ad info

 
CNN.comTranscripts
 
Editions | myCNN | Video | Audio | Headline News Brief | Feedback  

 

  Search
 
 

 

TOP STORIES

Bush signs order opening 'faith-based' charity office for business

Rescues continue 4 days after devastating India earthquake

DaimlerChrysler employees join rapidly swelling ranks of laid-off U.S. workers

Disney's GO.com is a goner

(MORE)

MARKETS
4:30pm ET, 4/16
144.70
8257.60
3.71
1394.72
10.90
879.91
 


WORLD

U.S.

POLITICS

LAW

TECHNOLOGY

ENTERTAINMENT

 
TRAVEL

ARTS & STYLE



(MORE HEADLINES)
 
CNN Websites
Networks image


Crossfire

Will Joe Lockhart Miss Defending President Clinton?

Aired September 28, 2000 - 7:30 p.m. ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

BILL PRESS, CO-HOST: Joe, say it ain't so.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

QUESTION: Are you having any second thoughts, Joe, about leaving?

JOE LOCKHART, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Are you kidding me?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PRESS: Tonight: What's next for departing White House Press Secretary Joe Lockhart, and what was it like defending President Clinton?

ANNOUNCER: Live from Washington: CROSSFIRE. On the left, Bill Press; on the right, Mary Matalin. In the CROSSFIRE: White House Press Secretary Joe Lockhart.

PRESS: Good evening. Welcome to CROSSFIRE.

Take this job and shove it. That's the song Joe Lockhart is going to be singing tomorrow when he walks away from two years as White House presidential press secretary. Lockhart presided over one of the sleepiest times in modern presidential history.

Nothing much happened, except -- oh yeah -- the impeachment and Senate trial of his boss; an allied air war against Slobodan Milosevic in Kosovo; a six-month battle over the fate of little Elian Gonzalez. Remember riots in the streets of Seattle over Bill Clinton's economic policies? Then, of course, the bungled persecution of Los Alamos scientist Wen Ho Lee.

And today -- as if that's not enough -- FDA approval of a controversial abortion pill called RU-486 in France. So what do you do for an encore, Joe? Tonight, before he disappears forever in the high-paying lecture circuit, we get one last shot at Joe Lockhart.

What will be Bill Clinton's legacy? Who gets the blame for Wen Ho Lee? And what marks does Joe give the media?

Mary.

MARY MATALIN, CO-HOST: And the likelihood of your disappearing is very remote, Joe. Thank you for being here. The first day was here, and the last day that you're in the White House.

LOCKHART: Wouldn't have it any other way.

MATALIN: Six degrees of separation.

LOCKHART: Yes.

MATALIN: Some of us who think you did too good of a job are happy you're leaving for the private sector there. Let's do...

PRESS: Greatest compliment you could get.

MATALIN: Yes. Leave. Now. Quick.

News of the day: The pill formally known as RU-486, the official name is mifepristone -- if I'm not mispronouncing that -- it's the abortion pill, the so-called abortion pill. The dialogue needs to shift on this. I think both parties agree that we -- if you're pro- choice or pro-life, you have the same goal: reducing the number of abortions.

That's what President Clinton said in '92, said throughout, and said we want to make abortion safe, legal and rare. Doesn't the push for this pill make that not possible, make abortions more common and more widespread?

LOCKHART: Well, I think you have got to separate the scientific debate -- which the FDA properly conducted -- and the research on this -- from a political debate. What the FDA did was do something -- was put a new drug on the market that was safe and promotes women's health. There is a political debate in this country. And it's an appropriate debate.

We ought to have the debate between people who take a pro-choice and a pro-life position. But that debate should not spill over into a scientific debate. And I think what's really troubling is -- are the people today -- I think Congressman J.C. Watts came out and said this -- that the next administration would only appoint an FDA commissioner based on a litmus test, a political litmus test on where they were on this drug.

That's not how an FDA should be run. We should be afraid when politicians start telling the scientists what to do.

MATALIN: Well -- and please don't imply that you're attributing what the Bush campaign might be saying by what some Republicans have said. But let me ask you about the political implications. LOCKHART: Well, I mentioned Congressman Watts because he came out and said that. I think Governor Bush came out with a statement today that tried to have it both ways. But eventually, he'll take a position.

MATALIN: No, he didn't try to have it both ways. He said this pill will produce more widespread and common abortions. But let me ask you about the political debate. The FDA has been struggling for 12 years to get this on the market. Now, five days from the first debate, a very, very controversial political issue -- you couldn't put -- with all the power the president has, couldn't put off the approval of this pill until after the election, so we might have some chance at a debate that is not so acerbic?

LOCKHART: This -- I mean, this debate could have been solved during the last presidency of President Bush, but he didn't want to have a scientific debate. He chose to play politics. This was a scientific decision. I think Dr. Henney did this in an appropriate and deliberate way. An I think if we had tried to time this in a way that had anything to do with politics, we would be rightly criticized.

The White House had nothing do with this. This was done at the FDA.

PRESS: Joe, there were serious charges leveled at the White House today -- what's new, perhaps. This concerns the so-called mole in one of the campaigns. For everybody who hasn't been following this, a tape of George W. Bush rehearsing for the debates shows up in the office of Tom Downey, who is helping Al Gore get ready for the debate.

LOCKHART: Right.

PRESS: Downey turns the tape over to the FBI. The FBI is now conducting an investigation. Karen Hughes, the spokesperson for the Bush campaign, today came very close -- if not didn't get there -- to accusing the FBI and the Clinton administration of playing politics with this investigation.

Here's what she said, if I may just quote Karen Hughes -- so I'm not putting words in her mouth -- quote -- "It's wrong and inappropriate for federal law enforcement officials out of Washington, presumably officials connected with the Clinton administration, to play politics with this."

Did you sic the FBI on George W. Bush's campaign?

LOCKHART: Absolutely not. And let me make a couple points here. I think Ms. Hughes is the going to learn, as she gathers more experience, about how careful she needs to be about making charges like that. And let me make a second point, which is: What planet is she from?

Where has she been living the last four years? The idea that somehow the FBI is out there trying to do political work for this administration, which newspapers has she been reading and which leaks has she missed? I -- you know, it's absurd to say. And I think it demonstrates -- you find these sort of absurd things and these phony issues when campaigns are flailing around a little bit, and they don't feel like the issues are working for them.

And I that's why you find Karen Hughes coming out every day making charge after charge.

PRESS: This may not be fair, but I'm going ask anyhow. When I first met you, Joe, you were working ago at the Democratic National Committee. I believe you were working in opposition research. You certainly had some connection to it. How -- so you've been in campaigns.

LOCKHART: Sure.

PRESS: And you've probably enjoyed the game as well as anybody.

LOCKHART: Absolutely.

PRESS: How do you think this tape got to Tom Downey? Who did it?

LOCKHART: I don't have the slightest idea. I don't know why anyone would do this. I think what's forgotten in here is how properly Tom Downey acted. He took the thing and got rid of it, because anything he had done with it would have -- would, I think, blown up rightfully in their face.

And who did it? Who knows? But you know what, this campaign is about a lot more. So I think my answer is: Who cares?

MATALIN: Speaking of phony issues and attacking the FBI for political purposes: President Clinton has attacked the FBI and the Department of Justice for the Wen Ho Lee case. This man is a spy. He downloaded 50 years of nuclear secrets. He copied them. He won't tell us where all the copies are. And the president is crying crocodile tears for him.

Do you think he was a little precipitous in attacking his own Justice Department?

LOCKHART: No, I think -- No, I think we should look at what the president did say. First off, I don't know -- and I don't think anyone knows if this gentlemen is a spy. We do know now that he's a felon, because he's admitted to doing something that's very wrong. And he will have to face justice for that.

But I think the president indicated questions which I think a lot of Americans have on the issue of why, in the pre-trial period, did he have to be detained? Was -- why was he so dangerous that, on one day in a week, they said he couldn't get out, and three days later, they cut a deal with him? He raised questions on a very narrow part of this.

And I think Americans want an answer. And I think the attorney general is committed to giving the American public an answer.

MATALIN: Can I play for you something -- Senator Shelby, who was on CROSSFIRE last night, who sits on the Senate Intelligence Committee -- had to say about that very issue.

Senator Shelby here:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, CROSSFIRE) SEN. RICHARD SHELBY (R-AL), CHAIRMAN, INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: This was done on his watch, with his basic assent to what was going on. His national security adviser was in a meeting where they decided, with the attorney general, to go forward with this. And now I guess he's discovered gambling in "Casablanca."

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MATALIN: Why, Joe? Because he wasn't unaware.

LOCKHART: Well, let me talk about Senator Shelby, for a second. I'll take the specific point first. And Senator Shelby knows he's wrong there. He's playing politics. The meeting on December 4 at the White House was a meeting with the prosecutors and the national security team on a simple issue, which is: If we go forward, how will we handle the national security issues here?

How will we make sure we don't, in trying to get at secrets, give away secrets? It wasn't about giving assent to a prosecution. The Justice Department made the decision here. And they will -- I think, since they have found that he downloaded this, they have made the proper decision. But Senator Shelby has something to answer for -- and some of the media in this town -- and Congressman Cox.

Senator Shelby -- go back and look at his quotes from last year. He called this the worst intelligence breach of all time. It was a disaster, a crisis. The sky is falling. He whipped up anti-Chinese sentiment in this country. And now he's standing there saying something about being on his watch. He ought to go back to last year and put up some of those clips, because I think there are a lot of politicians in this town have a lot answering too.

And there's also members of the media. We've seen what the "New York Times" have done. And they have at least...

MATALIN: I just want to -- that charge of whipping Chinese sentiment there, you're saying -- that's a very bad accusation. That's the same thing you're accusing -- accusing Karen Hughes of doing. This is a horrible breach.

LOCKHART: Go back -- go back and look at what they said. And look at -- and put the clips up and play them for your viewers. And you'll find that they're singing a completely different tune now.

MATALIN: As is the president.

PRESS: Well...

LOCKHART: They jumped the gun on this. They whipped up a lot of hysteria. It was wrong then. They should -- they should come out now and now say: We made a mistake. We were wrong.

MATALIN: As should the president.

PRESS: As I asked him to do last night. LOCKHART: Well, what the president did, is the president said to the attorney general: I want answers. You need to look at this. And that's what's going to happen.

PRESS: All right, but I want to pick up on that point, because, I mean, Mary says he's a spy. I don't think we know whether he's a spy or not. Ninety percent, I've read, of what he downloaded is available on the Internet. And so my question is -- I was pleased to hear the president say that this guy had been mistreated, had been confined in prison before trial unnecessarily. But Joe, we knew that nine months ago, certainly knew it during that nine-month period. Why did it take so long...

LOCKHART: Well...

PRESS: ... for the president to speak out about this injustice?

LOCKHART: Listen, I think if the president had tried to weigh in on a prosecution while it was going on, you all would have screamed even louder than you're capable of screaming now. That would have been improper.

There were questions that the president had that I think we need to get answers to, but I don't think that -- I think it belittles this issue to say something like it's available on the Internet. I don't think we know that. What happened is he did something wrong. He wasn't supposed to do that, and he has pleaded guilty to a charge, and he will face the justice he deserves.

PRESS: All right. Now this is not the first major screw up we've seen from the FBI since Louis Freeh has been director. Remember the Waco cover-up of the tape that was hid for six years where they asked for the permission to use pyrotechnics and did even though they had denied it. And now you've got this thing where they refused to approve a wiretap for Wen Ho Lee in the beginning.

According to Department of Energy officials, the FBI dragged its heels for over a year when they first alerted them and now they bungled this prosecution, ended up, you know, basically letting him walk on just one charge. It all goes back to Louis Freeh. Does the president still have any confidence left in his FBI director, Louis Freeh?

LOCKHART: I think the president expressed, has expressed his views on that, and they haven't changed over the last few years.

PRESS: That means yes?

LOCKHART: I think his views were clear the last time he was asked about this.

MATALIN: He goes out fighting, dying -- to his dying moment as does the president. He goes out fighting. He has -- let's talk about energy a little bit. The ultimate politics -- that doesn't bother me that this administration would be political. What bothers me about the release is the -- the dangerousness of that precedent. That we -- those oil-producing nations can outwait us, they would outwait us if they -- and that's a dangerous precedent to set.

We could really end up with no reserves, which is what they were set there in the first place to do, with these oil-producing nations, Saddam Hussein in particular, who could really create a national security dilemma for us.

LOCKHART: Well, I think there was, and being part of it, there was a very deliberate and a long process looking at this, because I think you're right. This is a serious decision when we do something like draw down the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

But it was done in a way that looked at potential supply problems this winter, particularly with heating oil, and taking whatever precautionary steps we could. We need to worry about how people are going to get heating oil this winter. There are a lot of other issues. And I think if anybody has questions about whether this was the right choice, just look at all the G-7 finance ministers and the G-7 central bankers. That includes the chairman of the Federal Reserve here, Alan Greenspan, who put out a statement last week at their meeting in Prague saying this was the right thing to do.

MATALIN: Let me ask you about increasing domestic production, which would reduce our dependency on foreign oil and we'd be having a whole different discussion here. Do you really believe, does the president who is Mr. "Up With All the Technology," really believe that we cannot extract from our humongous reserves in ANWR in Alaska oil without hurting the environment? There is a technological way to do without hurting the flora and fauna, and he won't do it because the Democratic Party is captive...

LOCKHART: I -- first...

MATALIN: ... of the environmental extremists.

LOCKHART: Let me make a couple of points. One, I don't think that we're going to take the big oil companies' promise that they're not going to harm the environment. We've taken this position. I think most people support us on that.

But let's look at what the Congress has done, the people who go around flailing their arms saying, "No energy policy, no energy policy."

We have sent up year after year pieces of legislation, tax legislation that provide incentives for energy efficiency, things that are -- you can get off the shelf now. And for every dollar we've asked for we've gotten a dime back.

Now that prices have gone up, all of them have woken up and said: "What do we do? What do we do?" Well, the answer is right in front of them. We need to take these steps. They're important steps.

We can do things in the short term, but we're not going to solve this problem until we take steps to reduce our dependency on foreign oil. It's all right there.

Republicans have to stop protecting the special interests who don't like this legislation...

MATALIN: OK, unless you're going to the campaign next, you don't have to go there.

PRESS: Why not? The man speaks the true.

MATALIN: Do you think he really is going to miss all of this? Well, he probably will not miss some of this, but when we come back we'll ask him what he thinks the president will miss.

And you can weigh in on this too right at your computers. Here's tonight's poll: "What should President Clinton do after leaving office?"

Go to cnn.com/crossfire, and we'll have the results later in the show.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MATALIN: Welcome back to CROSSFIRE.

There's no place like home, especially if your home is the White House. He doesn't really live there, but the president's spokesman must give as much, if not more, time and emotional commitment to the first family as his own. The job is exhilarating, exhausting, and especially in this era, unpredictable.

Joining us tonight, outgoing White House spokesman Joe Lockhart looks back at his White House days and forward to a future in the real world -- Bill.

PRESS: Joe, in your job as press secretary, always willing to help out a member of the media who requests your help. You recently helped out "The New York Post" by releasing a certain photograph -- I think we'll see it here on the screen soon -- a photograph of a certain Senate candidate in New York shaking hands with a certain leader of the Palestinian state, formerly a terrorist.

My question to you, Joe, is if you could find and release that photo, why don't you release the photo of Bill Clinton shaking hands with Fidel Castro? I'd like to see it.

LOCKHART: Because it doesn't exist. There isn't a photo. The president saw the Cuban leader at the end of an event where they were walking out. The entire staff except for one person had left, including the official photographer. I'm not telling you I would release it. I'm just telling you it doesn't exist.

PRESS: Well, Joe, I know in the beginning when this -- first of all, I think you should have sat down and met with Fidel Castro. I'm glad he at least shook hands with him. Don't get me wrong.

But I remember in the beginning, when this incident was first reported, you said at first, as I believe, there wasn't a handshake. Later you had to correct yourself. I've never seen the president, as many times as I've been around him, where there wasn't a White House photographer right at his elbows snapping every shot. Are you sure there's not a photo there somewhere, Joe?

LOCKHART: I thought I was sure there wasn't a handshake, but then I checked with the right people and there was. But I checked, and there wasn't one. The people had left the room, and it was just a few of the leaders left. So we have some of these events that are leaders-only, and they only go in with their aides. And you know, I think if there was a photo people would be clamoring for it, and I would probably be struggling and would have to make a decision to release it or not. But it doesn't exist.

MATALIN: Clearly a vast left-wing conspiracy, no photo of the president shaking hands with another...

LOCKHART: It's vast and getting vaster.

MATALIN: Speaking of -- this has become part of your job. It shouldn't be. But while we're on the New York Senate campaign, 93 trips the first lady has made on the taxpayers' dollars, reimbursed 184,000, the legal 15 percent for a $1.3 million taxpayer bill. Yes, it is legal.

Is it right for the first lady to when it is not absolutely necessary -- we saw that when the vice president rushed back on a commercial flight to make some political votes -- is it right for her to spend that much of the taxpayers' dollars on this race?

LOCKHART: I think we've had a consensus in this country for some time based on some really terrible things that have happened to our leaders that we're going to do what we need to do to protect the president and his family. And I thing it's frankly pathetic that people are trying to make a political issue out of this. We've done this for first ladies, presidents going back over decades, and the fact that Rick Lazio and his campaign can't come up with something better than this, can't put forward an idea to actually help New Yorkers. And I think it's just pathetic.

MATALIN: He's not doing it; I'm doing it. Call me pathetic, not him.

PRESS: All right. You're pathetic.

MATALIN: Let me ask -- a last question for Joe. And if you think making political issues out of everything, as this administration has done for eight years, then we're all pathetic. Let me -- my final question for you as you go on -- I think it's something we agree on. The president said on the campaign trail that the coverage of this particular presidential election -- let me quote him directly -- was a bunch of bull and hooey.

Truly, greater substance on this campaign, greater differences, greater impact than any -- almost since 1980, and less substantive coverage. You've been at the buffer zone between the media and the press. They blame -- the press rather and the politicians, who blame each other for the diminution of substance. Whose fault is it?

LOCKHART: Well, I can understand if people in America think they're watching an old episode of "Animal Kingdom." It's rats, moles and dogs.

(LAUGHTER)

But guess what, we have crucial, you know, monumental decisions about what we're going to do in the future, and George Bush and Al Gore have radically different ideas about how to do that.

I actually think that Al Gore's ideas are much more sound, but you know what, there are differences, and they're being missed for things that are absolutely trivial. And whose fault is it? You know, who knows, but I'll tell you something: The people who are losing are the voters.

PRESS: Joe, just less than a minute left, I just want to ask you about something you said today, sort of a parting shot. If I can quote you quickly: "Reporters want to stand out, and rather than getting the facts they want to show how smart they are, and that's a real problem in journalism."

I guess it's a compound question quickly: I mean, how do you feel you've been treated? And are you really saying that reporters just stand there and make it up?

LOCKHART: Oh, no, I don't think so. I think what we have here, to provide some context for that, is we've got a culture now that rewards in the media those who can say the most extreme things. There's a lot of people -- there are a lot of people competing to get out and say things and get on television and get in the news. And there seems to be now this premium on someone who will make the most outrageous charge and who will say the most extreme thing.

And I think that politicians have succumbed to that to a bit. I think reporters have succumbed to that more than they should. I think the vast majority of reporters are still out there just trying to get it right, doing their job.

But overall, I think we see -- in the campaign coverage this year, you see something where something's lacking. It's something we need to do better.

PRESS: Joe, thank you very much for coming in to CROSSFIRE. You do us an honor by coming here. And wherever you end up, good luck.

LOCKHART: Thank you.

PRESS: We know you'll do well.

LOCKHART: Great, thank you.

MATALIN: Great job as always.

PRESS: Joe Lockhart, press secretary. Tomorrow is the last day. Mary Matalin and I will continue, and we'll have our closing comments and the poll results -- coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PRESS: All right. As if presidential debates weren't enough, don't miss CROSSFIRE all next week. We're going to be live on the road before a studio audience at George Washington University.

MATALIN: And think you're up for a good debate? Then go online right after this show and test your political knowledge against me at cnn.com/crossfire.

And here are the line -- on-the-line results you've been waiting for. Earlier we asked what should President Clinton do after leaving office: House husband beat out Hollywood executive, running for another office, and university president. It was 51 percent.

And you know, I think he's really demonstrated how particularly good he would be as a house husband. He could stay there all day watching soap operas, eating bon-bons.

PRESS: Whatever -- whatever he's going to do, I don't think house husband is going to be his first choice. But I have got to say, you know, you and I have both seen a lot of good presidential secretaries.

MATALIN: Yes.

PRESS: I think Joe Lockhart is right up there with the best. He's...

MATALIN: Trained by the best, Mike McCurry, who kind of followed in the footsteps of Marlin Fitzwater. It's a really, really tough job.

PRESS: It is, and he did it well.

From the left, I'm Bill Press. Good night for CROSSFIRE.

MATALIN: And from the right, I'm Mary Matalin. Join us again tomorrow for more CROSSFIRE.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com

 Search   


Back to the top  © 2001 Cable News Network. All Rights Reserved.
Terms under which this service is provided to you.
Read our privacy guidelines.