going anywhere?
MR. TOIV: About the budget, did you say?
Q Yes.
MR. TOIV: Yes. He made the point that as of right now the Republicans are going extremely slow on the budget. They're four months behind on a budget resolution. They've not sent one appropriations bill up here yet and it looks like they're hoping to go home without doing anything -- without providing the investments that are needed in education, in training, that he has asked for. And, frankly, that's just not going to happen. And he made that very clear to Democrats today, that he was going to be -- that he wanted to work with them to make sure that Republicans in Congress were not able to leave town without getting their real work down.
Q He could call them back after the election.
Q Barry, what's the next stop for the White House now since the sampling has failed in the House?
MR. TOIV: Well, we put out a statement by the President on that, and of course we're disappointed in that vote. The White House -- the administration supports a census that is fair and accurate and that is done by the most modern, scientific means. Unfortunately, there are those on the Hill who are trying to politicize the issue.
And what we're going to do is we'll fight that issue in the Senate. If I'm not mistaken, the Senate has a different view than the House does. And the President's senior advisors, though, have recommended that he veto the bill if it contains the provision that's in the House bill right now.
Essentially, what they've done is they've decided to fund the census for only six months -- which means as we come into March of 1999, on a census that's supposed to take place next year, they are threatening the ability of the census to actually operate. They're ready to close it down in six months over this issue. And we're not going to -- you know, the President is not going to let that happen. And that's another thing that he made clear to Democrats in the House today, that he just would not tolerate that.
Q Why are Republicans politicizing the issue? Why is anyone who opposes the President's point of view on something politicizing it? Why can't you just accept that they have a different point of view on it?
MR. TOIV: Because this is a method that -- they're opposing the method of sampling, which is the scientific method of making the census more accurate that has been proposed by the career people at the Census Bureau, based on the recommendations of the National Academy of Science. I'm not sure how much more scientific or nonpartisan you can get.
Q But the other side says you ought to do it the way it says in the Constitution.
MR. TOIV: Well, the Supreme Court will make that decision. We think that this is constitutional and we want to move forward.
Q Isn't it just a difference of opinion and not a politicalization of the issue?
MR. TOIV: Well, when the National Academy of Sciences says this is the best way to get the most accurate census, I think that's a pretty powerful statement, and not a political one.
Q On the issue of closing down, do you see the government closing down if there's no budget this year?
MR. TOIV: Well, we don't really see that happening, because we're hoping that Republicans in Congress will change direction in time. Right now the House Republicans, though, are very clearly moving in a direction that sets us up for confrontation. They're doing that deliberately. Why? I don't know.
But that's where we're headed right now, and they're going to have to make some major changes in these bills to get them signed because they're going to need to provide the kinds of investments in education and training and child care that the President has asked for. And right now they're just not doing that.
Q Barry, what's the President's view at the moment on whether there should be drilling -- oil drilling on federal lands in Alaska?
MR. TOIV: You got me on that one. (Laughter.)
Q Dinner for two. (Laughter.)
Q Can we call Mr. Kendall and ask him?
MR. TOIV: No, call Mr. Babbitt on that. I'll have to take that question because I'm not sure. I know that's an issue that is brewing right now. I think that may be one of the environmental riders that's at issue in the Interior appropriations bill, but I'm not certain enough to answer the question. Ask me tomorrow.
Q Barry, the trip to California is still on next week?
MR. TOIV: Oh, yes. There's a three-day trip to five states. The President's looking forward to visiting every one of them.
MR. TOIV: Five cities, four states -- I'm sorry.
Q He's looking forward to collecting money from every one of them for the Democratic party. (Laughter.)
MR. TOIV: He's looking forward to helping some very good candidates in those states and also talking about some very important issues.
Q Barry, when the President said last Friday that he would testify completely and truthfully, should we not construe that to mean he would not take the Fifth Amendment?
MR. TOIV: He will testify truthfully and completely, and I have no way of elaborating on his words.
Q Barry, the President has gotten a lot of advice over the airwaves from people like Mr. Panetta, your former boss, and a bunch of other people the past couple of days. Are you aware of whether he is actually trying to get some of this advice on his own, through phone calls, or has he scheduled any meetings? Is he consulting with his friends in the community to --
MR. TOIV: I'm not aware of who he might be on the phone with at any given time. I don't know if he's consulting with others outside of his attorneys.
Q That's his M.O., to talk to a lot of people, isn't it?
Q Going back to an earlier question, but if the President is going to testify completely and truthfully, why not release the testimony after he does so?
MR. TOIV: I'm not sure what the connection is.
Q The earlier question of whether you would release the testimony the President gives August 17th?
MR. TOIV: Right. And there's no plan at this time for doing so.
Q Why not, if he'll do it truthfully -- testifies completely --
MR. TOIV: Does that mean that if he wasn't going to testify completely and truthfully, we wouldn't want to release the testimony? I don't understand the connection. (Laughter.)
Q No, I'd want to see it either way.
MR. TOIV: I don't understand the connection between those two. The President is going to testify truthfully and completely.
Q Why not release it?
MR. TOIV: There are no plans for doing so at this time.
Q In terms of his testimony, so that Starr won't be on a fishing expedition, are there parameters? Did the subpoena specify --
MR. TOIV: I'm sorry, Helen. It's a real good question to which I do not have the answer and you know who is the only person who has the answer to that question. I'm as sick of saying it as you are of hearing it, believe me. (Laughter.)
Q Who is David Kendall anyway?
Q He doesn't exist.
MR. TOIV: He does. I read an article about him in the paper today.
Q Has the President received from the FBI, or anyone else, the results of the tests that have been conducted by the FBI?
MR. TOIV: I don't know. Not that I'm aware of.
Q Is the President concerned, or did any member of Congress express concern, that Ken Starr's report could in fact be an issue in the upcoming fall elections?
MR. TOIV: No, the subject was not brought up.
Thank you.
END 2:27 P.M.