THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
PRESS BRIEFING BY
JOE LOCKHART
The Briefing Room
12:42 P.M. EST
Q This is Martin Luther King's birthday, so it should be a holiday.
MR. LOCKHART: It is, so I'll be very brief.
Q It's a day off.
MR. LOCKHART: No, it's a day on, not a day off.
Q What made you change your mind?
MR. LOCKHART: On briefing? I'm happy -- I figured you all would want to see me today. Everyone made such a fuss about the fact that they wouldn't see me for a couple days, I thought I'd come out and see you.
Let me do one piece of business first. I have in front of me that lists those who will be joining the First Lady, Hillary Rodham Clinton, in the box tomorrow night.
Q Is Helen on it?
MR. LOCKHART: No, sorry. Once again. Next year maybe. The people chosen to sit with Mrs. Clinton that daily exhibit what is best about America -- they range from students participating in the AmeriCorps program to parents who are active in their local communities to some locally-elected officials.
I'll just briefly run through some of the people, for those who have an interest. Ashley Dumas is an AmeriCorps member, with the Notre Dame Mission Volunteers program, a 1998 graduate of Wellesley College. She's currently serving at Project Hope in South Boston, a shelter for single mothers. She teaches GED classes and helps provide child care assistance.
Loc Truong is an AmeriCorps member with the San Luis Obispo AmeriCorps program. Serves as a full-time mentor to high-risk teenage boys. He and his family were political refugees from Vietnam. I'll read you a brief quote from him on why he does AmeriCorps: "The main reason I joined AmeriCorps is because of my passion to repay society for what they've done for my family. When we came to the U.S. we had nothing. People gave us food, clothing, and shelter. Now I would like to help those who are less fortunate, those who were once in my situation."
Joanna Quintana Barroso is a third-grade teacher at Coral Waya Elementary School in Miami, Florida. She's been involved in curriculum based gun safety programs and is known in the community for turning around lives. She recently participated in the White House Conference on School Safety, where she spoke about the successful anticrime efforts at her school, including school uniforms, gun safety curriculum and DARE officers.
Suzann Wilson, some of you will remember, is the mother of an 8-year-old girl who was killed in Jonesboro, in that shooting. She has been here and spoken here at the White House before. She's currently working to pass child access prevention gun laws that will require gun owners to keep loaded firearms out of the reach of children.
Officer Chris Lonsford is a COPS funded community police officer from Fontana, California, Police Department, where, in 1998, received the police department's highest honor, the Medal of Valor. He exhibited extraordinary bravery and judgment in assisting in the arrest of three heavily-armed robbers without any -- despite their heavy weaponry -- without any collateral casualties in the community.
Maurice Lim Miller is the Executive Director of Asian Neighborhood Design, a program that was recently cited in San Francisco, California, as part of the President's initiative on race -- the promising practices for racial reconciliation.
Captain Jeffrey B. Taliaferro is presently chief of wing weapons for the 28th Operations Support Squadron; played an important role in Operation Desert Fox. So he will be there.
Elam Hill, age 15, is the winner of the Bayer National Science Foundation Award for a community. He is someone, along with some of his classmates, developed a communications program to help homeless families when they shifted between shelters, and not lose school time in moving from school to school. It's a program that has now been picked up by the Georgia State Department of Education.
Two more. Dr. Rita Colwell --
Q Where is he from?
MR. LOCKHART: Atlanta. From the Walden Middle School.
Dr. Rita Colwell is the first woman to head the National Science Foundation. She is doing a lot of fine work there, including a five-year initiative on information technology, which will ultimately speed the pace of scientific discovery.
Finally, Mayor Wellington Webb, the Mayor of Denver, a longtime friend of the President and First Lady and a well-recognized and distinguished public servant for three decades, leading Denver in many surveys to being one of the most highly acclaimed cities in the country.
Q There was a story that they were trying to put together Michael Jordan and Sammy Sosa and Mark McGwire -- was there any truth to it?
MR. LOCKHART: Oh, there's lots of stories about --
Q Were you trying to get them?
MR. LOCKHART: If I've got any more to say on that, I'll say it.
Q The answer is yes, I take it.
MR. LOCKHART: No.
Q The answer is, no, you are not?
MR. LOCKHART: Maybe, could be. There are stories.
Q I want to know why the pool that leaves with the President is not allowed to go on the floor, as they have been for many, many years.
MR. LOCKHART: Helen, I don't really know what you're talking about, so let me look into it. That's the first I've heard of this.
Q Does the White House agree with Senator Daschle's statement this morning that witnesses now appear to be inevitable?
MR. LOCKHART: I think the White House believes that the senators, in a bipartisan fashion, deferred the decision of any witnesses until both sides had a chance to make their case and the senators had a chance to do their own questions. I don't think we believe that any judgment should be made at this point. We have, again, not had a chance to present a single minute, second, hour of our case. We'll start that tomorrow. We're looking forward to that. And the senators should, as their agreement indicated, wait until both sides have had a chance to make their case to decide on this issue.
Q If I could just follow up on that, Joe, do you believe that the momentum for witnesses will be slowed by the defense presentation?
MR. LOCKHART: The senators will have to make their own judgments. We believe that we have a compelling case to make based on the laws, the facts, and the Constitution. We will do that. We look forward to that, starting tomorrow. And the issue of witnesses will be deferred.
I'll make a comment that I think I've made before, which is what was remarkable about the House prosecutors, the floor managers, was their almost single-mindedness on the issue of witnesses and it being the most important priority for them. And I think that is a stunning admission that they don't believe that the case that they sent over from the House and the case that they presented to the Senate is strong, and is strong enough to do what they set out to do from the beginning, which is remove the President.
Q But you have suggested, and others have certainly said, that witnesses might help the President's case. They might be exculpatory about these accusations, or they certainly might throw some doubt on several questions. Mr. Hutchinson said yesterday that he didn't think he could get a conviction in a criminal court at the moment without witnesses.
MR. LOCKHART: Well, I think that witnesses certainly could help the case, there could be exculpatory information -- there is exculpatory information. But I'll repeat again, the one thing that bringing witnesses into this case will definitely do is extend and delay this process.
We've had more than, I believe, 150 witnesses over a year that have gone before the grand jury. We have tens of thousands of pages of testimony and transcripts that indicate where people are. We have people who have been disposed and testified over 20 times. Asking them to do it one more time is not likely to provide any new or shocking revelations in this case. They've testified many times before. And the one thing we can be assured of if we go this route is extending and delaying this process.
We think -- I think the American people believe that the process has gone on long enough and we ought to find a way to bring it to a conclusion.
Q Joe, given what most people have heard about President Clinton over the last many months is -- these allegations, this impeachment, now the Senate trial, what do you hope that people tuning into the State of the Union speech tomorrow night will see and hear from the President? What message do you hope that they'll take away?
MR. LOCKHART: In the State of the Union?
Q Yes.
MR. LOCKHART: Oh, I think the public largely knows that the President has remained focused on their business. But I think tomorrow's speech will promote a very forward-looking agenda for the 21st century, will be an ambitious agenda to build on the success we've had over the last seven years -- the unprecedented economic expansion in this country allows us to really look forward and look to give people the tools they need to balance family and work in the he 21st century.
I think at the end of the speech people will look not at an administration that has entered the last two years of office and is slowing down, but an administration that is energized and is looking forward to moving into the 21st century with an ambitious and activist agenda.
Q Why isn't he mentioning impeachment? Does he think it would hurt him as a personal plea, or does he think it would intervene with the trial?
MR. LOCKHART: I think the President believes the appropriate place for those comments are in the Senate --
Q But they won't have his personal comments.
MR. LOCKHART: They certainly have his comments and his testimony. His lawyers I think will do an excellent job of presenting a compelling case based on the facts and the law.
Q He's not going to mention impeachment?
MR. LOCKHART: I think this is probably the fifth day running that I've answered in the affirmative there.
Q But you could be wrong.
MR. LOCKHART: That's right. I've been --
Q Joe, the Congressional Budget Office indicated a larger surplus than forecast. Does the White House acknowledge that and will the President talk about the budget surplus tomorrow, and is he going to reorient any of the priorities?
MR. LOCKHART: Barry's not here, but Barry is more of an expert on this than me. But I think if you go back over the last seven years, you'll find that the OMB estimates are traditionally slightly more conservative than the Congressional Budget Office. I think we talked about new surplus numbers that will be used as far as putting our budget together. They do show a large surplus and a growing surplus.
But as we've said before, we believe that the surplus needs to be reserved until we figure out the long-term solution to Social Security. The President will address that tomorrow, will address those issues, and I'll leave it to him.
Q Even more money is still not enough until Social Security is taken care of and there are other things that can be taken care of?
MR. LOCKHART: Well, I think I'll leave it to the President to discuss tomorrow.
Q How uncomfortable will it be for the President to stand in the chamber where he was impeached and deliver his speech, talking to an audience that impeached him and is now judging him?
MR. LOCKHART: Well, I would say that the President is speaking more -- will be speaking to members of the House and the Senate, but he's also speaking to the American public, and I believe the President is always comfortable when he's dealing with issues, dealing with issues that impact real people's lives, dealing with how the government can help provide the tools that people need in home and work.
Q Joe, what are the lawyers going to emphasize tomorrow? Will there be a point-by-point rebuttal of the House prosecutors' case?
MR. LOCKHART: I'm not going to get into how they're going to do what they're going to do. I'll tell you that Mr. Ruff -- I expect Mr. Ruff to open tomorrow and give you an overview based on the facts, the evidence, and the Constitution, and the constitutional standards that should be applied. And I think, at the end of the three days, people will have a different view of the case that's been laid out and the facts that have been laid before them.
Q What comes after Ruff? Can you give us a schedule?
MR. LOCKHART: I'll tell you, tomorrow I expect Mr. Ruff to take whatever he needs in the afternoon to open and do this overview, and I expect that will be the only presentation for tomorrow. And we'll move into Wednesday.
Q What do you mean, facts --
Q He'll be the only presentation tomorrow?
MR. LOCKHART: Yes.
Q Will you use all your time, Joe?
MR. LOCKHART: We'll use as much of the time as we believe is appropriate.
Q What do you mean, based on facts? It's going to have a different story than the one we've already heard?
MR. LOCKHART: Sure. Let me just give you one example, which is for three or four months -- we have filed several hundred pages of briefs, talking about the evidence in the 60,000 pages, including a lot of exculpatory evidence. But there is still, based on published polls, three-quarters of this country who believe that the President refused to acknowledge that he had an inappropriate relationship with Monica Lewinsky in the grand jury. Somehow that message hasn't gotten out there.
So we look forward to this opportunity to use the time that the Senate has allowed us to make the case, based not just on standards and the Constitution and the law, but based on the facts in this case.
Q The House managers played the President's portion of his grand jury testimony in which he said that, acknowledged that.
MR. LOCKHART: Yes, that is correct.
Q Well, why do you think people don't know it?
MR. LOCKHART: And it's one of the first times that that got any significant attention, so we appreciate the help they provided to us.
Q He acknowledged an inappropriate relationship and said he then would not answer any further questions about that relationship.
MR. LOCKHART: That's right. That's right.
Q Well, are you abandoning the argument that it's not an impeachable offense?
MR. LOCKHART: Absolutely not. Absolutely not. Our argument is going to closely track what you've already seen as far as what the facts are in this case, what the evidence is in this case, and what the constitutional standards should be in this case.
Q Joe, if you don't enter the facts in a detailed way and don't go into the interpretation of those facts, will that not require witnesses and prolong the proceedings?
MR. LOCKHART: No, because there has already been 150 witnesses. I think -- George Mitchell said something yesterday that was very interesting, which is, witnesses don't provide clarity, they provide disputes. It's the tryers of facts that try to clarify these things. Everyone who has had something to say in this case, according to the Independent Counsel and according to the House Judiciary Committee -- and we'd argue that maybe there are some other people that might have something to say, but they have not spoken, but we don't think it's necessary to bring anyone else in at this point -- has had their chance to make their case. And I think it boggles the mind a bit to try to understand how someone testifying for the 10th time or the 23rd time or the 9th time might provide any more clarity.
Q Given that argument, Joe, are you saying that the White House would not call witnesses, even if the prosecution does?
MR. LOCKHART: No. What I think I said, and I'll repeat again here, is the White House, even though the record that exists is probably the most prejudicial that could exist, we're willing to go forward and argue this case on that record. If the House managers insist on witnesses and if the Senate approves them, certainly I would think that we would look at calling witnesses. Either way we're looking at a process that is extended and delayed.
Q The President is now making his second State of the Union address under the shadow of the scandal. Talk to me about what he was able to accomplish in 1998 that makes you think he'll be able to accomplish the agenda he's about to lay out in the State of the Union address in 1999.
MR. LOCKHART: I think that if you look back on last year's State of the Union, we got an awful lot accomplished. The President laid out two central economic challenges and I think we've met both of them. The first was Social Security and reserving the surplus for Social Security. And think back -- I mean, it seems like it was a long time ago, but there was a very healthy debate -- okay, the man upstairs doesn't like this argument, I'm going to change it. (Laughter.)
Okay, let's go to IMF. No, seriously -- there was a very healthy debate among Democrats and Republicans about what the surplus should be used for. The Republicans argued very forcefully and strenuously that we ought to immediately turn around and have tax cuts. That's a pretty viable political option, but the President and the Democrats held firm. The surplus has been reserved, it's there and it's going to be important to how we go forward with Social Security.
The second main economic area was the international financial crisis. And it was like pulling teeth at times, but we got the IMF funded and have made important steps towards stabilizing economies around the world. And that has a direct impact on the American economy and American workers.
Clearly, the President talked about 100,000 teachers, and that's something we took the important first step on this year. We talked about the High Hopes mentoring program and that went through. We talked about continuing to move towards -- adding a million children in Head Start. He got the full request for assistance on that. We got a dramatic increase in after-school care, on his child care initiative. Education standards and Title I and Goals 2000 went through. Three thousand new charter schools -- I've got a longer list here -- the G.I. Bill for American workers; the support for Americans dislocated by changes in the economy; the 25 percent increase in research and science; important efforts on welfare reform; and also, on the foreign policy front, the expansion of NATO.
Q Can I follow up on that? Yesterday, the Speaker and Senator Lott sent the President a letter, asking him to get Social Security reform legislation to them by March 1st. Will he meet that deadline?
MR. LOCKHART: I'm sorry, say again.
Q The Speaker and Senator Lott sent the President a letter about the State of the Union address, listing several things they'll be listening for. They said they would like to have his reforms as soon as possible, but surely before March 1st, when Finance and Ways and Means starts work. Will the President present a plan?
MR. LOCKHART: The President will present a lot of ideas on how we move this country forward and we look forward to, beginning Wednesday morning, working with Congress in order to effect that.
Q And they also say they're looking for an across-the-board tax cut and --
MR. LOCKHART: You know, this is coming from a leadership that has still not passed a budget for 1998. So we look forward to working with them in a bipartisan way and beginning that at the earliest point possible. On the issue of tax cuts, we have said -- as we said for the last year and our position hasn't changed -- that we need to take steps to ensure the long-term viability of Social Security before we start moving down the road to tax cuts.
Q Joe, the Coalition for National Referendum, in Concord, New Hampshire, has sent invitations to hundreds of radio stations, including ours, to join in trying to stop the President's removal from office. And my question is, did you or anyone else in the White House have anything to do with this?
MR. LOCKHART: Not that I know of. But let me reassure you that it's okay with me if you don't join the team. (Laughter.)
Q Is this just a Carville/Flynt/Lear operation?
MR. LOCKHART: Who?
Q Carville/Flynt/Lear.
MR. LOCKHART: I don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about.
Q People for Norman Lear's way -- Carville and his friend, Flynt.
MR. LOCKHART: And what is your basis for the question?
Q Is this an operation by these people?
MR. LOCKHART: I don't have the slightest idea. Go ask them.
Q Joe, could I turn you into Kosovo and the situation there?
MR. LOCKHART: Turn me into Kosovo? You would like that, wouldn't you?
Q A battleground -- you're already there. What action does the White House plan in the wake of the massacre over there over the weekend?
MR. LOCKHART: Those of you who were around over the weekend will remember the President issued a strong statement condemning the barbaric atrocity that occurred in Kosovo over the weekend. I think there have been a series of statements over the last 24 to 36 hours that indicate -- both from the North Atlantic Council, from the OSCE -- we expect the U.N. to discuss today that the international community is united in sending a strong message to President Milosevic both condemning this atrocity, demanding access of the International War Crimes Tribunal to go in and bring to justice those who are responsible for this. and demanding further that President Milosevic come into compliance with the agreements he made with the U.N. Security Council.
I think we expect the United Nations to take this up later this afternoon and we believe that the Council is united on this. Further, General Clark Naumann will go to Belgrade tomorrow to deliver this strong message.
Q Joe, is it fair to say that at this point the OSCE has failed in its monitoring effort, that they didn't know this happened until it was all over.
MR. LOCKHART: Well, they certainly were able to go in and quickly verify who they believe is responsible for this, and that's important. I think there's been some important work that has been done We've averted a humanitarian crisis that was facing us as we moved into this winter.
Q Who is going tomorrow?
MR. LOCKHART: General Clark, who is the Supreme Allied Commander, Europe, and the head of the Military Committee of the North Atlantic Council.
Q And who else?
MR. LOCKHART: It's those two: General Naumann and General Clark.
Q I have two follow-ups --
MR. LOCKHART: I'm not finished yet, because I think that's an important question.
Certainly, we have seen troops that have pulled back in the area. But we've, obviously, in the case of this weekend, seen a brutal atrocity that has to be dealt with; and now non-compliance. So I think a strong message will be brought to President Milosevic about bringing those to justice who should be punished for this and coming into compliance with the agreements that he made.
Q Two follow-ups. Do you think there's any will among the American people to become more deeply involved in the Kosovo situation. And, secondly, why hasn't Milosevic been arrested? I don't understand what the problem is there?
MR. LOCKHART: Well, on the second question, I'll leave it to others to detail the difficulties in that. But on the first, I don't think the United States, the people of the United States are anxious for further involvement in issues around the world. But I don't think this country is made up of people who can turn a blind eye to the kind of atrocity that they saw in the middle of Europe that not only defies the progress that we've made as we move to the 21st century, but actually harkens back to an earlier, more brutal time in Europe -- something that Europeans, Americans and the rest of the international community won't tolerate.
Q So where does that leave us then?
MR. LOCKHART: That leaves us at the Generals going to Belgrade tomorrow and delivering a very strong message about what the international community demands.
Q So the NATO threat to use force is still on the table?
MR. LOCKHART: The ACT ORD remains in effect.
Q Bob Dole said this morning, on "Good Morning
America," that the administration still hasn't done enough to get tough with Milosevic. Do you think the American line will harden, will the American treatment of Milosevic toughen?
MR. LOCKHART: I think our line -- both the American's and the international community's -- is quite tough. And while we took some steps in the right direction, this is clearly a step in the wrong direction. That message will be delivered to President Milosevic, as well as the demand that he comply and allow access to those who are responsible for this and can be brought to justice. And it is certainly our hope that he gets that message.
Q Does the President feel that he's been able to devote enough attention to Kosovo in recent weeks? Has he been distracted by the problems here?
MR. LOCKHART: No. I think any objective analyst over the last year will see that the President has not been distracted. He has not wavered in his leadership, as far as America's responsibilities around the world and will not be.
Q Joe, I apologize if this came up earlier, but is there a role here for Richard Holbrooke?
MR. LOCKHART: Well, I think he has been playing an important role throughout, if you go back and look at this in a longer context. As far as his role over the next few days, I don't have any specifics on that. No plans at this point to send him there.
Q What's he doing on the impeachment today? What's he doing on State of the Union?
MR. LOCKHART: State of the Union, he's going out -- let me give you a little weekend flavor, because that can answer, sort of, both of those questions.
The President spent a good deal of time on the State of the Union over the weekend, both Saturday and Sunday, spent some time in the family theater practicing the speech, making changes as they went along -- with both his -- the team that's been working with him on the speech as well as some of the policy people who have been providing ideas for the speech. He probably spent three or four hours each day on that, as well as some time alone just working with the speech draft.
I expect him, upon returning from the service event today, to go back and take another session, a couple hours maybe -- but it could extend or detract, depending on how things go.
Q How long is it going to run? And how much trouble are you having cutting it down --
MR. LOCKHART: Well, it's always a difficult process, with so many good ideas, to highlight the best ones and talk about them in a way that leads to an effective presentation. I think they've made a lot of progress on that over the last few days.
On impeachment, the President, as far as I know, has nothing on his schedule today. He spent about 30 minutes yesterday with his lawyers and legal team. They sort of outlined how they plan to present their side of the case over the week and the session lasted probably 30 minutes.
Q Joe, at one of the House hearings, Chuck Ruff said that he thought a reasonable person could conclude that the President had lied at prior proceedings. And then I think --
MR. LOCKHART: Well, not in prior proceedings. The question was specific to the grand jury deposition.
Q To the deposition or the -- that was my question.
MR. LOCKHART: I'm sorry, I didn't mean -- to the civil deposition. I'm confusing myself here.
Q The concession was simply that there were some times in the civil deposition that a reasonable person could conclude that he lied -- not necessarily what we're talking about now, in his grand jury --
MR. LOCKHART: That is correct. That is correct.
Q Joe, actually the question included both. I went back and read it. It included both --
MR. LOCKHART: Right. But if you look at the answer, the answer clearly was talking about the issues involved in the civil deposition. And if you go down a little bit further in the transcript you'll see that the direct question about the grand jury was put to him and he answered it directly several times.
Q And then you later said the President agreed -- if I remember correctly --
MR. LOCKHART: I said that the President thought his counsel made a strong presentation to the House and agreed with the points he made.
Q Joe, has the President spent any time at all over the weekend -- Saturday, particularly -- looking at the summation of the prosecutors, read a transcript?
MR. LOCKHART: Not that I'm aware of.
Q Is he unaware of what they said about him in the House -- I mean, the Senate?
MR. LOCKHART: No. It's certainly -- most newspapers have done a fair job of devoting significant space to their testimony, as well as television and radio.
Q So he's been reading newspaper accounts and watching news broadcasts about it?
MR. LOCKHART: He is certainly aware of what their case was, based on a variety of mediums, including briefings, you know, from his staff and reading accounts or watching TV.
Q Have the major elements of the President's initiatives that he'll talk about in the State of the Union already been announced, or are there new initiatives that we'll hear tomorrow night?
MR. LOCKHART: There are some things that you haven't heard yet and will knock your socks off.
Q What does that mean?
MR. LOCKHART: No, not everything -- we're going to let the President make a few of the announcements.
Q Are you kidding or are you --
Q Well, he's the one who has already -- did all these leaks.
Q Are you kidding?
MR. LOCKHART: No, I'm not kidding. There will be parts of the speech that have not been previewed that I think you'll find very interesting.
Q Will knock our socks off?
Q Has he done anything on Brazil today, Joe?
MR. LOCKHART: No. I mean, he's gotten his daily national security briefing, which has become a standard part of
Q Has the President ever talked to President Cardoso about this?
MR. LOCKHART: Not that I know of, not directly. I know Secretary Rubin has had some conversations with his counterparts and with G-7 and IMF officials.
Q Beyond Ruff's summary tomorrow, will you be able to tell us about the rest of the time at all?
MR. LOCKHART: Maybe tomorrow.
Q Were you saying before that if there were witnesses you would reserve the right to call -- some of your allies have suggested that they'd like to see Ken Starr and Linda Tripp called. Do you share that view?
MR. LOCKHART: I'm not going to preview what our strategy may be for something that hasn't been decided yet. I think those who want to speculate are free to speculate and it should be viewed as speculation.
Q Joe, if the President were not on trial in the Senate, would he be coming forward with all these initiatives that he'll be talking about tomorrow?
MR. LOCKHART: Absolutely. I think anyone who has spent time covering the President and who knows the President, knows, like he told his Cabinet several months ago, this President wants to make sure that on the last day of the last term that he's in office he's still pushing forward and putting out policy ideas. And I think that is significant.
I think, again, if you look back, sort of the 7th year of a presidency, there have been some in the past that have proposed things that are less ambitious. That won't happen with this President. In fact, if you look from a purely policy point of view, this one is probably as ambitious as the very first one he gave.
Q Joe, if he's going to knock our socks off, is that going to be in addition to all the things that have leaked out so far, and there's going to be applause. So would you figure it's a 90-minute or two hours?
MR. LOCKHART: I'm not going to predict.
Q I mean, a lot of applause, that takes time, Joe. Particularly the Democrats.
MR. LOCKHART: I'm not going to predict. Will someone remind me not to use the sock allusion again? (Laughter.)
Q Is the President aware of the House managers -- the President is aware of all the presentation of managers?
MR. LOCKHART: Not in any great detail, but I think he's got a general awareness.
Q What was his assessment?
MR. LOCKHART: That the time has certainly come for his team to put on our side.
Q Joe, what does he have on his schedule tomorrow that would prevent him from watching some of his lawyer's presentation?
MR. LOCKHART: I don't know that there's anything on his schedule that would prevent him from --
Q Does he plan to watch?
MR. LOCKHART: I don't think so. I'll check with him tomorrow.
Q Can you tell us what else he has on his schedule tomorrow?
MR. LOCKHART: Hold on.
Q And will you brief?
MR. LOCKHART: I think not. I think the tradition on State of the Union day is not to, and I know I have to go up to the Hill in the afternoon for a meeting.
Q Is it impeachment-related?
MR. LOCKHART: No, no, no.
Q It's a job interview.
MR. LOCKHART: Yes, a job interview -- very good. Very good. (Laughter.) Very funny, Steve. See if you get invited to another state dinner. (Laughter.)
Week ahead: Tuesday, the President will remain at the White House to prepare for the State of the Union; will deliver the speech on Capitol Hill later that night.
Q And where will Lockhart be?
Q Darning socks.
Q Do you know what time you will have --
Q You'll have a briefing in the morning, gaggle?
MR. LOCKHART: Yes, we'll do the gaggle in the morning. And then I think traditionally we don't brief. You all can bring an appeal to the gaggle if it's something you feel that strongly about.
Q And then you're going to put out a summary of his State of the Union?
MR. LOCKHART: Yes. I expect that throughout -- as we get late into the afternoon there should be some excerpts available, and then a text.
Q Speech in advance?
Q Text about 6:00 p.m.?
MR. LOCKHART: Oh, don't tie me down.
Q 5:00 p.m., 4:00 p.m.?
MR. LOCKHART: When do you want it?
Q Noon.
MR. LOCKHART: Okay. It will be noon, or shortly thereafter. Thank you.
END 1:15 P.M. EST