Press Briefing by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre 2/06/24 Transcript

Oh, boy. Good afternoon, everyone. A couple of things off the top before we go into questions. This month is Black History Month where we celebrate and recognize black Americans and their contributions to the core of who we are as a nation. Today the president and the First Lady will host a Black History Month reception attended by the Vice President and the second gentleman. There will be a performance by R&B singer, Tank, and the president will be introduced by Nijel Murray, a Las Vegas High School student who founded a non-for-profit that provides foster kids new clothing and basic necessities. This year's theme is African-Americans and the arts. Whether it's through music, written and spoken word, fashion, film or other forms of creative expression, African-American and black culture anchors American culture in every passing moment, setting trends both in the US and around the world. (01:01) Since taking office, President Biden and Vice President Harris have ensured that our governments look like America. From the appointment of Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson to the cabinet, to the nearly one third of judicial nominees who are black Americans. In fact, President Biden has appointed more black women to the federal circuit courts than every other administration in history combined. Under the president's leadership, Bidenomics has ushered in a historic economic recovery creating 2.6 million jobs for black Americans. 2023 marks the lowest year for black unemployment and the smallest gap between black and white workers over decades of record. Black wealth has increased by 60% since the pandemic fueled in part by black owned small business boom, not seen in over 30 years. A historic over $7 billion in investments for historically black colleges and universities and the increase of black homeownership since January 2021. In the spirit of Black History Month and the icons we honor in February, the Biden Harris administration will continue to create opportunities and ensure equity for black Americans in order to realize a nation that truly and fully works for all. (02:18) As you all heard from the president just moments ago, there are important issues our country is facing today. Our immigration system has been broken for decades and it's a long pastime we fix it. That is why the president instructed his team to negotiate in good faith with a bipartisan group of senators to seriously address the immigration system. The bipartisan agreement we have come to is the toughest and fairest reforms to our immigration system in decades. You heard the president, he described what's in the bill. A couple of things I'll call out is 1,500 CBP personnel and 100 cutting edge inspection machines to catch fentanyl, improving our ability to process asylum claims, dropping the processing time from five to seven years to six months and so much more. (03:09) Now it's time for Republicans to choose, will they support the Border Patrol Union who have endorsed this bipartisan agreement or will they continue to play games with our national security? Will they show some spine and do what they know is right or will they put partisan politics ahead of our national security. As the Border Patrol Union put it, this bill is a step in the right direction and is better than status quo. Republicans should listen to them and pass this bipartisan agreement. Zeke, you want to kick this off?

Thanks, Karine. Following the president's comments earlier, writing the Hamas response on the ceasefires and hostage deal talks, the president described it as over the top. Does he believe that there's a workable path forward with Hamas still demanding a permanent ceasefire as a condition for release of the remaining hostages?

So here's what I'll say, and Secretary Blinken spoke to this and as the president said today as well, Hamas has responded to the framework of a hostage deal, this is as we speak towards a hostage deal. The United States is going to review that response. There's still a lot of work to be done here before we have a deal, so we are not going to get in the way of that and it's very-

[inaudible 00:04:20].

... well, look, they have a deal. They have responded to a framework hostage deal. We think that's actually incredibly important. We're going to review that response. And look, there's a lot of work to be done here. We're going to be really, really careful. These are sensitive negotiations. As you know, this is a negotiation process that has been also led by Qatar and also Egypt, those leaderships there, and so we're going to be really careful not telegraphing that information about the response from here. (04:51) But look, the president has been very clear. You heard from National Security Advisor, Jake Sullivan when he was on multiple networks doing interviews, talking about the next steps here. It is important that we get to a humanitarian deal. The president and his team has been working around the clock to get this done. We want to make sure we get those hostages home, including the American hostages, we understand are about six of them that are part of that, that are part of the folks who are still part of the hostages, I should be more clear, that are being held. We want to get them home. We want to make sure we get that all important humanitarian aid to the Palestinian people. That's what we're working on, and I'm not going to stand here and telegraph anything there. But look, they have responded. Hamas has responded to a framework of a hostage deal and that's critically important in doing what we need to do in getting these hostages home and getting humanitarian aid in.

On a different subject, two more ships came under fire today in the Red Sea, the deadly attack on Kurdish fighters, the base that housed Americans a couple of days ago. Does that signal that the president's strategy now striking these whining back militias but not Iran directly has not had its deterrent effect or even reduced their capacity to carry out these sorts of attacks?

So look, we believe, and you heard again from National Security Advisor on Sunday, that our response has degraded their capabilities and we think that's incredibly important. Well, the United States, the president has said this, you heard this from our NSC colleagues here, the United States will not hesitate to take further actions to defend against these unlawful reckless attacks against the US ships and international commercial vessels. We've been very clear about that. We will act. And as you know, we have formed a coalition obviously with other countries to make sure that we respond to this.

And then on the supplemental, the president and his remarks laid the blame for this seemed to be pathway to failure of this legislation at the feet of Donald Trump, the former president. He's the current occupant of the Oval Office. Doesn't he bear some responsibility? He didn't engage with House Republicans. He negotiated with the Senate but not the house, the other branch of legislative branch. Where is he taking responsibility here?

The president has taken this issue incredibly seriously from day one. You heard us say this over and over again. You heard this from the president. On the first day of his administration he said, "I'm going to put forward a legislation, a comprehensive immigration legislation," that was introduced more than three years ago, more than three years ago, and they have failed to act, failed to act. And just a couple of quotes here, and you've heard me say these quotes and I'll say them again. This is from Speaker Johnson in October 2023, not too long ago, just a couple of months ago, he said, "We must come together and address the broken border. In November 2023 I think we can get a bipartisan agreement on border security," that's what he said. The speaker of the house in December of 2023, "Statutory reforms designed to restore operational control at our southern border must be enacted." (08:04) He himself has said we need a bipartisan agreement. We can get there. There's the Speaker Johnson, so what changed? And that's a question for the speaker. What has changed that now there is? There's actually a bipartisan agreement coming. We saw the text, it was released. It's coming out of the Senate that they have worked on for two months, two months now, and he has an opportunity. It has been called the fairest and the toughest agreement border deal that we have seen in decades. The Border Patrol Union said that we should move forward. It's better than status quo. And so what has changed? This is something for Speaker Johnson to speak to. The president has said he wants to get work done and they keep getting in the way, House Republicans keep getting in the way, and that's where we are today.

And so what's the President's plan once this bill goes down?

Well, we're going to-

[inaudible 00:08:56]-

... here's the thing. Well, it is a bipartisan agreement that is the fairest, the toughest agreement that we are going to see or we have seen in decades. There's Texas out there. The Texas is out there, Border Patrol Union supports it. US Chamber of Commerce supports it. Republicans, Republican governor and Democratic governors have put a letter together, an op-ed supporting this bill. It could not be stronger or more fairer, and this has taken two months, two months. And I just don't understand again why Republicans are getting in the way of this. They should not, they should not. Look, the president again by the direction of president, he sent his team to work with the Senate. He's taken this very seriously. He put forth a border security supplemental, obviously that's part of the National Security Supplemental. We have a deal. There is a deal there, a deal that is supported by Border Patrol Union that says a lot. So why can't they move forward on it? Go ahead, Michelle.

Thanks, Karine. So to follow up on that, this deal looks like it's going to fail. So without getting into specifics, is there a plan B?

I'm not going to get into... Again, like you just said, get into specifics of a plan B. There is a border that exists right now in front of congressional members, in front of senators and in front of house members. Right there, a bipartisan agreement that has been endorsed by the Border Patrol Union, the US Chamber of Commerce. It has been worked on for two months, and the president laid out in a very comprehensive way what's in that deal. Speaker Johnson has said just the last three months before we headed into 2024, how important it was to get a bipartisan deal. We've heard from Senator Tillis, you don't normally make this country less safer for political points. This is coming from one of their colleagues, Senator Cornyn. It makes no sense to me for us to do nothing when we might be able to make things better and stem the flow of humanity across the border for the next year. This is what Republicans have been saying, so it is up to them to answer this question.

President Biden pointed out that Trump spent the last 24 hours reaching out to Republicans, pressuring them not to support the agreement. So what has the president done to personally engage with lawmakers or what does he plan to do?

So as you know, early January we had key lawmakers here at the White House from both sides of the aisle. It was obviously a meeting on Ukraine and the importance of moving Ukraine funding to make sure that the brave people of Ukraine were able to continue to fight against Putin's aggression, and he had that conversation. Obviously some of the folks there were from the National Security Council team and other parts of his International Security team as well or the national community. So during that time it came up, border security came up, the president laid out how important it is to get something done, how this immigration system has been broken for decades, and so he brought it up then. (12:15) We've had White House officials including the president, have been in contact with members of Congress. We don't read out obviously every conversation that the president has. He has long time relationship, decades of relationship with some of those members on the hill. So we've been engaged, we have been engaged. When the president directs his team to go up to Congress and to really work through this negotiation process with both Republican and Democrats, that is the President acting, the President taking this very seriously.

And then finally the President said on Thursday that he would stand here and answer all the questions that we want about this issue, so can you confirm that there is a press conference on Thursday?

What I'll say is stay tuned. I'll leave it there for now.

What happens now to the Israel and Ukraine aid?

Well, right now, we believe that there is again a bipartisan agreement that includes aid for Israel, that includes much needed aid for Ukraine, that includes humanitarian aid. Obviously this border security deal, Indo-Pacific, also a component in that National Security Supplemental. We think that it needs to move forward. We are still going to stand pretty steadfast and say, "This needs to move. This needs to move." There is a bipartisan deal right there in front of them and they need to move it forward.

So you separate it out or just [inaudible 00:13:43]?

I'm not going to get into hypotheticals. What we're saying right now is there's a bipartisan agreement. There is a deal right now in front of them, in front of congressional members in the house and in the Senate.

And lastly, the New Hampshire attorney general identified two Texas- based companies of being behind the fake robocall that circulated in New Hampshire. Did they give you a heads-up? Do you have any reaction?

So I don't have any reaction to that. I would refer you to the campaign since that was related to obviously the New Hampshire primaries, I would refer you to the campaign on that specific question. Go ahead.

Just to follow up and see what exactly did the president think was over the top in the Hamas response?

Again, these are incredibly sensitive negotiations that are happening. I'm not going to telegraph any of the conversations. I'm just going to be super careful here. This is incredibly important that we get this done. Obviously I'm just not going to go into it any further.

Because the Secretary of State called the deal or the proposal for Hama serious, so it seems like there's a little bit of a disconnect.

I'm just not going to go into it any further. I laid out that obviously Hamas has responded to the deal. It's important that we get this done. It's important we get hostages home to their family and it's important that we get this critical humanitarian aid into Gaza.

And on October 4th, President Biden said he thought that there was another means by which we may be able to find funding for Ukraine that would bypass Congress. You guys weren't able to talk about what he meant back then, but now that this deal has collapsed, what is that alternative means? Is there work behind the scenes?

I mean, I think they still have to vote on this, I think, tomorrow.

President Biden said that the deal wasn't moving forward, and so it seems like he's moved past that.

Well, look, I think we're still going to be steadfast and continue to push forward and ask and say to Congress, "It's time to act." That doesn't stop us from doing that. That doesn't stop us for laying out what's in the deal and how critical and important it is. It doesn't stop us from saying, "Hey, you've got to stop playing political games. This is something that majority of Americans want to see, making sure that we get on top of dealing what is happening at the border, making sure that we fix a broken immigration system."

It doesn't mean that we stop talking about it. It doesn't mean we stop pushing. The votes haven't happened yet, so we're going to keep calling this out and saying, "Hey, it's time to act. It is time to act." This is an agreement that took two months, that had both Republicans and Democrats at the table negotiating this. This is important. This is about securing the border. This is about trying to start the process and fixing a broken immigration system. And this has been around for decades. For decades. So until the vote happens, we're going to continue to move forward and speak to how important it is to get this bipartisan agreement done. Go ahead, Michael.

Thanks, Karine. What is the administration's response to today's court of appeals ruling on presidential immunity?

I'm not going to comment.

Thank you. So you guys talk a lot, including today, about how the border wouldn't be such a big deal if Congress would've just passed your immigration bill on day one. Who was in charge of Congress on day one?

So it's been three years. It's been three whole years, more than three years, more than a thousand days. And look, this is a difficult issue, obviously. This is a difficult issue. And what we have said is that Congress has to act. Congress, Democrats, Republicans have to act. But in those three years, it is true that Republicans have to gotten in the way. They just have, Peter. They have consistently used immigration, the immigration system, the broken system as a political stunt. That's what they've done. They've gotten in the way in trying to get more border patrol agents. They've gotten in the way in actually trying to fix what's happening, the challenges at the border. They did, I mean they voted. They've actually voted-

[inaudible 00:17:55] for the first two years, no responsibility.

I'm not saying that Democrats have not been in control of the first two years. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying House Republicans have gotten in the way. They have. Have purposefully gotten in the way in trying to fix what's happening at the border.

And how has President Biden ever going to convince the three quarters of voters who were worried about his physical and mental health that he's okay even though in Las Vegas he told a story about recently talking to a French president who died in 1996.

I'm not even going to go down that rabbit hole with you, sir. we're going to go... Go ahead.

Why is it a rabbit hole? He said he talked to Mitterrand-

You saw the president in Vegas, in California. You've seen the president in South Carolina. You saw him in Michigan. I'll just leave it there. Go ahead. Go ahead.

Thanks, Karine. On the border deal McConnell just said we have no chance to make a lot here. So the president earlier was just outlining how urgent the stakes are, especially with Ukraine, saying they're in dire straits. So assuming the president must be very eager to get something to Ukraine if this fails, as all indications show? What might that pathway look like?

Say that... What pathway?

It looks like this is going nowhere. The president was laying out the stakes here for Ukraine. So assuming this doesn't go anywhere, as all indications show, what's the president's plan for Ukraine?

the president's plan for Ukraine is to telling Congress they have to act. We need Congress to act in order to help the Ukrainians who have been fighting bravely, fighting bravely against Putin's aggression. He laid that out. He laid out what we've even seen from Putin in the last couple of months, how much more aggressive that he's gotten. So these are critical, critical, needed military aid that Ukraine needs to help them continuing their fight on the ground. And it is important. It is important to get this done. But not just that, we have to remember the president put forward a coalition of more than 50 countries to help Ukraine. He gathered and make sure and brought together our partners and our allies to help Ukraine. (19:58) We have to make sure that United States continue to stand with this coalition. So we're going to continue to tell Congress they have to act. I'm not going to get into hypotheticals. I'm not going to get into plan B. What I'm going to talk about is there's an agreement in front of Congress right now, a bipartisan agreement that is the most fair... Which is incredibly fair, which is also very tough. Something that we haven't seen, a bipartisan agreement we haven't seen in decades, and we got to get this done.

Senator Chris Murphy had some strong thoughts. He said, "What the hell just happened? I can't believe this is happening." Does the president feel the same way? How is he processing what's going on?

I mean, you heard from the president. He spoke to this very, very sternly and laid out what he thought he saw was going on. I don't think he could have been any more clear. He called out the politics around this, the political stunts around this. He even said, I said it at the top, Republicans need to have a spine here. You need to have a spine. This is not about their politics over there. This is about the American people. A majority of Americans want to see Congress work for them on this issue, on the border, on this broken immigration system.

And just lastly, what's the White House's reaction to that controversial Wall Street Journal op-ed?

So look, a couple of things about that, the op-ed that we saw. It is unacceptable to actually put together a bunch of people, honestly, and write an op-ed that is actually dangerous. So obviously the president spoke to this, he spoke to this... Well, not spoke to this, but you saw a tweet from this president over the weekend about how unacceptable that type of language is and that you cannot... Obviously what a small group of people have said is we have to call that out. But to group an entire community is unacceptable, and obviously we will stand with the people of Dearborn on this issue.

Two questions. One is that a number of Republicans have insisted that there are unilateral actions that this administration could take on immigration. Do you all see additional unilateral actions you could take on border security? What are they?

So this is an opportunity to do this in a comprehensive way, to not do this piecemeal. That is what the border agreement shows. It is a negotiations with Republican and Democrats in a way that we need to move forward with policy in a bipartisan way. And there's no reason to do this piecemeal. There isn't.

But if it potentially fails, if the president were to do it today [inaudible 00:22:55]-

Look, we're going to continue to push Congress to move forward. That's what we're going to do. And that's one of the things that the president was trying to do today. He laid out the politics around this. He laid out what was in the bill, what is in the text that came out on Sunday, and said how important it is to move forward with this bipartisan agreement. So we're going to continue to do that. They have to still move with their process, they meaning the Senate. They have to vote. They have to move with this process. So I'm not going to get into hypotheticals because we believe this is the best way to move forward in dealing with the border. This is the best way to move forward in dealing with an immigration system that has been broken for decades.

And then separate topic, on the hostage negotiations, your team who's been covering this all in the Middle East says that Hamas is still insisting on a permanent ceasefire. Is it still this administration's position that it opposes a permanent ceasefire?

What we have been working towards, and you've heard us say over and over again, we want to see a humanitarian pause. We want to make sure that we get these American hostages home and also hostages more broadly, obviously, home to their families. And we want to make sure that we get that critical aid, the critical aid that Palestinians need in Gaza. It is important to get that aid, whether it's medical, whether it's food. We have to get that in. So we believe a humanitarian pause gets us there. As I stated at the top, Hamas has responded to the framework of a hostage deal. So we're going to review it, and I'm going to be really, really careful. I'm not going to dive into or telegraph information about their response from here. But we've been very clear that we believe that we need to get to another humanitarian pause because that humanitarian aid needs to get in, and also we need-

[inaudible 00:24:44] humanitarian pause. It is the administration's position that a permanent ceasefire is not-

We've been very clear on where we stand on the ceasefire. That has not changed.

Thanks, Karine. Senator McConnell is talking today about the collapse of the deal, suggested that Senate Democrats should draft a new legislation that would handle Ukraine, the Pacific, and Israel. Is that a process that the White House would be engaging with Senate Democrats?

I'm just not going to get into hypotheticals or plan B from here. There is literally a bipartisan agreement that has taken two months to get done, and we believe it is the fairest and toughest agreement as it relates to certainly the border component and the immigration system. Something that Republicans in Congress, many Republicans in Congress have been wanting to see that type of agreement for decades, and now they have it. And it's important that we move forward with the National Security Supplemental, important to move forward with Ukraine, Israel, and the Pacific. So there's a deal. There's a deal in front of them. We should move. We need to act. We cannot play politics with this.

Then I wanted to look back on your answer to [inaudible 00:26:02] on the press conference. Stay tuned, sounds like Karine for no?

Wait, say that one more time.

Let's stay tuned sounds like Karine for no.

You said Karine for no? Wow. A translation.

Is there any question? I mean, the president seemed pretty explicit, and I asked this in addition to the context of Friday where he'll be hosting the German Chancellor and it doesn't appear like there's a press conference on the schedule. That's another one of these foreign leader visits and skipped a Super Bowl interview. So it just seems, again, like we're in one of these instances where the president is not communicating with the press.

I mean, look, seriously, stay tuned. That is the answer for you. I mean, look, the president took questions yesterday, took questions today, so I wouldn't say that he's not engaging with the press. I would not say that. Because he does. And when we have more to share on later this week, what Thursday might look like, or Friday with the German Chancellor coming, certainly as it relates to the press component, certainly we will share that. It really truly is stay tuned.

I guess the criticism, and you look not only on engagements, which now the president [inaudible 00:27:21] as predecessor in terms of that, but interviews where it's half of most of his recent predecessor's at this point in his term, interviews where it's less than half. Can you kind of flesh out... I mean, there's no kind of denying this strategy and what you're...

Look, I'm not going to stand here and deny the numbers. That's not what I'm going to do here. But I will say that the president, one of the things that the president has been able to do is communicate in non-traditional ways. That is true. And he's done that in a way we have not seen other presidents do. That is true. Whether it is podcasts, calling into radio programs more often, speaking to digital creators and taping interviews in local news stations. That is something that he has done in a more, I would say, regular way. (28:09) So look, we're trying to do everything that we can to meet Americans also where they are and try to do it a little bit differently. It doesn't mean we're not going to sit down and do interviews, which doesn't mean we're not going to sit down and do networks interviews. We are going to do that. We've done them recently, whether it's David Muir or Fareed Zakaria or Scott Pelley and many others. We have been able to have some of those sit down interviews, and we'll certainly continue to do that when we feel the time is right. But the other hand of this too is we have found some non-traditional ways as well to communicate with the American people.

Just to follow up on that, anything specifically on why you're not doing the Super Bowl interview? I mean, that's a massive audience in an election year of people who may not be tuned into this White House or this election at this moment.

So look, as you know, Super Bowl is a great annual tradition, and the president, certainly, president Biden, looks forward to watching the game this Sunday, just like millions of... As you just stated, just like millions of Americans are going to be doing that. And look, we hope that the viewers who tuned in, we know that the viewers who tuned in, they can't be tuned in to watch the game. So obviously that is just a fact. They want to see the game. They want to see their favorite team. They want to see a halftime show. That is what the Super... It's that type of tradition. The president will find many other ways to communicate with Americans, the millions Americans out there, and we will find those ways to do it where we think the time is right.

Also, in February of last year, the president had his annual physical. Is he going to have it this February? Is that scheduled?

I don't have a timeline on it. Obviously he is going to have his annual physical. When we have more to share, we certainly will do that. Go ahead, Gabe.

Karine, to ask you more bluntly and also more broadly, can the president do business with Speaker Johnson?

Well, that's a question for Speaker Johnson and I say... No, no, no, no, no, no. Let me finish my question. The reason why I say that, or let me finish my answer, the reason why I say that is because the president directed his team to work with Senate to come forward with a budget agreement. They worked really hard on it the last couple of months. It answers a lot of the questions that Speaker Johnson and many House Republicans have wanted to see. It actually addresses a lot of the issues that they have with border security, that they have with the immigration system. It actually brings forth a real bipartisan way in dealing with that. When you have the Border Patrol Union supporting this, I don't know what the problem is. I really don't know. Why cannot... Well, I do know what the problem is. Let me answer my own question. It's politics. Politics. And they're putting politics ahead of getting things done for the American people. It really is a question for Speaker Johnson.

I know the speaker was here a couple of weeks ago, but why not invite him here over the next couple of days to hash this out? Does the president believe that wouldn't be [inaudible 00:31:13]?

I mean, hash out what? The agreement is in front of them. A bipartisan agreement. Again, border Patrol, U.S, chamber of Commerce, it has Republicans from the Senate who worked really hard on this as well as Democrats. It answers a lot of the questions that he has had, that other Republicans in Congress have had. Republicans in the House more specifically. President said this, and I'm going to repeat it. To not have the spine to deliver for the American people and to play politics, how do you get things done? This is their job. They're supposed to legislate. They're supposed to legislate.

Finally, a question on another topic. For an administration that is focused so much on gun violence, what's the White House's

... response to the Jennifer Crumbley verdict today? And does the White House believe that parents should be held accountable in these instances?

Obviously, we saw the breaking news just not too long ago. And that said, other related cases are ongoing. So without speaking specifically on today's verdict -- want to be really careful here -- I can say that the president remains committed to stopping tragedies like these happening in the first place. That's what he's committed to doing. That's why recently we announced new executive actions to help promote the safe storage of firearms. We know that most students who carry out K-12 school shootings are using firearms they obtain from home, from a friend or a family member. We know that to be true. (32:44) The importance of safe firearm storage cannot be overstated, and the administration will continue to use every tool at our disposal to implement these and other common sense gun safety measures to protect our children, our schools and our communities. Look, when it comes to gun violence, the president has said, this is an epidemic. It is the number one killer of our kids. It truly is. And so the president has taken action these last couple of years. He's done more than two dozen executive actions. (33:12) Obviously, you know that he signed a bipartisan deal, bipartisan legislation to deal with gun violence, legislation that we hadn't seen or hasn't passed in 30 years. So he takes this very seriously. We do not want to continue to see gun violence happening. And our kids being the number one killer, it shouldn't be. It just shouldn't be. Okay, Michael?

Thanks, Karine. Can you talk about the actual consequences at the border itself if this bipartisan agreement doesn't proceed? And is it the administration's position that if it doesn't pass, that the border is not secure from national [inaudible 00:33:56]?

I mean, look, this is stuff that the president has talked about before. I mean, look, there are challenges at the border. You all report that. We see that. It gets overwhelmed at the border. So this is why the first day of his administration, the president put forth a comprehensive immigration policy, because he wanted to deal with that. That was his first piece of legislation. That was the first piece of legislation that the president put forward. (34:20) So obviously, this has been an issue, not just the last three years of this administration, but for decades, including the last administration; for decades. So we leaned in, we worked with the Senate for this bipartisan agreement. And what we're seeing now, and you heard directly from the president, obviously is politics. Politics getting in the way. And Americans see this. They want us to deal with this issue. The majority of Americans do.

On East Palestine, do you have any update on the president's plan to travel [inaudible 00:34:58]?

Well, as you know, the president is planning to travel to East Palestine this month, in February. When we have more information on the date and what that day's going to look like, obviously we'll share that. Okay.

Thanks. Quick scheduling question before I hit my two questions. Has the speaker invited the president to give the State of the Union on March 7th, and has he accepted?

Yeah, we already did. That happened a couple of weeks ago. It's all ready to go.

Excellent.

Ready to go.

Wouldn't miss it.

March 7th. Here we come.

What is the administration's message to Black voters who are already disillusioned over slow progress on racial justice and who are now upset over the situation in Gaza?

So look, it is Black History Month. I just actually got the top laid out, promises that the president has made to the Black community and promises that he's kept, we believe, to the Black community. For example, when we walked in, the president wanted to make sure that the White House used the full force of the federal government to deal with racial equity, to deal with racial justice. He signed an executive order to make sure that the agencies within the federal government, as they move forward with policy, had equity at the center of it. (36:09) And so that is really important too. And under this president, we've seen 2.6 million more Black Americans have jobs. That's because... Make sure there's equity at the center of all the policies. Again, economic policies. And so, look, the president wants to make sure that all communities are not left behind. He wants to make sure that we create an economy from the bottom up, middle out. And that's really important. Black wealth is up a record 60% since 2019, and that's accounting for inflation. That's because of the work that this president has done. (36:46) Look, he's going to continue to speak directly to the American people about all issues, all issues. He's going to continue to hear from the American people about all issues, including-

[inaudible 00:36:57] Gaza.

No, I was going to say, including concerns that many people have of what's going on in the Middle East, including Gaza. Look, the president understands that there's a lot of emotions out there, a lot of feelings out there. He gets it. A lot of opinions out there. And that's why we always say, when we do see protestors, we say, "Okay, it's okay for them to protest as long they're doing it in a peaceful way." And certainly we're always here to listen. (37:28) And so the president believes in that. Obviously he's been very steadfast on his support for Israel, especially after what we saw after October 7th. When you have a terrorist organization like Hamas saying that they want to see October 7th happen over and over again, he believes that they have the right to defend themselves. At the same time, we also need to make sure that we have those conversations with Israel on protecting innocent lives, the Palestinian lives in Gaza, and many people who are very much innocent. They are innocent. And so that's another reason this humanitarian pause is so important, to get that much needed aid into Gaza as well.

Quickly on El Salvador, what is the White House's reaction to the reelection of Nayib Bukele, who used a little bit of creative interpretation of the Constitution to get a second term, and describes himself as the world's cutest... the world's coolest dictator? I'm so sorry.

Is that your opinion?

[inaudible 00:38:31].

No, it's okay. I don't mind.

Sorry. Yeah. So what is the administration's reaction to the reelection of a guy who calls himself the world's coolest dictator?

So look, we respect, obviously, the Salvadorian people. This was their decision to make, obviously. And so we look forward to working with the president-elect on various issues of mutual interest. I don't have anything else to add. I can't speak if he's the coolest or the cutest. I don't know. Okay, Nadia.

Thank you. Just to put up [inaudible 00:39:11] question, the question for many voters, minority voters like Arab Americans and African Americans, it's not about protests and emotions and opinion. It's more of the justice and equality and human rights this administration held very high when it came. So how do you address this disparity between what the president's message has been and these people, who actually disagree fundamentally with the White House?

And we understand. We understand that people are going to fundamentally disagree, not on just this issue, many issues. That's what a democracy is all about, for people to disagree and agree. That's how it works. What I'm saying is that the president's commitment continues, it stands. He's been very steadfast about that. What I'm saying, and what I was trying to say, is that, yeah, people are going to have difference of opinion. We get that. And what I'm saying is that we value that. We value the fact that people are going to have difference of opinions. (40:17) And the reason why I brought protests, because that's what we've been seeing. We've been seeing that's how people have been expressing themselves. And just as long it's peaceful, obviously people have the right to express themselves. The president's going to continue to speak directly to the American people, as he has, to talk about the importance of the different policy decisions that he's making. Just like today. He laid out why it's important, he believes, to make sure that Ukraine has the funding that they need. He laid out it's important why Israel has the funding that they need. (40:50) It's important to also make sure that we have those humanitarian aid. It's important to have that border security and try to start fixing the immigration system. So look, I can't speak to every group or everybody's... their disapproving of how we're moving forward with an issue. But what we're saying is, we understand what people are going through. We understand that this is a difficult time. We get that. And that's what I'm speaking to.

One more question on Gaza. Did the White House receive an ironclad evidence that actually the UNRWA staff member, 12 of them, were involved in the October 7 attack? Because four news organizations, including Financial Times, Channel 4 and Sky News, found no evidence to support the Israeli claim. They said actually what they provided was just cell phone messages and cards being found after-

You're talking about UNRWA?

Yes. So where are you in the process of reviewing that? And second, considering the disaster humanitarian situation in Gaza, what's the alternative if you're waiting for the results to come out or the review to come out?

The alternative of...

[inaudible 00:42:07]

That the White House suspended. So look, a couple of things there. As you know, there's an investigation happening, so we're going to let that investigation move forward. And look, funding for Palestinian civilians is a team effort. And so, for example, while we continue to provide funding to organizations like WFP, other countries may continue to fund UNRWA, which is their own sovereign decision. That is their right. As we've said before, it is important for UNRWA to complete its internal review. As I just stated before, the US will provide any additional funding. We got to get to the bottom of this, to your point. We got to get to the bottom of this. (42:46) But there's no denying that UNRWA does critical lifesaving work here. And we get that and we understand that. As I said, getting that critical need to Palestinian civilians is a team effort. And there are obviously other avenues that we have used. But they have to have this investigation. We got to get to the bottom of this. Okay.

Thanks, Karine. A clarity question on the border and then another topic, if we can. Mitch McConnell did just say, "We have no real chance here to make a law." Does the White House still think that there is a chance that this border bill gets passed?

It is deeply disappointing if that is indeed the case. Obviously, Mitch McConnell is part of leadership there, and so obviously what he says has weight. But it is disappointing to hear. As the president stated, there's no reason why politics should get in the middle of this. Really, there really isn't. We are dealing with an issue that majority of Americans care about: starting the process to fix the immigration system, dealing with the challenges at the border. It's there, it's right in front of them. The text came out on Sunday. We don't understand why they won't move forward. (44:04) I keep saying that and I actually do understand, which is they're letting politics get in the way. They need to show some spine here. They need to show some spine and deliver for the American people what the majority of American people want. And it should not be about politics here. It's taken more than two months. Folks were working, people in the Senate were working around the clock to get this done, through the holidays to get this negotiation done. And they did it in a bipartisan way. It is unfortunate, if that is indeed the case, that it doesn't get out of the Senate or it just doesn't move forward, period.

And then on another topic, expanding access to affordable internet has been a priority for this administration, but the Affordable Connectivity Program is going to expire soon unless Congress takes action. We've been talking a lot about how difficult it's been for Congress to move forward on things. Is there any sense that the administration thinks that that program will be extended? And if it isn't, does the administration have other ways to keep that program going without congressional action?

Karen, it's a great question. I would have to talk to our Office of Leg Affairs to get a better sense of where they are with this and what their read is. Obviously, this is why the bipartisan infrastructure legislation was so important. We had the broadband component to it. And getting technology, getting that access to all Americans across the country, whether it's rural America, urban America, suburban America. Whoever you are, it is important to make sure that they have that access. It's important. It is so important, that's why the president wanted to make sure that it was included in the bipartisan infrastructure legislation. (45:51) But look, as I'm reading out, bipartisan. That was done in a bipartisan way, the infrastructure legislation. So it's not like we can't get this done. We have had some pretty historic pieces of legislation that has been done in a bipartisan way. And so look, I have to talk to Office Leg Affairs. We'll have more to share for you. Go ahead. Right in the middle.

Thanks, Karine. On the joint letter nine ambassadors sent to the Congress today, can you explain what is the White House role behind it? How much do you think it helps?

So this morning, as you just stated, nine of our ambassadors to countries across the Indo-Pacific, including to Japan, China, India, and the Philippines and the Republic of Korea, wrote a letter to the four leaders in Congress -- this is Schumer, McConnell, Johnson and Jeffries -- urging them to act quickly to pass the president's national security supplemental funding request, including the funding it contains for, obviously, the Indo-Pacific, as well as for Ukraine and Israel. Although they wrote the letter themselves, we have been in contact with those ambassadors.

On upcoming President Biden, President Xi's call, do you have a timeline? Are we expecting days or weeks or months?

Oh, boy. I don't have an update on a scheduled call with President Xi and President Biden. I just don't have anything to share at this time.

Was it the president's first bubble tea yesterday, and why did he choose to?

Well, I want to be careful. That was technically a campaign event. So I certainly will leave it to the campaign to answer that question more specifically. Go ahead.

Thank you so much. There's a report just came out like two hours ago. I'm not sure if you give us more information or a comment. The U.S. and four of its European allies hope to announce in next few days a series of commitments made by Israel and Hezbollah to diffuse dangers and restore calm to Israel and Lebanon border.

I'm not going to comment on reporting on a potential deal. I'm just not going to [inaudible 00:48:00].

[inaudible 00:48:00] question if you don't

... mind. So we've been hearing a lot that this administration might claim officially Palestine as a state. This is something that we've been hearing a lot as sources from the White House or from the State Department. How serious is this administration considering that?

The two-state solution? We've been very serious. The President's talked about this multiple times. That's what he wants to see, a two-state solution.

We were talking about directly to claim Palestine as a state. So Israel is a state already, but the administration is going to go and claim it after the war as a state, and actually treat it as a state.

I mean my answer's the same. The President has been very clear. He wants us to see a two-state solution. He's been clear about that for many, many years and he'll continue to do so. Go ahead.

Thanks Karine. I want to ask you about layoffs. UPS is cutting 12,000 jobs. Wayfair is cutting 13% of their workforce. Macy's, Amazon, Google, Citibank, Blackstone, they all announced layoffs. The President talks about how he's added back all the jobs lost in the pandemic and created 5.4 million jobs. What's the level of concern that 2024 will be that wave of layoffs that we're going to start to see?

So look, I am certainly not going to speak to every company that you just named, but if you look at, and you just stated if you look at under this, obviously he takes that very seriously, any layoff. He understand what that means to a family and how that could affect a family. (49:32) But the President has also done a lot of work to get this economy going again, right? He's done a lot of work to make sure that this economy is being built from the bottom up, middle out. Some of this piece of legislation that I've talked about talks about making sure that workers are being paid fairly, that wages are competitive, that there are good paying union jobs. And we see that. We see that. So it's not just those 14 million jobs. Many of those jobs are good paying jobs that meet the moment that the Americans need. (50:08) And let's not forget when the President walked into this administration, the economy was in tailspin. He had to turn that around, he had to turn that around. So obviously we're always concerned hearing about layoffs, but at the same time we are trying to build an economy that works for all and leaves no one behind. And you see that, whether it's in the CHIPS and Science Act, whether it's the bipartisan infrastructure legislation, make sure that those jobs are good paying jobs, good union jobs, and many of them you don't need a college education. So that's really important as well.

The New York Federal Reserve just released a report today saying that Americans have $1.13 trillion in credit card debt, which is now another record. Is there an affordability crisis in the US?

Look, what we have been seeing as you know from the data, the data has been very clear here that wages are going up, consumers are spending a lot more. And it's important. Wages are meeting inflation. That's important. And obviously inflation has gone down, and I think that's important as well. You got to look at the holistic components of the data, and I think that tells you a story of where we are as an economy. Go ahead, Phil.

Yesterday the White House Office of Management and Budget said that the President would veto a stand-alone Israel aid package coming out of the House. Is that still the case?

Yeah, that's still the case. I mean this particular ... You're talking about what the House put forth. Look, and you heard, I tweeted about this as the SAP came out as you just stated. Look, the President put forward, and I said this before, a national security supplemental. And the reason why the President puts forth a national security supplemental is because like every other president, it is an emergency request. It is an important request on behalf of Americans and our national security. And that included the support of Israel, Ukraine and our partners in the Indo-Pacific as I was just talked about, as well as a robust humanitarian assistance as well. They're all important so that we can continue to move forward in these elements in a way that is important to our national security. (52:25) And instead of working in good faith to address the most pressing national security challenges that Israel-only supplemental is another cynical, it truly is a cynical political maneuver. That's how we see it. (52:37) There's a way to deal with this in a comprehensive way, right? That's what this national security supplemental, not do it in a piecemeal. That's not how we want to do this. We want to do this in a comprehensive way. And it does not help, this bill, this bill that has been introduced, it doesn't help the people of Ukraine that really need it. It doesn't offer humanitarian assistance to people who need it. It's not including Palestinian civilians who have nothing to do with Hamas and it makes a political game of Israel's security. That's what we're seeing. So we don't want to see politics here. We want to do this in a way that meets our needs at this moment, our national security needs.

And then a second question. The President said last month that there was a crisis at the border. I know the White House is calling on members of Congress to, I think in your words, put policy above politics. In the absence of that though, is the President evaluating any executive actions that he could take on his own to address that crisis? Is he looking at perhaps a menu of things like maybe a state of emergency or new policies that he can act on his own?

We have a bipartisan agreement that the Senate put forth, Republicans and Democrats came together. There's actually a piece of legislation. Texts came out on Sunday. Folks have been working on that for two months. And it is the toughest and the fairest piece of legislation that we've seen in decades. There is something out there right there in Congress for them to answer those questions that you just asked me. It is unfortunate that politics is getting in the way. The Border Patrol Union, Phil, supported this legislation. US Chamber of Commerce supports this legislation.

I hear all of that, absolutely. And that's all been well reported, but in terms of like generally the consensus is that this thing is either imploded or it's dead on arrival and we can wait until there's an actual vote. But is there anything that the President himself is evaluating that he could do, assuming what we all expect is going to happen happens, which is that this bill does not pass.

We want to see this agreement move forward. That's what we want. I don't have anything else to speak to. Go ahead George.

It's been two weeks since the court gave the President a victory over Texas on the border control. Two days ago, Governor Abbott said he's going to expand Texas' control of another stretch of the border. Has Texas won this showdown? When can we expect to see any action by the President in response?

Look, I've been pretty clear about what Governor Abbott continues to do, which is play politics, which doesn't make the lives of people who live in Texas any safer. And it certainly doesn't make the lives of migrants any safer either. It's inhumane and it's dehumanizing and it's unfortunate. That's what the governor wants to do. (55:42) Obviously this is something that the Department of Justice, is a legal issue that they're handling. So I'm not going to get ahead of that. But we have seen how the governor has treated the immigration issue. We've seen how he's treated the border issue. And instead of talking to, maybe he should talk to his congressional colleagues in the state and tell them, "Hey, do your job. Act. Let's really figure this out in a legislative way that can become law." Then maybe that's what he should be doing. But I don't have anything else to say.

Thank you. I've got a question, Ukraine question and then a border question. Tucker Carlson is in Moscow and just confirmed that he's going to be interviewing Russian President Vladimir Putin. He argues that Americans have a right to know all they can about a war they're implicated in. Carlson contended in his preview video that the Biden administration has opposed and even attempted to hinder his attempts to interview Putin. Do you have-

Wait, say that, say that last part again.

He said that the Biden administration has allegedly attempted to prevent him from interviewing Vladimir Putin. Do you have a comment on either the interview or that allegation?

Absolutely not.

As absolutely not a comment or absolutely not that didn't happen?

Absolutely not a comment to be more clear, period.

Thank you. On the border, President Biden said today that the immigration system has been broken and that he intends to drive him the message that "the only reason the border is not secure is Donald Trump and his MAGA Republican friends." Secretary Mayorkas repeatedly said that the border is secure. And that's one of the reasons House Republicans are trying to impeach him. Did President Biden just confirm that Mayorkas gave Congress false information when he said that the border was secure?

I actually want to go back to your question. It's a ridiculous premise and a ridiculous statement that was made about this administration. So I just want be very about ... Yes, I just want to be very, very clear. It's just ridiculous. (57:45) Going to Secretary Mayorkas for a second to your second question, we believe what the House Republicans are doing, and I've said this many times. Nothing new here. It's shameless. It's baseless. There's no merit for it. And as I've been talking about this bipartisan agreement that came together with Republicans and Democrats over the last two months, Secretary Mayorkas was involved. He was part of that. And what they're doing is all politics here, politics. And as the President said, our immigration system is broken. And he's repeatedly asked, repeatedly asked Congress for resources to take more action and secure the border. (58:31) The administration, as I just mentioned, including Secretary Mayorkas, negotiated in good faith with Congress. And we believe that that bipartisan legislation should be passed, should be moved forward. But what House Republicans continue want to do is choosing to play politics instead of doing their jobs. That's what House Republicans are doing and it's really shameful as I just started saying, and they should focus on what multiple ... And here's the thing, multiple House Republicans have said this too, that there's no impeachable offenses committed here. That's what some of their colleagues have said. (59:08) Just yesterday, Republican Congressman Ken Buck wrote an op-ed saying "that weaponizing impeachment undermines both the Constitution and the seriousness that an impeachment ought to have." That is one of their colleagues said this. So we really shouldn't even be talking about this. We really shouldn't. It's a political play. It is a political ploy and we'd encourage these House Republicans to drop these stunts that do nothing to address the serious issues and serious concerns that the American people have, including immigration system, including the border.

Though with the President saying today that the border is not secure and Secretary Mayorkas saying under oath to Congress that it is?

Here's what I will say. Secretary Mayorkas has done everything that he can do to deal with what's going on at the border and to deal with a broken immigration to the point where he was part of this negotiation process that we saw the Senate go through. The President has confidence in the Secretary and I think that's what matters.

Thanks Karine.

All right, thanks guys.

Thank you.

Thanks Karine.

Thanks Karine.

Thanks.