(http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Press-Conference-by-the-President-6-23-09/)
His first question from a reporter was on Iran and where Obama draws the line on his offer for talking with Iran. When queried as to whether there should be consequences for what's happened so far in Iran, Obama says, "Since we're on Iran, I know Nico Pitney is here from Huffington Post."
THE PRESIDENT: So let me open it up for questions, and I'll start with you,
Jennifer.
Q Thank you, Mr. President. Your administration has said that
the offer to talk to Iran's leaders remains open. Can you say if that's still
so, even with all the violence that has been committed by the government against
the peaceful protesters? And if it is, is there any red line that your
administration won't cross where that offer will be shut off?
THE
PRESIDENT: Well, obviously what's happened in Iran is profound. And we're still
waiting to see how it plays itself out. My position coming into this office has
been that the United States has core national security interests in making sure
that Iran doesn't possess a nuclear weapon and it stops exporting terrorism
outside of its borders.
We have provided a path whereby Iran can reach
out to the international community, engage, and become a part of international
norms. It is up to them to make a decision as to whether they choose that path.
What we've been seeing over the last several days, the last couple of weeks,
obviously is not encouraging, in terms of the path that this regime may choose
to take. And the fact that they are now in the midst of an extraordinary debate
taking place in Iran may end up coloring how they respond to the international
community as a whole.
We are going to monitor and see how this plays
itself out before we make any judgments about how we proceed. But just to
reiterate, there is a path available to Iran in which their sovereignty is
respected, their traditions, their culture, their faith is respected, but one in
which they are part of a larger community that has responsibilities and operates
according to norms and international rules that are universal. We don't know how
they're going to respond yet, and that's what we're waiting to see.
Q So
should there be consequences for what's happened so far?
THE PRESIDENT:
I think that the international community is, as I said before, bearing witness
to what's taking place. And the Iranian government should understand that how
they handle the dissent within their own country, generated indigenously,
internally, from the Iranian people, will help shape the tone not only for
Iran's future but also its relationship to other countries.
Since we're
on Iran, I know Nico Pitney is here from Huffington Post.
Q Thank you,
Mr. President.
THE PRESIDENT: Nico, I know that you, and all across the
Internet, we've been seeing a lot of reports coming directly out of Iran. I know
that there may actually be questions from people in Iran who are communicating
through the Internet. Do you have a question?
Q Yes, I did, I wanted to
use this opportunity to ask you a question directly from an Iranian. We
solicited questions last night from people who are still courageous enough to be
communicating online, and one of them wanted to ask you this: Under which
conditions would you accept the election of Ahmadinejad? And if you do accept it
without any significant changes in the conditions there, isn't that a betrayal
of what the demonstrators there are working towards?
THE PRESIDENT:
Well, look, we didn't have international observers on the ground. We can't say
definitively what exactly happened at polling places throughout the country.
What we know is that a sizeable percentage of the Iranian people themselves,
spanning Iranian society, consider this election illegitimate. It's not an
isolated instance -- a little grumbling here or there. There is significant
questions about the legitimacy of the election.
And so ultimately the
most important thing for the Iranian government to consider is legitimacy in the
eyes of its own people, not in the eyes of the United States. And that's why
I've been very clear: Ultimately, this is up to the Iranian people to decide who
their leadership is going to be and the structure of their government.
What we can do is to say unequivocally that there are sets of
international norms and principles about violence, about dealing with peaceful
dissent, that spans cultures, spans borders. And what we've been seeing over the
Internet and what we've been seeing in news reports violates those norms and
violates those principles.
I think it is not too late for the Iranian
government to recognize that there is a peaceful path that will lead to
stability and legitimacy and prosperity for the Iranian people. We hope they
take it."
Today, on Meet The Press (June 28 2009), David Gregory interviewed David Axelrod.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31584983/ns/meet_the_press/page/2/displaymode/1098/
The topic was a possible change in foreign policy regarding Iran. Near the end of the interview, Gregory played a vidoetaped portion of Tuesday's press conference:
(Videotape, Tuesday)
PRES. OBAMA: Since we're on Iran, I know Nico
Pitney is here from Huffington Post.
MR. NICO PITNEY: Thank you, Mr.
President.
PRES. OBAMA: Nico, I know that you and all across the
Internet we've been seeing a lot of reports coming directly out of Iran. I know
that there may actually be questions from people in Iran who are communicating
through the Internet. What--do you have a question?
(End videotape)
Gregory then asked "Did the White House coordinate with a reporter about a question to be asked at a press conference?"
At first, Axelrod said the White House didn't coordinate with the reporter about a question, that they looking for a way to get questions from within Iran. Gregory pressed further with saying that they talked to a reporter beforehand and asked the reporter to ask a question from Iran at the press conference.
Axelrod tried to sidestep the question with a nonaffirmative-affirmative, saying, "We didn't coordinate with, with him about what was asked. ...We had no idea what he was going to ask."
If you have paid attention to anything coming from the Administration, then you know that this format of dancing around the wording of an answer is standard for them. Gregory pursued the topic with,
But you coordinated with him about, about that subject of a question beforehand".
to which Axelrod responded,
"He was a, he was a, he was a, he was a vehicle to get questions from Iran asked at this press conference, and that we thought was not only appropriate but, but necessary.".
When Gregory asked him if he would do it again, Axelrod said he has no problem with what was done.
As I see it: the Administration sees no problem in prompting reporters to ask questions they want to answer. Most of us who have watched the decline in true journalism the last 10 years really shouldn't be surprised that it is considered appropriate to tell reporters what sort of questions you want to be asked. Maybe for the next 'press conference', the Administration will have the whole question and answer session typed up and thrown up on the teleprompters for the reporters to just read on cue.
I won't be surprised when what happened begins to get noticed. And there will probably be the customary '..he mis-spoke when he said...what he meant to say was...' statement released sometime next week. It won't change the fact that the Administration prompts reporters - regardless of how they word it.
No comments:
Post a Comment