Press Briefings

Via Teleconference

1:47 P.M. EDT

MODERATOR:  Hey, everyone.  Thanks for joining.  As always, sorry we’re a little bit late.  Kirby has a few words here at the top, and then we’ll get through as many questions as we can. 

MR. KIRBY:  Hey.  Good afternoon, everybody. 

So, just real quick on Moldova, if you’ll indulge me.  In recent months, the U.S. government, Moldovan President Sandu, the Moldovan security services, and other allies and partners have warned that Russia is seeking to undermine Moldovan democratic institutions in the lead-up to the presidential election and referendum on Moldova’s EU membership. 

Now, with Moldova’s election just days away, we remain confident in our earlier assessment that Russia is working actively to undermine Moldova’s election and its European integration. 

Today, I’m here to reaffirm that the United States and its allies stand shoulder-to-shoulder with all Moldovans in their efforts to uphold the integrity and the security of their elections.  The U.S. government and the government of Moldova have worked hand-in-hand to expose Russian influence efforts and sanction those involved.

Since September, when we last spoke publicly about Russian efforts to undermine Moldova’s election, we have become aware that Russia is spending millions of dollars to support its preferred candidates.  In fact, in the last several months, Moscow has dedicated millions of dollars to influencing Moldova’s presidential election.  We assess that this money has gone toward financing its preferred parties and spreading disinformation on social media in favor of their campaigns.  The Russian state has authorized this effort to spend significant sums of money to influence the election. 

Additionally, known Russian influence actor Ilan Shor has invested tens of millions of dollars per month into non-profit organizations that spread narratives about the election that are in line with Russian interests.  These nonprofits have promoted pro-Russian content on traditional media, on local websites, and, of course, through social media applications as well.

As we’ve said before, we continue to have full confidence in Moldova’s ability to manage these foreign influence threats.  We are taking a range of measures to support those efforts.  We have shared the information outlined above with our Moldovan partners, of course, so that they can further investigate, further attempt to thwart and disrupt Russia’s plans, and, again, preserve their democratic institutions. 

Since Moldova’s 2021 elections, the United States has used its sanction authority to target Russia’s malign influence campaigns in Moldova. 

In 2022, Treasury designated Mr. Shor and his network of cronies, Russian businessman Igor Chayka and his Russian enablers. 

In 2023, Treasury imposed additional sanctions on seven leading members of a Russian intelligence-linked project. 

Most recently, in September 2024, the United States imposed sanctions on other entities and individuals for attempting to influence the Moldovan election.  So that’s just last month.

Our allies have implemented sanctions as well to support Moldova.  The United States has partnered with the Moldovan government, private companies, and others to offer critical expertise and technical assistance to bolster Moldova’s cybersecurity across the government, across critical infrastructure, and, of course, through independent media. 

So, look, our message today is very clear: The United States will continue to support Moldova and the Moldovan people, and to expose and counter Russian efforts to undermine Moldovan democracy. 

With that, we can take some questions.

MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Our first question will go to Aamer with the AP. 

Q    Hey.  Thank you both.  It’s nice to hear you back, John.  I hope your family and loved ones in South Florida are doing okay. 

I wanted to ask you about Secretary Austin and Secretary Blinken’s letter calling for the potential reassessment of military assistance to Israel if food and other aid to Gaza is not increased within a month.  Can you talk about why they saw the need to send this letter now?  And what does it say, that this had to be put into a letter form, about the relationship?  And can you explain the rationale in also giving Israel 30 days before facing potential consequences?

MR. KIRBY:  Yeah, thanks, Aamer.  And thanks for the kind words.  I appreciate that very much. 

So, look, I can confirm that Secretary Austin and Secretary Blinken co-signed the letter you’re talking about, and it was sent to their Israeli counterparts. 

I would note that the Biden-Harris administration made a similar request for concrete measures with respect to humanitarian assistance back in April through a similar form, a letter.  And that letter did receive a constructive response from the Israelis. 

This particular letter that we’re talking about now follows a relatively recent decrease in humanitarian assistance reaching the people of Gaza, which is obviously something we’ve been very, very concerned about since the beginning of the conflict and through which we aim to try to get more concrete measures in place to increase that humanitarian assistance. 

So the question on why and when: Again, because there’s been a decrease in humanitarian assistance and it matters to us is the “why.”  When?  Why now?  Because, again, tied to a recent decrease.  But it’s not like we haven’t communicated these concerns in writing before to the Israelis.  We have.  And, you know, we’ll continue to stay on this very, very important topic.

As for the 30 days, I would refer you to the State Department to speak to the timeframe itself.  I really don’t have a good answer on why it’s exactly 30 days.  The only thing I would address with respect to that particular question is just the sense of urgency that we all have here about the desperate need of the people of Gaza for this humanitarian assistance.  So, when we take the step of talking to our Israeli counterparts orally or in writing about this, there’s obviously a deep sense of urgency about it.  But why 30 days in particular?  I’d have to refer you to State.

MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Our next question will go to Trevor with Reuters.

Q    Hey, thanks for doing this, John.  Really appreciate it.  Just one more on the letter.  Could you talk about whether the President was aware of the letter and signed off on it?

And then, on India, could you talk a little bit about what intelligence the United States has about whether the Modi government has been involved in these extrajudicial killings and assassination attempts?  And what concerns are there about Sikhs being targeted on U.S. soil at this point?

MR. KIRBY:  Thanks, Trevor.  On the first question, the President has been very consistent in expressing our concerns to the Israelis about humanitarian assistance getting into Gaza, and certainly he’s mindful of our efforts to communicate those concerns to the Israelis, whether that communication is, as I said, done orally or in writing. 

So this is not an issue, this is not an effort, this is not an initiative that the President was at all surprised by.  It’s very much in keeping with the communications that he has had with Prime Minister Netanyahu and we’ve all had across the government with the Israelis.

On your second question, I would just say a couple of things.  One, the Indians have an inquiry committee that is looking into these issues.  That committee is visiting here in the United States today to deal with the U.S. case specifically.  I can’t speak to the case in Canada, and I wouldn’t speak for the Canadians one way or another. 

But we have expressed our deep concerns about this to our Indian counterparts.  They have expressed to us that they are taking it seriously.  The fact that they sent an inquiry committee here I think demonstrates that they are taking this seriously.  It is something they absolutely need to take seriously. 

But beyond that, I really can’t say much given that it’s an ongoing case, and the Justice Department is really the best place to go for that.

MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Our next question will go to MJ with CNN.

Q    Hey, John.  Thank you.  Two Israel questions for you.  First, in terms of both the potential timing and the contours of Israel’s retaliation against Iran, is Israel sensitive to the upcoming U.S. presidential election?  You know, have they indicated to U.S. officials in any way that they would not want whatever actions they take to affect the politics here?

MR. KIRBY:  Hey, MJ.  I’m going to let the Israelis speak to any prospective operations they may or may not conduct, and therefore would let them speak to, you know, issues of timing, scope, scale, size, that kind of thing.  That’s not really for me to get into. 

And as for their decision-making process and whether and to what degree it’s tied to our election cycle here, again, I wouldn’t be qualified to speak to that one way or another. 

Again, whether and to what degree Israel conducts any kind of response is really for them to speak to and not us, and we need to be very circumspect about not inserting ourselves into that kind of operational decision-making by the Israelis. 

Q    Okay.  My second question was on the decision to deploy a THAAD system, along with U.S. personnel, to Israel.  Was that a direct —

MODERATOR:  Sorry, MJ, you got cut off there.  Do you want to try again?

Q    Hi.  Can you hear me?

MODERATOR:  Yeah. 

Q    I don’t know if you heard the first part of my question, but just the decision to deploy a THAAD system to Israel.  I was asking whether that was a direct result of certain assurances that the Prime Minister offered to the President about how Israel would conduct itself going forward, whether it’s related to Iran or otherwise.  Did that come from the conversation that they most recently had last week?

MR. KIRBY:  Well, you know, we issued a readout of that

conversation, and I’m not going to go beyond that one way or another.  We’re not going to get into the details of the specific back-and-forth beyond what we issued in a readout.  So that’s sort of point one.

And point two that I think is really critical to make is that it’s not the first time that a THAAD has been deployed into the region.  We deployed one after the October 7th attacks in the region specifically. 

It’s also not the first time that a THAAD has gone to Israel.  I mean, back in 2019, we sent one there for some training and exercise purposes.  So that’s — it’s not a completely unprecedented move.

But the main point I want to make is that it is very much in keeping with our commitment to help Israel defend itself.  It’s commensurate with putting fighter jets in the air to knock out drones and missiles.  It’s commensurate with deploying guided missile destroyers that are ballistic missile defense capable in and around the waters off of Israel.  So it’s very much in keeping with the President’s strong desire that, from an air defense perspective, our ally has what they need to defend themselves against clearly a very real, present, viable threat by Iran and its proxies.

MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Our next question will go to Weijia with CBS.

Q    Thank you, Sam.  And thank you, Admiral.  So, days before that conversation between the President and the Prime Minister, President Biden told us that they would speak after Israel made a decision about how to respond.  So, during that phone call, did Netanyahu brief President Biden on his intentions with how to respond?  And did the President offer any guidance with regard to how to respond?  For example, not to attack nuclear sites or oil refineries, et cetera.

MR. KIRBY:  Yeah, I do appreciate the question, and it’s similar to MJ’s, and I hope you’ll appreciate that I’m simply not going to get into the specific back-and-forth between the Prime Minister and the President.  We issued a readout, and I’m not going to go beyond that, and certainly not going to detail operational discussions one way or another. 

Q    Okay —

MR. KIRBY:  If, when, how — wait a second.  If, when, and how Israel decides to conduct some kind of counterstrike, that’s going to have to be for them to speak to: how they do it, if they do it, when and in what manner they do it.  That’s not something that we’re going to speak to here.  And we’re certainly not going to get ahead of any of that operational decision-making and characterize it publicly. 

The President and the Prime Minister had, as they have had since the beginning of this conflict, another constructive but very candid conversation, and we stand by the need for Israel to defend itself.  They live in a tough neighborhood.  Got very viable threats against them; we saw that on the 1st of October.  They absolutely have a right and responsibility to defend themselves.  And they need to know, as I think they do, that the United States will continue to do what we can to help them — help them in that regard. 

Q    Thank you.  And just because we haven’t had a chance to talk to you since the report came out, have you ever heard the President characterize Prime Minister Netanyahu with flowery language that was reported by Bob Woodward?

MR. KIRBY:  I’m not going to get into the details that — you know, that are written about in the book.  I would just tell you, as I’ve said many, many times before, these are two guys that know each other very, very well, going on four decades now.  They are able to be very frank and forthright with one another.  And they, frankly, I think, appreciate the fact that they can speak plainly to one another.  I’d leave it at that. 

MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Our next question will go to David with the New York Times.

Q    Thanks, John, and hope that all is well in your house in Florida.

There have been a lot of reports lately, most of them coming from the Ukrainians, a little bit from the South Koreans, both of whom are (inaudible) interested in this, about North Korean troops who are being used by the Russians in the war in Ukraine.  Should be a significant change in the North Korean approach to this.  Do you have any independent confirmation that, in fact, the North Koreans have moved from just being a supplier of missiles and other weaponry to a supplier of actual troops?

MR. KIRBY:  Yeah, David — no, we cannot independently confirm those reports.  That said, those reports are concerning to us.  This idea of North Korean soldiers fighting on behalf of Russia, we believe, if true, would mark a significant increase in the DPRK and the Russia defense relationship, a relationship I would remind that we’ve been talking about now for many months as burgeoning and growing and deepening.  And this, if true, would represent a significant deepening of that relationship. 

It would also, if true, David, indicate what I think can only be classified as a new level of desperation by Putin as he continues to try to make progress in Ukraine. 

And I think it’s — you know, again, I’m not confirming the reporting, but I think it’s important to put it in some context.  I mean, if it’s true, it’s coming at a time when Russia continues to suffer extraordinary — in fact, I’d go so far as to say historic levels of casualties in a modern conflict.  I mean, more than a thousand casualties per day just in recent months. 

So it would be important, again, if true, to keep it in that context. 

Q    John, I understand why you said “if true,” but has anybody been tasked to go, given the magnitude of the import here, to go figure this out?  Because (inaudible).

MR. KIRBY:  Yeah, look, I mean, the reports are concerning, so I don’t think it should surprise anybody that we’re obviously looking into those reports to see if it’s accurate.  Of course, we’re going to do that.

MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Our next question will go to Andrea Mitchell with NBC.  Andrea, you should be able to unmute yourself. 

Q    Hi, John.  Let me join in saying that we’re hoping that your family is well and that you’ve done what you can in this terrible situation.  We’re sorry for what you’ve been going through, and thanks for doing this today. 

Let me ask you about Lebanon and Hezbollah.  Could you talk about the complaints by the United Nations about UNIFIL, but the strong complaints from Israel that UNIFIL permitted — which is unarmed — but permitted Hezbollah to store weapons in tunnels right under their noses in what should have been — what was supposed to be a buffer zone, and whether there is now an opening for the U.S. to try to, with Hezbollah weakened, restore or help the Lebanese restore their independence from Hezbollah, in terms of their leadership and the Lebanese army?

MR. KIRBY:  Just a couple of points on that.  First of all, the U.N., through UNIFIL, plays an important role, a peacekeeping role in Lebanon, and we respect that role.  We want everybody to respect that role, including Israel. 

And I think — you know, as we’ve said, we’ve told Israel very directly that we oppose their near-daily strikes here in densely populated areas in Beirut, and we understand that they’re conducting targeted operations that are designed to go after Hezbollah infrastructure.  And we recognize that they have a right to do that, but they also have a commensurate responsibility to do it in a way that doesn’t threaten the lives of civilians or U.N. peacekeepers or, quite frankly, members of the Lebanese Armed Forces who have suffered some casualties here.  It’s unacceptable, and we’ve pressed the Israelis for more details about that. 

I’m in possession of no information that confirms that the U.N. was witting in terms of what Hezbollah infrastructure was nested beneath their buildings.  I can’t confirm that particular allegation.  But, again, it doesn’t even — you know, I mean, again, I can’t confirm that, but it doesn’t diminish our concerns about the lives and livelihoods of U.N. peacekeepers.

Q    But can you — the U.S. is not going to challenge the evidence that Israel has provided of weaponry being stored in tunnels and homes along their border, are they?

And secondly, do you see opportunities here, with Hezbollah as diminished in its leadership, to have a diplomatic initiative, a U.S. diplomatic initiative, which we’ve been seeing evidence of, to try to help the LAF stand up?

MR. KIRBY:  I mean, I don’t want to get the cart before the horse here, so a couple of things. 

One, certainly we’re not challenging the idea that Hezbollah, like Hamas, uses hidden facilities underground for storing arms and ammunition or for facilitating the freedom of movement of their fighters.  No challenge to that allegation. 

On your second point, all I can say at this point is that we continue to believe that a diplomatic initiative is important to pursue to bring the conflict to an end — yes, up there in the north as well — and to try to prevent further escalation of the conflict in the region. 

So I don’t want to get into the guts of what that diplomacy is considering in terms of whose role and how it would be facilitated, just except to say that we continue to support a diplomatic initiative and a diplomatic resolution to this. 

Q    Thank you.

MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Our next question will go to Nick with PBS.

Q    Hey, John.  Thanks very much.  And let me add my words about your house and everything that you’ve been through.  Thank you. 

If you’ll forgive me, three quick ones.  Just to put a point on the NSM-20 conversation at the top, because we saw language from Secretary Austin and Blinken about this, is the President willing to cut off some weapons to Israel, as U.S. law would dictate, if indeed the U.S. decided that Israel was arbitrarily blocking U.S. aid into Gaza?  That’s number one.

MR. KIRBY:  Yeah, Nick, look, I don’t want to get into speculating here on a hypothetical.  We have made clear our concerns to Israel since the beginning of the conflict about the way in which they prosecute their operations, about the need to get humanitarian assistance in and to increase that flow.  I mean, heck, that’s one of the reasons why we were pushing so hard for, you know, a six-month ceasefire so that we could supervise or help — I shouldn’t say “supervise” — help facilitate a surge of humanitarian assistance into Gaza.  So it’s deeply concerning to us that there has been a decrease in that assistance.

And the letter just simply restates what we made clear to the Israelis back in April in a similar letter, which is, you know, we have to follow the law of the land here.  We don’t want to have to have any kind of an impact on our assistance to Israel, which is why, as friends and allies do, we have those kinds of frank and honest conversations, and we lay bare our forthright concerns about humanitarian assistance.

Q    And then, on Iran, has the U.S. communicated to Iran that if Israel only attacks military targets, this should be the end of this round?  And have the steps the U.S. taken — including the THAAD, including sanctioning Iran, including trying to get a new Lebanese president — have those helped convince the Israelis to get the conversation about the nature of their response closer to (inaudible) the U.S.?

MR. KIRBY:  Look, our deployment of the THAAD, as I said earlier, is very much in keeping with our commitment to Israel’s defense.  That’s what it’s all about.  I’m not going to get into direct communications or indirect communications that we might have with other parties in the region, to include Iran, except to say that we have spoken in deed, not just in word, about how important it is that Israel is able to defend itself and how critical we take our obligations to help them in their defense.  And there’s little doubt that the Iranians know how seriously we take that commitment and that requirement.  But I don’t think it’d be useful for me one way or the other to get into the specifics of the diplomacy.

MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Our next question will go to Alex Ward with the Wall Street Journal. 

Q    Thank you, John.  A couple questions.  Just want to be sure about this letter, and then I’ll move on to another subject.  But is the intent of this letter to signal that Israel actually is at risk of losing military aid funding?  Like, is that an actual credible threat that is now on the table thanks to this letter?

MR. KIRBY:  The letter was not meant as a threat.  The letter was simply meant to reiterate the sense of urgency we feel and the seriousness with which we feel it, about the need for an increase — a dramatic increase in humanitarian assistance.  And that’s what you can do with your friend.  That’s what you can do with your ally.  And it’s not the first time we’ve communicated that to Israel, but hopefully we won’t have to communicate it again.

Q    Okay, thanks.  Appreciate that.  And then one quick follow-up on that, and then I’ll move to the last subject.

You mentioned before you couldn’t confirm the 30 days.  Does that mean that was a solely State Department decision not coordinated with the NSC?

MR. KIRBY:  No, no, no, no.  What I said was I can’t speak to why the 30 days.  I wasn’t separating myself from the 30 days.  It’s in the letter.  I just don’t know, you know, why that timeframe was chosen, and I’d refer you to the State Department to speak to that with more specificity.  That’s just really a reflection of my ignorance, not necessarily any kind of talking point.

Q    Gotcha.  And then quickly, on this India inquiry.  You mentioned that the Indians have said that they are serious about this.  What have they done to prove to you and the administration that they are serious about this inquiry and that it isn’t just a box-checking exercise where there won’t be any accountability in the end?  What specifically have they done to show you that they are serious about this, especially after what we’ve seen in Canada, where they — clearly, the Canadians are — don’t seem to believe that there’s a lot of credibility in their process?

MR. KIRBY:  Well, look, they got their inquiry committee here today.  We take that as a sign that they’re taking this seriously.  Sending over a team here today to talk to the Justice Department to glean and to learn perspectives from us about the U.S. case specifically — can’t talk about the Canada one, of course — but we take that as a step in the right direction. 

And I would also point to conversations that we’ve had with Indian officials at various levels, including at the leader level, about our deep concern over this and how that’s been reflected in those conversations. 

But we’re going to monitor this going forward, Alex.  We’re going to stay in close touch with them as they move forward with their own inquiry, and we’ll be watching closely.  But thus far, in the main, it appears to us that they are taking this seriously.

MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Our next question will go to Akayla with Bloomberg.

Q    Hey, John.  We’ve reported that Biden is traveling to Germany this week.  Can you preview that trip at all?  And can you speak to why Angola is no longer part of that trip?

MR. KIRBY:  I can’t confirm any travel for the President later this week, but I would just say stay tuned.  There’s not a lot I can do to answer that question today.

MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Our next question will go to Asma with NPR.

Q    Hey.  Thanks, John.  An iteration — I realized that my question was just actually asked, but I guess I have a quick follow-up here on the letter.  We saw the VP yesterday — or the other day tweet out that the U.N. was reporting no food had entered northern Gaza in nearly two weeks.  I just want to understand: Is that the administration’s assessment as well that no food has been able at all to enter in two weeks? 

And then, if I can go back to the 30-day timeframe then.  I guess that seems like an awfully long time then, from two weeks plus 30 days, for food to come in and for folks to survive.  So I just wanted to understand that timeframe and what you all are seeing. 

MR. KIRBY:  I’m going to take your first question, Asma.  I don’t know the answer to that.  And so, rather than guess, I’ll ask the team to go look at that and get back to you on the delivery of food.

And again, on the 30 days, I truly just don’t know.  I’m not trying to be cute with you all.  I just don’t know why the 30-day limit was put in that letter.  You know, and that’s really a question I think better put to the State Department, Secretary Blinken and his team, about that particular point of the letter. 

The only thing that I would add, which doesn’t necessarily answer your second question but I do want to foot-stomp, again, is that we all have a sense of urgency here.  So while I can’t speak to 30 days, it’s not as if our messages to the Israelis are, you know, “You can do nothing for 30 days.”  We want humanitarian assistance increased now.  The letter follows a marked decrease in humanitarian assistance, which has us concerned and which prompted the expression of those concerns in writing. 

We want that situation turned around now, as soon as possible.  You know, yesterday would have been a better day to increase humanitarian assistance into Gaza.  So there’s a keen sense of urgency throughout the administration on this. 

I just — again, I can’t speak to that particular point in the letter.  I apologize — I probably should have anticipated that question before the gaggle, but I just don’t have the context for it, and the State Department’s probably the best place to go.

MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Our next question will go to Jihan with The National.

Q    Thank you, John.  I have a question about the letter again.  Is this concern over the entry of humanitarian aid — is there, with it, a concern for the wider conduct of the Israeli army in Gaza?  We saw over the weekend the burning of a tent camp.  There’s an image of a man on an IV burning to death.  Have you seen those images? 

And like I said, is there concern, with the no access to food to Gaza, that there’s also the targeting of civilians in Gaza that should perhaps not happen? 

MR. KIRBY:  Of course there’s concern about destruction of civilian infrastructure and civilian casualties.  And, yes, I’ve seen some of those images, and they’re ghastly.  They’re deeply troubling.  And we have asked the Israelis urgently, over the weekend, for more details about those operations specifically.  But, of course, there’s deep concern about that. 

The letter itself — I mean, again, I’d refer you to State and DOD.  It’s Secretary Austin and Secretary Blinken who signed that letter.  But as you, I’m sure, have read the letter, it’s primarily focused on humanitarian assistance.  But that doesn’t mean that we aren’t deeply concerned as well about civilian casualties and damage to civilian infrastructure in general.  As I said earlier, the way in which the Israelis prosecute their operations matters greatly to us.

Q    And so, what measures will there be in order to curb that sort of — that behavior?  I mean, is there also a time limit to the target- — to stopping the targeting of civilians, or is it a separate conversation?  I mean, in what context is that conversation being had?

MR. KIRBY:  Look, I think I would add, you know, if you look at the letter — in the last paragraph of the letter, it talks about civilian harm mitigation and setting up a channel between the United States and Israel to — a channel that had been agreed to previously, and that still has not been put in place, to mitigate civilian harm.  So, no civilian casualty should be accepted, and we aren’t.

Q    Finally, on Lebanon, is there concern now that humanitarian aid —

MR. KIRBY:  You asked how long is it going to — we don’t want to see any civilian casualties.  So that is a perennial concern here with respect to this conflict, and it’s why, again, we’ve been working very closely with our Israeli counterparts to see what can be done to ensure greater precision and discriminant targeting, to improve deconfliction with aid workers on the ground and other civilian institutions on the ground, and to, again, try to develop civilian harm mitigation measures that we can help our Israeli counterparts develop and deploy.

Q    Yeah, is there a concern now that humanitarian aid and food will also now not be accelerated in Lebanon?

MR. KIRBY:  That remains a concern.  I mean, one of the reasons why we’ve been trying to prevent escalation and to bring that conflict up in the north to an end as well is because of the effect that it’s already having on the Lebanese population who have fallen victim to this conflict between Hezbollah and Israel at no fault of their own. 

So, yes, that remains a concern.  And that’s why, again, we’ve been working so hard diplomatically to try to find a way to bring the conflict to an end. 

MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Our next question will go to Nathan with KAN TV.

Q    Hi.  Thanks for that.  I’d like to know if there’s any negotiations going on, on behalf of the U.S., regarding the hostages and the hostage ceasefire deal in Gaza.  Or are these talks on hold?  And if so, is there any thought in the administration to try and advance an alternative deal to release the hostages?

MR. KIRBY:  We still, obviously, want to see a ceasefire in place so we can get all them home and to get that surge of humanitarian assistance into Gaza.  I wish I could tell you that there are fresh negotiations at hand.  There aren’t.  But that’s because Mr. Sinwar has shown absolutely zero interest in continuing that discussion. 

So we’re going to keep at it.  We’re still working on it.  We still believe that that’s the best way to get those hostages back home with their families where they belong.  And we’re not going to give up on those efforts.

MODERATOR:  Thank you.  That is all the time we have, but I think Kirby has a few words he wants to close with. 

MR. KIRBY:  I just wanted to thank you all for the kind words with respect to how me and my family fared during the storm.  

I just wanted to add, you know, that I’m very lucky.  This is just a — it’s a little cottage on the beach.  It’s a second home.  It’s not my primary home.  And unlike — I mean, unlike friends I know, and so many other people down in Florida, particularly the Tampa Bay area where I’m from, I mean, my losses are minuscule and insignificant compared to what so many other people have gone through.  I know people who are literally homeless, and I am fortunate that that is not my situation. 

So I do appreciate the kind words.  I really do.  But I’d ask you to throw those prayers and those thoughts to people that are much, much more in need and much more heavily impacted by the devastation of those two hurricanes than me and my family. 

But thanks again.  It was very thoughtful of you.  I appreciate it.  Very glad to be back in D.C. and back at work.  Thank you.

MODERATOR:  Thank you again, everyone, for joining.  As always, if we weren’t able to get to you, please reach out to the NSC distro and we’ll try to get back as soon as we can.  Thanks, everyone.

2:27 P.M. EDT

The post On-the-Record Press Gaggle by White House National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby appeared first on The White House.

12:30 P.M. EDT

MS. SIMONS:  All right.  Good morning, everyone.  Given the projected trajectory and strength of Hurricane Milton, President Biden is postponing his upcoming trip to Germany and Angola in order to oversee preparations for and response to Hurricane Milton, in addition to the ongoing response to the impacts of Hurricane Helene.

The president was briefed again this morning by his team, and as Karine said yesterday, FEMA and other federal agencies continue to actively pre-position lifesaving resources in advance of the storm, including temporary power teams, swiftwater rescue teams, and search and rescue teams. 

FEMA has two staging bases stocked with 20 million meals and 40 million liters of water to deploy as needed. 

Currently, nearly 900 staff are already in the region, including over 440 specifically deployed for Helene recovery. 

Yesterday, FEMA Administrator Criswell was on the ground in Tampa.  Today, she is back in North Carolina.  So, we maintain our focus on both storms.

And yesterday evening, as we read out, the president had separate calls with Governor DeSantis and Tampa Mayor Castor to discuss efforts for Helene recovery and preparations for Milton.  He asked them to please keep directly in touch with him if they need anything.

And to anyone in Milton’s path, this storm will be catastrophic.  We urge you to listen to local officials, especially if you are told to evacuate.

And onto today’s trip.  Today, the president is traveling to Milwaukee, along with all of us, where he will announce that the EPA is issuing a final rule that will require drinking water systems nationwide to replace lead service lines within 10 years.  He’s also announcing that the EPA is investing an additional $2.6 billion for drinking water upgrades and lead pipe replacements funded by President Biden’s landmark Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. 

This comes as part of our work to sprint through the finish and deliver on our historic Investing in America agenda. 

To talk a little bit more today about the announcement, here is EPA Administrator Regan. 

ADMINISTRATOR REGAN:  Well, thank you all.  Let me tell you, this is a very exciting day.  This is something that President Biden talked to me on day one.  He came to this administration with the promise of a 100 percent lead-free future for every family and every child in this country.  And today, I’m proud to announce that this rule will mandate that every single utility in this country identify the sources of lead service lines and remove them within the 10-year window. 

We’re also announcing $2.6 billion will be flowing simultaneously along with this announcement. 

I’ll take a step back and say that in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, $26 billion dedicated to drinking water, $15 billion specifically aimed at eradicating lead service lines.  Between those bill dollars and this regulation, the president is really accomplishing his goal and keeping his promise.

Q    On — on the window.  Ten years —

ADMINISTRATOR REGAN:  Yeah.

Q    — this is very ambitious, and there’s obviously a lot, a lot of pipes that need to be replaced in this country.  But how do you get that done?  And is there a worry that, you know, it’s not just one administration that you — you’re going to have to go through; it’s at least two to get to this goal.  How — is there a concern that not just one Republican administration could out — could undo this but perhaps two?  Like, why should Americans be confident that this is actually going to get done?

ADMINISTRATOR REGAN:  Well, listen, in my conversations, I have to tell you, I would hope that both Republicans and Democrats would want to remove lead and lead service lines from impacting our children.  We know that it causes learning impairments, you know, heart disease.  We know that they’re — oh, with this rule, we’ll save or prevent over 900,000 low birth weight. 

So, you know, listen, it’s — it’s a bipartisan issue.  Everyone wants this lead out.  That’s the first thing. 

The second thing is that many of these cities are already moving forward.  Just under the president’s watch over the last three and a half years, over 367,000 lead pipes have been removed.  We know that this rule will get 99 percent of all of the cities who say they can step up and can do this, especially with the bill funding. 

So, we believe it can get done.  The cities have indicated that they want to get it done.  No one wants to roll back this rule or roll back these health protections, especially given that it’s tied to Bipartisan Infrastructure Law money.  So, we feel confident. 

By the way, the rule is legally durable.  It’s scientifically sound, well within the four corners of the Clean Water Act.  We feel very confident that it’s legally durable, scientifically sound, and that there are resources flowing to help these mayors and these county commissioners and these local governments all over the country. 

Q    In retrospect, is there any wish that you guys started earlier on this and actually the implementation?

ADMINISTRATOR REGAN:  This is a very complicated rule.  We started on day one.  It’s taken us some time to really put the rule in place.  We had to roll back a rule that the Trump administration put in place that was not as protected.  So, we had to do that due diligence in the process and put forward a legally sound, scientifically relevant rule.

And, listen, by the way, let me — let me just say that we’ve also, through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, given a lot of cities the resources to specifically identify where these lead service lines are. 

So, the identification process has occurred.  States feel confident.  Now it’s time to govern.

Q    During the administration’s contacts with these local officials, are you seeing any pushback or hesitance to jump on board and take this money and — and redo these water lines?  Or is everyone sort of, you know, gung ho, and as soon as the money is available, they’re going to start with these projects? 

ADMINISTRATOR REGAN:  You know, everyone that I’ve engaged with is ready to go.  Obviously, there was some apprehension in the beginning about the timeline and the level of aggressiveness.  We have worked with our stakeholders to smooth out those wrinkles. 

And, again, 99 percent of the cities and states are saying that they can do what this rule is asking them to do.  For that very small portion that will need some assistance, we will work with them on the timeline.  We will also work to prioritize resources to keep them in the game. 

Q    Are — are you guys working with private-sector companies or matching private-sector companies with these local officials to make sure the plans and the build-outs can get accomplished as soon as possible?

ADMINISTRATOR REGAN:  Absolutely.  There’s a lot of public and private partnerships happening right now.  We know that many of these water systems are complicated.  We are creating, through these investments, a lot of good-playing — -paying union jobs to come in and eradicate these pipelines. 

So, the public-private partnership is very strong, and we’ll continue to move forward together. 

Q    Just one more quick one.  Is the partnership — part of that partnership, does that involve contracting at the federal level, or is all — that all happening at the state and local level?

ADMINISTRATOR REGAN:  It’s all happening at the state and local level.  The state and local level have all the autonomy.  We’re not being paternalistic.  We have some guidelines.  We’re giving them the resources.  This rule gives them the rules for the road, and they’re ready to hit the ground running. 

Q    Why Milwaukee?  Why Milwaukee?

ADMINISTRATOR REGAN:  You know, Milwaukee has some of the most heart-wrenching stories that I’ve witnessed, the vice president has witnessed, the president has witnessed.  We’ve been here time and time again.  I’ve traveled to Milwaukee previously with the vice president.  It’s full circle for many of us. 

One of the first stories we heard was a mother named Deanna and her son, Aidan, who was lead poisoned.  We’ve held roundtables here. 

Milwaukee is an excellent example of a city who is ready to go, who has demonstrated that they can meet the timeline, who’s put the resources in place, and has the local advocacy on the ground that is partnering with the government along with the private sector.  It’s a great example of how we can do this together. 

MS. SIMONS:  Thank you so much. 

ADMINISTRATOR REGAN:  Thank you.

Q    Emilie, with the president — with the president canceling his trip to Germany and to Angola, does he still have plans to get to Africa before the end of his term?

MS. SIMONS:  So, as he said before departing the White House, he does hope to make that trip to Africa.  He really wants to continue — and the whole essence of the trip was to underscore our commitment to our partners in Africa, and especially because Sub-Saharan Africa is such an important global leader. 

So, I don’t have any additional.  This has happened this morning, but we will keep you posted.

Q    On the Middle East.  Hezbollah’s deputy leader has said he supports attempts to secure a truce and, for the first time, did not mention the end of the war in Gaza as a precondition for halting the combat on the Israel-Lebanon border.  Do you see this as an opening for a ceasefire?  Have you spoken to Israel about these comments?  And — and what are you hearing from Israeli counterparts?

MS. SIMONS:  So, we continue to have discussions with the Israelis about their response to the earlier attacks last week.  I’m not going to get ahead of those discussions, as this is their operation.  I hear the new statements that you’re saying from the Hezbollah leader. 

And what we understand right now is that what they’ve been working on is efforts to destroy Hezbollah infrastructure.  This is in line with Israel’s right to defend its citizens. 

I think we are all eager for a ceasefire, speaking from the United States.  And along with our G7 leaders, we put out a statement last week about the need for peace in the region so people can return safely to their homes.  So, we definitely are continuing to urge that from our side. 

Q    And have you gotten any assurances from Israel that they will not target Iran’s nuclear or oil facilities? 

MS. SIMONS:  This is their operation.  We continue to have discussions with them about their response, but I won’t get ahead of that.

Q    Hey, Em.  On Israel.  There was a report in Axios this morning that a U.S. official said that they had sort of lost trust with Israel in — in conveying their planned activities.  There’s also Bob Woodward’s book in which he — which the president reportedly used some language to describe Prime Minister Netanyahu that we might normally hear at a Phillies game instead — (laughs) — of in the Oval Office.

So, I’m wondering: Do you agree with that assessment, that the trust has broken down between the U.S. and Israel?  And are you taking any steps to try to get it back on track at this crucial period?

MS. SIMONS:  The commitment that we have to the State of Israel is ironclad.  The relationship between Netanyahu and the president goes back decades.  They can have very honest and straightforward conversations with each other. 

Just yesterday, President Biden spoke with President Herzog on the anniversary of October 7th and spoke about a range of issues, including the need for peace and what the Israeli people have been through in this past year and also what the Palestinian people have been through and the hope for peace in the coming months. 

Q    So, their relationship is fine, or — or are those — and those reports are incorrect, or — 

MS. SIMONS:  The relationship between the United States and the State of Israel is as strong as ever. 

Q    Just to follow up on the storm as well.  The — in addition to the trip to Africa, the president was going to Germany and had meetings with a number of top allies, including in Ramstein with President Zelenskyy.  Is that going to be rescheduled, or will a different U.S. — you know, the secretary of Defense or State go in the president’s stead?  Do you have any update on that?

MS. SIMONS:  Yeah.  So, for this weekend, given the trip was pulled down today, we’re still working through exactly how the Ramstein engagement may play out.  Our commitment to Ukraine was a big piece of this, and that is unwavering, including the security and financial announcements that come along with that.  That is not going anywhere.

     And we are committed to the transatlantic alliance.  It’s a huge reason why we were going to Germany.  I know the president said that he’s hoping to connect with Scholz today, so hopefully we’ll have more to read out soon. 

Q    Will he talk to the other European leaders and — and President Zelenskyy who are planning to attend or just Chancellor Scholz?

MS. SIMONS:  Our team throughout this morning has been in touch with a variety of officials from the different countries to inform them that due to the strength of the hurricane, we had to change our plans

Q    Could I — if I could just follow on Justin on the Woodward aspect of the — the Bibi rel- — revelation and the very rough language that the president allegedly used?  One, are you — did that — did that happen, or are you saying it didn’t happen?

And then, more broadly, is — how is that helpful at, like, this time?  Is th- — is there any concern that that’s going to further, you know, hurt the relationship at a critical time? 

MS. SIMONS:  Well, first of all, when it comes to the Woodward book, there are plenty of books that are being written about this administration and others.  That’s normal.  We’re not going to comment on each anecdote that may come out of different reporting.

On specific — about the relationship between the president and Netanyahu, they have a long-term relationship.  They have a very honest and direct relationship.  And I don’t have a comment on those specific anecdotes. 

Q    Emilie, can you talk a little bit about the president’s conversations with Governor DeSantis related to the storm?  You said earlier that they had a good conversation.  Can you tell us a little bit more about that and — and if it came up about whether or not he’s going to speak with the vice president, or his public comments to that?

MS. SIMONS:  Yes.  Last night, President Biden spoke with Governor DeSantis and he spoke with Tampa Mayor Castor ahead of landfall for Milton and also about the ongoing recovery efforts with Helene.  It was a very productive conversation.  It was expressed that the state has what it needs, the city has what it needs, but that it is going to be catastrophic, and everyone needs to heed local warnings. 

One thing that we are hearing continuously about the storm is debris removal and the issues relating to the debris left by Helene and what the risk can be as winds pick up because of Milton. 

So, to that point, FEMA is supporting the state of Florida to expedite the removal of debris from Hurricane Helene in the Tampa region in advance of Hurricane Milton’s landfall.  There’s a few ways we’re doing this: We are surging additional resources to get as much debris picked up as possible, management sites are open 24 hours a day, and contracted trucks are now collecting debris around the clock. 

The governor of Florida has additionally activated 4,000 state active-duty National Guard, many of whom are going to help with that debris removal. 

Q    They didn’t discuss anything about the vice president’s outreach to the governor?

MS. SIMONS:  So, the president and the governor kept their conversation to the storm at hand.  I know that the vice president’s office has been in touch with various local officials, as our team has as well, from the city all the way up the state and back down.  So, we’re all going to continue that important engagement. 

Q    And just one other one on a different topic.  Elon Musk, again, was joking in a recent interview or a conversation with Tucker Carlson about the assassination — or hypothetical assassination of Vice President Harris.  And after that, former Congressman Adam Kinzinger, among others, noted that this is a person who happens to be the largest contractor with the Defense Department, who the government — who just has billions of dollars in federal contracts.  And Congressman Kinzinger said that that should be reconsidered, that some of those contracts should be revoked, because no member — no person with ties to the Pentagon, no serviceman, would be allowed to say those things. 

Does the administration have any response to that, or are there any reviews that may come as far as those contracts based on the things that Elon Musk is saying? 

MS. SIMONS:  I’m not going to get into any hypotheticals about government contracts.  But what I can say is that we take rhetoric very seriously.  Want to be mindful of any comments about assassinations or attempted.  This is a — these are volatile words.  But I don’t have comments on government contracts.

Q    Emilie, just back to the hurricane.  North Carolina is weighing loosening absentee ballot restrictions for people in the western part of the state who are obviously impacted by flooding, and the mailing system is out of whack still.  Does the president support states this close to the election changing their electoral rules, one, to allow those people to vote, but just looking back on all of the chaos we saw in 2020, both before and after the election?

MS. SIMONS:  We know that people are facing a variety of obstacles in everyday life, including in voting.  Karine spoke to this from the podium yesterday.  We would direct you to state and local officials about their own state and local voting rules.  But we know that this is an issue that folks are facing in a variety of states this close to an election.

Q    And then, total change of topics.  How closely is the president following these hacks of U.S. telecom companies?

MS. SIMONS:  The president has been made aware of these reported intrusions into U.S. telecom companies.  Congress has also been briefed. 

I would refer you to FBI and CISA, who are looking into this. 

Q    Just a quick follow-up.  Is there any indication that Beijing is involved in this, or are these independent actors?

MS. SIMONS:  I would refer you to FBI and CISA. 

The U.S. government has warned many times about the risk posed by PRC state-sponsored cyber actors, but I would refer you to the FBI.

Q    Dr. Biden’s office today announced that she’s going to be visiting five battleground states in the coming weeks.  The president has been in Pennsylvania.  Why — why aren’t we seeing the president in more battleground states?  How much of this is about scheduling?  How much of it is — this about that he just can’t be an effective surrogate in these places outside his home — or his birth state?

MS. SIMONS:  I need to be mindful of the Hatch Act when it comes to the campaign and the election.  But we are going to continue traveling to very important states around the country. 

Today, we’re traveling to Wisconsin.  We’ll be in Pennsylvania later. 

I’ll let the first lady’s office speak to her travel, especially as it relates to being a surrogate or the campaign.

But in the next few weeks, you will see us continue to travel across the country.

Q    Will he campaign outside of Pennsylvania?

MS. SIMONS:  You will continue seeing us travel the country, as we are today, to very important states.  Everyone is important.  But I have to be mindful of campaign — campaign talk.  But we’re excited to go to Wisconsin today, and we’ll be in Pennsylvania later.

Q    I’ll just ask one on Russia.  What does the White House make of the revelation in the new Woodward book that Trump has spoken to Putin several times since leaving office?  Are there national security concerns around this?

MS. SIMONS:  So, once again, when it comes to the book, I’m not going to comment on the specific antidote — anecdotes that are coming out.  It’s very common for books to be written about this administration and others, so I’ll leave others to speak to that. 

Meanwhile, we have a continued commitment to President Zelenskyy and doing everything that we can to support Ukraine in their unprovoked aggression from Russia.

Q    But do you have concerns about Trump speaking to Putin several times since leaving office?

MS. SIMONS:  I don’t have a specific comment on that.

Q    I — I guess I just wanted to follow or push a little bit on that.  It is a national security concern.  We — we have one president at a time, right?  Why are we having multiple — a former president talking to foreign leaders that were — in pretty tense times?

MS. SIMONS:  President Biden has been crystal clear about his views of Putin as a dictator.  He’s made that clear repeatedly and whenever asked. 

There are — I — I won’t get into the former president’s engagements with president — with Putin, both when he was president when — sorry, when Trump was president and today. 

But we are focused on doing everything that we can to secure our relationship with Ukraine and ensure they have everything they need to continue to fight against Russia’s aggression.

Q    Is the administration aware that the — the calls were happening?

MS. SIMONS:  I don’t have anything further to say on the Woodward anecdotes.

Q    Can I ask one last one on the hurricane response?

MS. SIMONS:  Yes.

Q    The president canceled his trips to Germany and Africa.  Is it fair to assume that he won’t be traveling to Delaware at all this weekend?

MS. SIMONS:  I do not have any weekend travel to purview — to preview.  We are — just as the storm updates are continuing to roll in, we are taking this hour by hour, day by day, making sure that every city, every impacted community and family has what they need to get through this storm. 

The president is the president wherever he goes, so we will keep you posted.

Q    Would he like the vice president to stick around Washington to help him with — handle the storm?

MS. SIMONS:  I would refer you to her team for the vice president’s schedule.

Q    I was asking you about, would he like her?

MS. SIMONS:  Would he like her?  They are in close contact.  They’re both in touch with the various impacted states and their relevant governments and local state leaders.  So, they’re continuing to do the job on behalf of those who may be affected.

Q    One more quick one, Emilie.  Does the president have a plan B to stop the proliferation of ghost guns and other related tech should the Supreme Court rule against them in this challenge that started today?

MS. SIMONS:  So, while I can’t comment on pending cases before the Court, what I can say broadly is that we know ghost guns are the weapon of choice for many gun traffickers because they are very difficult for law enforcement to trace and are available without a background check. 

In 2021, there were approximately 20,000 suspected ghost guns reported to the ATF.  That’s a 1,000 percent increase compared to 2017. 

So, our administration remains committed to stopping illegal manufacturers and sale of kits and parts that can easily be made into functional ghost guns.

Q    Does the president — is he confident those rules and executive actions he took are legally sound?

MS. SIMONS:  We stand by the Justice Department’s rulemaking to do this.

Okay?

Q    Thank you so much.

MS. SIMONS:  Thank you.

Q    Thanks, Emilie.

MS. SIMONS:  Thanks, guys.

12:52 P.M. EDT

The post Press Gaggle by Senior Deputy Press Secretary Emilie Simons and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Michael Regan en Route Milwaukee, WI appeared first on The White House.

South Court Auditorium
Eisenhower Executive Office Building

2:02 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT:  Good afternoon. 

Q    Good afternoon.

THE PRESIDENT:  I’ll be brief.  Last night, Hurricane Milton made landfall, as we all know, on the west coast of Florida.  It brought hurricane winds, heavy rains, including 10 to 20 inches of rain in the Tampa area overnight. 

Storm surge measurements are still being taken, but 38 tornadoes ripped through 13 counties.  Four deaths have been reported thus far. 

It’s too early to know the full account of the damage though, but we know lifesaving measures did make a difference.  More than 80,000 people followed orders to safety — to safely shelter last night.  And we’ve had search and rescue teams at the ready for any calls for help this morning. 

There are still very dangerous conditions in the state, and people should wait to be given the all-clear by their leaders before they go out.  We know from previous hurricanes that it’s often the case that more lives are lost in the days following the storm than actually during the storm itself. 

Vice President Harris and I have been in constant contact with the state and local officials.  And we’re offering everything they need.  I must have spoken to somewhere between 10 and 15 mayors and county executives and all the governors.

And, in fact, starting this morning, we are getting direct assessments from the storm of FEMA and Director Criswell as well, also Florida Governor DeSantis, with whom I had a chance to speak. 

And the vice president and I have just convened a meeting this morning with the leaders of the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Defense, including Northcom commander, who has responsibility for providing defense support to civilian authorities — and that, apparently, is going very well — as well as from the Coast Guard and FEMA, we’ve received reports. 

We focused on what the American military can do like no one else can: provide emergency support for communities in need and we’re required by the governor in a federal — and — required by the governor in the affected states.  And I’ve spoken to all the governors — not today, all of them, but I’ve spoken to all of them thus far.  And how we can be ready to go in an instant when the call comes. 

At my direction, Defense Secretary Austin has provided a range of capabilities both to Florida for Hurricane Milton as well as the states impacted by Hurricane Helene.  And the more capabilities are available, we assess the pressing needs, we can get whatever they need. 

To the servicemen and women who are on the ground responding to this — these disasters: Thank you.  Thank you for pr- — your professionalism, your dedication to every mission you’re given.  And you’re repeating it again.

This is a whole-of-government effort that also includes the Department of Energy and Department of Transportation, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development, which is providing mortgage relief for impacted homeowners. 

As directed, FEMA is going to open disaster recovery centers all across the impacted communities right away so there’s one stop for the residents can go to to learn about the support they might need.  And that  — it’ll be advertised where those places are.

Three million people are without power.  But more than 40 million [40,000] power work- — powerline workers have come from around the country, from Canada to Florida, to restore power across the state. 

In addition, the Federal Aviation has authorized Florida Power and Light to fly large drones before other manned aircraft can get up in the sky to quickly assess the damage on the ground so ground crews can restore power as quickly as possible. 

The Coast Guard and the Army Corps of Engineers are assessing how fast they can reopen the Port of Tampa to get fuel, food, water, and other basic goods flowing into the area again and quickly. 

Additionally, Vice President Harris and I said yesterday and we’ll say it again: To anyone who seeks to take advantage of our fellow Americans’ desperation, whether you’re a company engaging in price gouging or a citizen trying to scam your neighbors, we will go after you and we will hold you accountable. 

Now, not only that.  Our fellow Americans are putting their lives on the line to do this dangerous work and received death thre- — some received death penalties [threats] yesterday as a result of reckless, irresponsible, and relentless disinformation and outright lies that continue to flow.  Those who engage in such lies are undermining the confidence in the rescue and recovery work that’s opening and ongoing.  As I speak, they’re continuing. 

These lies are also harmful to those who most need help.  Lives are on the line.  People are in desperate situations.  Have the decency to tell them the truth.  

So, let me say this.  To all the people impacted by Hurricane Helene and Hurricane Milton, despite the misinformation and lies, the truth is we’re providing the resources needed to rescue, recover, and rebuild — and rebuild. 

Let me close with this.  I know recovery and rebuilding projects can take a long and difficult time.  But as — long after the press and the cameras move on, I promise you — you have to pick up the pieces still.  I want you to know we’ll do everything in our power to help you put the pieces back together and get all that you need. 

May God bless you.  And may God bless our troops and our first responders, who are — many — in some cases risking their lives to help. 

Thank you very much.  I’ll be reporting again tomorrow.

Thank you.

Q    Mr. President, on FEMA funding.  On FEMA funding.  How much time does Congress have to act before FEMA or the SBA run out of money?

THE PRESIDENT:  That’s in discussion now, and I don’t want to give you — mislead you.  I think in terms of the SBA, it’s pretty right at the edge right now.

And I think the Congress should be coming back and moving on emergency needs immediately.  And they’re going to have to come back after the election as well, because this is going to be a long haul to- — for total rebuilding.  It’s going to take several billion dollars.  It’s not going to be a matter of just a little bit.

But we’re providing now to make sure people have the emergency relief they need with dollars just to be able to get a prescription filled, to get a baby formula do- — all the thing- —

That $750 that they’re talking about, Mr. Trump and every- — all those other people know it’s a lie to suggest that’s all they’re going to get.  That’s bizarre.  It’s bizarre.  They got to stop this.  It’s s- — I mean, they’re being so damn un-American with the way they’re talking about this stuff.

But there’s going to be a need for significant amounts of money.  We’re already underway at trying to calculate what the cost will be because you don’t want to mislead anybody.  We want to make sure all the costs are able to be covered.

Q    Have you spoken to Speaker Johnson about coming back before the election to vote?

THE PRESIDENT:  No, I haven’t.

Q    Mr. President, are you calling on Congress to come back early?

THE PRESIDENT:  I think Congress should move as rapidly as they can, particularly on the most immediate need, which is small business.

Q    Mr. President, the vice president said yesterday that — that FEMA has what it needs.  There’s enough resources.  They don’t need — that Congress does not need to come back right away.  Who’s right?

THE PRESIDENT:  FEMA has what it needs.

Q    Okay.

THE PRESIDENT:  That’s different than SBA.

Q    Okay.  So, it’s SBA that — they need to come back and do SBA?

THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, but they’re going to need a lot more.

Q    Mr. President, wh- — what did you — what did Prime Minister Netanyahu tell you about his plans relating to retaliation against Iran?

THE PRESIDENT:  He’s coming over to help with the storm.

Q    Mr. President, have you spoken with former President Trump at all —

THE PRESIDENT:  Are you kidding me?

Q    — about the disinformation?

THE PRESIDENT:  (Laughs.)  Mr. President Trump — former President Trump, get a life, man.  Help these people. 

Q    Will you hold him accountable?  You said you were going to hold those accountable.

THE PRESIDENT:  The public will hold him accountable. 

Q    The —

THE PRESIDENT:  You better, in the press, hold him accountable because you know the truth. 

Q    Well, do you plan to speak with former President Trump?

THE PRESIDENT:  No.

2:10 P.M. EDT

The post Remarks by President Biden on the Initial Impacts of Hurricane Milton and the Federal Government’s Ongoing Support to State and Local Officials appeared first on The White House.

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

1:12 P.M. EDT

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Good afternoon, everyone.

Q    Good afternoon.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, before I turn it — turn to the latest — to the latest on the hurricane, I wanted to briefly mention at the top that — at the top regarding the passing of Ethel Kennedy. 

I expect you will have something from the president very, very soon.  They were dear friends.  And I don’t want to get ahead of him in his statement, but the president and first lady are sending their love to her entire family and everyone whose life was touched by her strength and service.

Now shifting gears to the storm.  This morning, the president and the vice president were briefed on the impacts from Hurricane Milton and will continue to be briefed throughout the day.

We are praying for those who lost their lives and all the communities devastated by this storm.  The president and vice president will do everything in our power to help — to help — to help with the respond, the recovery, and rebuild.

Last night, in advance of Hurricane Milton making landfall, the president spoke by phone with several officials in Florida, including Orlando Mayor Buddy Dyer, Sarasota Mayor Liz Alpert, and Representative Gus Bilirakis and Kathy Castor.

This morning, President Biden also spoke to Governor DeSantis about the impacts of Hurricane Milton.  The governor thanked the president for the extensive federal support to prepare for and respond to the storm.

This afternoon, the president spoke with several additional Florida officials following the impacts of Hurricane Milton across the Florida Peninsula, including Senator Rick Scott, Representative Anna Paulina Luna, Gainesville Mayor Harvey Ward, Fort Myers Mayor Kevin Anderson, Orange County Mayor Jerry Demings, and Pasco County Chair Ron Oakley. 

The president told each of these leaders to call him directly if they need additional assistance on rescue, response, and recovery efforts.  The president also emphasized that he will be with them and their communities no matter how long it takes.

Additionally, FEMA Administrator Criswell has been on the ground in Florida since last night, and today she is survi- — surveying the damage alongside her state and local counterparts and will work closely with them to determine any unmet needs.

At the direction of the president, FEMA and the federal family began to quickly deploy resources to assist with rescue and response operations, including over 1,200 urban search and rescue personnel and the three U.S. Coast Guard Swift Water Rescue teams, with rescues already underway — over 1,000 federal personnel, all focused on helping the people of Florida respond and recover.  And over 15 million meals and 13 million liters of water are already in the region, with 20 million meals and 40 million liters of water ready to be deployed.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has two temporary power teams and a roofing team to diagnose the need for short-term repairs to homes and structures.

The Department of Defense has also provided 60 high-water vehicles and personnel who can further aid in search and rescue efforts.

To the people of Florida, this is still a very serious situation.  Please remain vigilant.  Listen to local officials.  As the president has said, we will be here for you as long as it takes. 

Now, as you all know, this is an ongoing response and we are getting information in real time.

We are very grateful that we have the secretary, Secretary of Homeland Security Mayorkas, here, who is on the ground — here virtually, obviously — who is on the ground in North Carolina surveying the damage and helping with response to Hurricane Helene.

Regarding Hurricane Milton — Milton, we won’t have all of the answers right now, but we want to provide as much information as we can. 

And so, with that, I will turn it over to the Homeland secretary and — Homeland Security secretary.

Thank you so much, again, for joining us, sir.  The floor is yours.

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  (Via teleconference.)  Thank you, Karine, and good afternoon.

Can everybody hear me?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.  Yes, we can hear you fine.  Thank you.

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  Thank you.  So, I am currently joining you from North Carolina, where I’ve been meeting with our extraordinary FEMA personnel and federal, state, and local partners on the ground about Hurricane Helene’s devastating impact and the progress we are making in our work to help North Carolina communities and aid in their recovery.

Before I share an update on the situation here in North Carolina, I’ll provide you an update on Hurricane Milton, which, last night, made landfall as a Category 3 storm near Siesta Key, Florida, following a day of heavy rain and at least 27 tornado touchdowns.  Our hearts break for the Floridians who have lost so much.

I was briefed earlier by FEMA Administrator Criswell, who is on the ground in Florida, as Karine noted, along with more than 1,000 FEMA personnel. 

There is significant water and wind damage across Central Florida.  As of this morning, over 3 million customers are without power.  Structures have been severely damaged or collapsed.  And tragically, we know that lives have been lost.  We are praying for them and their loved ones.

Right now, search and rescue is our highest priority, and we are also praying for those who are unaccounted for and for their safe return.

It is very significant that many followed local guidance and evacuated ahead of landfall.  We cannot minimize the impact of that.

It is imperative that everyone continues to follow the direction of local officials.  Milton may have passed, but the danger it poses has not.  Downed power lines, flood waters, non-potable drinking water, and debris are creating deadly conditions. 

Keep listening to local officials and shelter in place until it is safe if told to do so.

Only use generators when and where it is safe to do so.

You can find — people can find more tips on staying safe after a storm on the FEMA app or by visiting Ready.gov.

In the lead-up to Milton, our administration made robust preparations for the storm.  President Biden approved emergency declarations for the state of Florida and for the Seminole Tribe of Florida days before this storm made landfall to provide full federal support for the response.

We’ve pre-positioned supplies, including food and water, 20 helicopters, 60 Department of Defense high-water vehicles with ladders, 1,300 U.S. Coast Guard personnel, and 1,400 Urban Search and Rescue team members across Florida in anticipation of the storm, and staged hundreds of ambulances to assist in the transport of hospitalized patients.

Today, FEMA is joining the state to begin damage assessments to ensure Floridians have what they need.  FEMA and our federal partners, including the Department of Defense and the United States Coast Guard, are already working closely to — to support the state of Florida in a comprehensive, coordinated response to the storm.

To reiterate President Biden’s message yesterday, every available resource is being deployed as fast as possible to impacted communities, and we will not leave until the work is done. 

The same is true for communities devastated by Hurricane Helene, including here in North Carolina.  President Biden and Vice President Harris were here last week, as was I, and we will continue to support impacted communities and first responders on the ground.  More than 10,000 federal staff are on the ground supporting Helene and Milton response efforts across the Southeast.

Since Helene first made landfall, Urban Search and Rescue teams have rescued over 4,300 people.  From a peak of 5.1 million customers without power, we have helped restore power for more than 5 million of them, and we are restoring more every day. 

We have helped quickly restore cell phone service across the region.  At its peak, 3.4 million customers were without service.  I — we have restored service now to more than 3.2 million of them. 

We have delivered more than 17.2 million meals and more than 13.9 million liters of water.  We have helped get over $350 million in assistance out to Helene survivors, with millions more going out every day.  All this and much more.

These first responders and their state and local partners are doing truly heroic work in extremely difficult circumstances.  We are all immensely grateful for their extraordinary, selfless service. 

The weeks since Hurricane Helene first made landfall have been devastating and difficult, but I want to be clear: We have the capability and the capacity to respond to and recover from multiple simultaneous disasters.  No resources needed for Hurricane Helene response will be diverted to respond to Hurricane Milton. 

We have made it clear we will be there for every impacted community every step of the way. 

Thank you.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Thank you, Mr. Secretary.  We’ll go to questions. 

Okay.  Go ahead, Kayla.  (Laughs.)

Q    Thank you so much.  Mr. Secretary, this is Kayla Tausche from CNN.  President Biden indicated that FEMA and the Department of Defense would have enough money to get through their immediate needs in this recovery phase.  I’m wondering, after your early assessments of the damage from Hurricane Milton, now coupled with the damage from Hurricane Helene, do you still believe that to be the case?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  Yes, I do.  We have the resources to respond to the immediate needs of individuals impacted by Hurricane Helene and Hurricane Milton and the associated — and it’s very important to remember — the tornadoes associated with the hurricane.  That being said, we will need additional funds, and we implore Congress, when it returns, to, in fact, fund FEMA as is needed.

Q    If I could, just a quick follow-up.  You said on CNN yesterday that some of the misinformation that had been perpetuated around these storms was already beginning to have an impact on individuals either applying or deciding — deciding not to apply for government relief.  Can you elaborate on what exactly you’re seeing and what exactly you determined to be the cause of that?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  So, let me — let me repeat that, in fact, the false information that is being spread deliberately does have a real-life impact on survivors, and it is also demoralizing for those heroic individuals who are risking their lives in the service of others. 

Let me give you one example.  There is false information that federal employees, who are there to help people, will actually take their land.  And what we have seen is people reticent, reluctant to access the relief to which they are entitled and which will help them, because of the fear that that false information has instilled in them. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Mary.

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  That is just one example. 

Q    Thank you, Mr. Secretary.  Mary Bruce with ABC.  Another question on misinformation.  You know, we’ve seen reports that some FEMA officials, including the administrator, are being doxed and targeted online in the wake of these hurricanes.  Are you concerned that individuals involved in the recovery effort, you know, are — are being threatened online?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  We most certainly are.  We are seeing horrific hate speech of all types propagated on online platforms.  That deplorable speech has an impact on people’s lives, and it is also a motivating force for people to do harm.  And it has got to stop, and it is our work in the Department of Homeland Security to combat hate in all its forms.  We —

Q    And do you —

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  — will continue that work.

Q    Do you have any information to suggest that any foreign governments have tried to take advantage and amplify this misinformation about the response and recovery effort?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  I have not been alerted to that phenomenon.  We, of course, have seen foreign nations disseminate false information for other purposes.  I have not seen it in the context of Hurricane Helene or the Hurricane Milton, which just transpired, but of course, we are quite vigilant in monitoring that.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Nancy.

Q    Thank you.  Secretary Mayorkas, it’s Nancy Cordes from CBS News.  Sec- — Hurricane Milton knocked out power to more than 3 million customers.  How does the scope of the power situation compare to other disasters?  And what is the federal government’s role in coordinating the restoration of that power?  How long will it take?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  So, Nancy, a number of questions.  Unclear how long it’s going to take, because, quite frankly, the damage asses- — assessment is still underway.  So, we’re — we’re at a very, very early stage. 

Our role, generally, is to support the state and local officials, the state and local resources to augment those resources and to work very, very closely alongside them.  And we are doing so both in response to Hurricane Helene and Hurricane Milton. 

Loo- — you know, the — the response is actually in a number of phases.  The immediate phase is search and rescue, life and safety of individuals.  And then we — we go from search and rescue to response and then to recovery. 

We work very closely with the state and local officials to rebuild whatever infrastructure has been damaged, to get power up.  We have the capacity to assist.  And we also work with the private sector.

We have the ability to deliver power immediately, but for the long term, very often, infrastructure has to be rebuilt. 

My visit here in North Carolina underscored that fact, because one of the long-term challenges is going to be to rebuild the water system in a number of cities where it’s been completely decimated. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Jacqui.

Q    Thanks, Karine.  Mr. Secretary, it’s Jacqui Heinrich from Fox.  I want to ask you about a different story. 

This Afghan national who was working for the CIA in Afghanistan was arrested for planning an Election Day terror plot.  He was brought to the U.S. after Afghanistan collapsed, your agency says, as part of the SIV program. 

The State Department is telling us he was not part of the SIV program, which had strenuous vetting.  They say he was never issued an SIV or immigrant visa, and DHS paroled him into the U.S.  They further expect the court document to be updated to reflect this from the DOJ side. 

So, Mr. Secretary, how was this man brought into the U.S.?  What screening did he undergo?  What did he apply for to get here?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  Jacqui, I — I’m here in North Carolina communicating with the individuals who are still conducting search and rescue operations.  Over 200 people have lost their lives in Hurricane Helene.  We have reports that at least 10 individuals have lost their lives as a result of Hurricane Milton. 

I’d be very pleased to answer your question in a different setting, but we’re here to talk about emergencies and the support that we can deliver to people in desperate need.  Thank you.

Q    I appreciate that, Mr. Secretary, but we’re getting conflicting answers from your agency and from the State Department about a man who was arrested for an Election Day terror plot.  How do you not have those answers prepared?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  Oh, Jacqui, that’s not what I said.  What I said is I’d be pleased to discuss this issue at a different time, but I am here to speak about disasters that have impacted people’s lives in real time, and that is the subject that I am addressing today.

Q    Can you assure people, though —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  We’re going to —

Q    Mr. Secretary, can you assure people that appropriate steps have been taken to secure the country against these kinds of threats?  Because the outstanding question is whether this man was radicalized before the U.S. government brought here — him here or afterward.  And people should be concerned about that.

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  Jacqui — Jacqui — Jacqui, your persistence in questioning can be matched my — by my persistence in answers.  (Laughter.)

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.  We’re going to go.  Go ahead, Gabe.

Q    Mr. Secretary, thank you.  Gabe Gutierrez here with NBC.  I want to go back to the funding question a little bit more specifically. 

So, eight days into the fiscal year, the federal government has spent nearly half of the money that Congress has allocated for disaster relief for the next 12 months.  How concerning is that?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  It is very concerning.  But — but let me be clear: We can meet the immediate needs arising from Hurricane Helene, Hurricane Milton, and the tornadoes associated with it. 

When Congress returns, we will need them to act swiftly to appropriately fund the Disaster Relief Fund upon which FEMA relies to deliver assistance to people after extreme weather events.  And so, we can meet the immediate needs.  We will need funding very rapidly. 

Q    What if there’s another disaster next week?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  We — we have — we are working on a continuing resolution.  That is not stable footing for the work that we do in disaster response, and so that is why I underscore the need for Congress to act swiftly upon its return. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Michael.

Q    Thank you, Karine.  Mr. Secretary, Michael Wilner with McClatchy.  Just want to ask you specifically about the National Flood Insurance Program.  Already this — the NFIP has been chronically in the red.  How do you anticipate Milton will affect that program?  And is there a specific ask of Congress?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  Michael, I’ll — I’ll have to follow up with you on that.  But I — you know, I’ve been in the Department of Homeland Security as the director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and the deputy secretary and now, of course, as the secretary, and I’ve always known the — the Flood Insurance Program to be in the red.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.  Go ahead.

Q    Thank you.  Mr. Secretary, this is Courtney Rozen from Bloomberg Government.  I would like to ask about the upcoming election in the next couple of weeks.  Are you thinking about that issue in terms of voters being able to access their polling places in states that are having such significant damage?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  Courtney, we have seen state and local officials who are, of course, on point in ensuring access to voting.  We have seen them make — take measures to ensure that people can, in fact, reach their polling places. 

Some polling places have been damaged, for example, as a result of Hurricane Helene, but they are pivoting to make sure that there are other facilities available to them, and they’ll have different places at which they can place their votes. 

And this is something that the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency of our department — CISA, as it — as it is known by its acronym — works very closely with state and local officials to assist in that regard.

Q    Can you give an example of one way that they are assisting in this time?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  So, what we do — what — there —

Q    Can you give some examples of what that work looks like?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  There are three — there are three threat vectors.  There’s physical violence — there’s the concern about physical violence.  There is the concern about cyberattacks.  And there’s the concern about disinformation.

An example is that we are protecting — protective security advisers in each state that assist state and local officials in sharing best practices about how to secure the facilities, both from a physical perspective and a cybersecurity perspective.  That would be one example.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.  Go ahead.  We’re going to start wrapping it up, but go ahead.

Q    Thank you, Mr. Secretary.  This is Skylar Woodhouse with Bloomberg News.  As you mentioned earlier, you said that FEMA, you know, will need funds when — when Congress comes back.  But if there is another disaster prior to Congress coming back to session and as you continue to work with Helene and Milton, is there — will FEMA have to perhaps stop offering services or sending out support for aid if you’re running out of cash before Congress comes back?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  No, it — no, it will not.  We — we have the funds to address immediate needs.  If we have to devote the resources that we have to immediate needs, we will do so at the expense of perhaps other long-term recovery efforts.  We need Congress to act swiftly upon its return, but we will meet immediate needs.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.  Jared, you have the last question.

Q    Thank you.  Mr. Secretary, as you talk about the need for Congress to come back and, obviously, replenish funds when they do that, I’m just curious: Moving forward, as you look forward to future appropriation battles, does Congress need to rethink how they are funding FEMA and disaster relief?  In other words, is it, like, an underfunded service and program of the federal government, as is?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  Let me — let me take a step back and widen the aperture of that question, if I may.  The — the — a continuing resolution is not a stable way to fund the federal government.  Needs change from year to year, and we need real budgets upon which we can rely and upon which we can predicate responsible financial planning and financial management.  So, a continuing resolution only retains a level of instability in the work that we do, in terms of the assurance of the funding that we need. 

We — the Disaster Relief Fund and the funding of it should be completely nonpartisan and apolitical.  This is a fund that provides much-needed relief to individuals, regardless of party.  And I have said publicly many a time since Hurricane Hele- — Helene first hit in late September, that when our brave individuals — and I say “our” meaning not just federal but federal, state, and local — reach into flooded waters to save an individual, they are not asking about that individual’s party affiliation.  They are rescuing a fellow human being, and we need to be funded accordingly.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.  Thank —

Q    And if I —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Oh —

Q    — just one quick one to follow up —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.

Q    — with the secretary.  The — the —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Wait, hold on.  Hold on.  Go ahead, Will.  I told him it was the last question.

So, Mr. Secretary, we have one more for you. 

Go ahead, Will.

Q    Sorry.  Sorry.  It’s Will Weissert with AP.  You mentioned at least 10 people killed in relation to Milton.  Is that — were those tornado deaths?  Can you give us a little bit more information about where that number came from?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  So, let me — let me be clear.  And this is something I want to echo that Karine mentioned at the very outset.  This is a very fluid situation.  We are just beginning damage assessment.  So, when I — we have 10 confirmed fatalities.  Our understanding is that those fatalities were caused by the tornadoes.

But — but I just want to introduce a little bit of tentativeness to that because of the fluidity of the situation and how nascent it — it is.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  It is our job to make sure that that number doesn’t climb, through valiant search and rescue efforts, but we are dealing in the immediate aftermath of a terrible hurricane and many, many tornadoes ancillary to it.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.  Thank you so much, Mr. Secretary.  Appreciate it.  Appreciate everything that you’re doing.

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  Thank — thank you.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Thank you. 

All right.  We don’t have too much time because the president, as you all know, is speaking at 2 o’clock.

So, Will, what do you have for me?

Q    Okay.  I wanted to switch gears a little bit.  Does the White House have a reaction to the U.N. Interim Force in Lebanon report that Israel has fired on their position in — in Lebanon, and there’s been at least two peacekeepers that were injured?  Does the president —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So — yeah.

Q    — think that — that there should still be U.N. peacekeepers in the region?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, I want to be mindful.  I heard about those reports coming in.  I — I need to talk to the team and get to the ground truth of exactly what’s happening.  I just want to be super mindful, because I don’t have all the information for me to respond to you at this time.

Once I have that, then we can certainly respond.

Q    Can you comment more generally on — on peacekeepers in —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — I mean, obviously, peacekeepers — we want them to be safe and protected, but I just don’t have anything for you on that particular event that’s happening on the ground.  I just heard those reports, and I just want to make sure I have the full — full breadth of the information before I respond.

Go ahead, Danny.

Q    Thanks, Karine.  The readout of the president’s call with Prime Minister Netanyahu yesterday said they’d be — remain in close touch.  Just wondered if the president or the White House has heard anything more about Israel’s plans for retaliation.  And, secondly, when — and, secondly, do we know when they’re expected to speak again?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, I don’t have anything to preview on the next call.  As you know — and I’ve said this many times before — since this past little bit mo- — now, over a year, the president and the prime minister have spoken over a dozen times.  We talked a little bit in this room about the call yesterday — 30 minutes; it was direct; it was productive.  There was a readout that we all put out.

And as I said yesterday and I’ll continue to iterate here, this was a — as it relates to the — Iran’s attack, they had a contin- — they continued the discussion that happened on the staff level, obviously, on the leaders level. 

And I’m just going to be super mindful here.  I’m not going to read out from here what Israel is going to do or not going to do.  And, frankly, I’m certainly not going to read that out to the Iranians. 

So, going to be — going to keep that diplomatic conversation as it should be.  It is a private conversation, and we read out as much as we were able to just to give you a little bit of — of a sense of color of what happened on that call.

Q    Can I ask if you do expect to hear from the Israelis after the Security Cabinet meeting? 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I don’t have anything to — to share.  What I can say, though, and we — and I — we’ve said this many times before: There is regular communication that is happening with the Israeli government, certainly on the staff level, on a daily — on a daily basis.  And certainly, that will continue as — as we have done for the past more — more than a year now. 

Go ahead, Kayla.

Q    Thank you, Karine.  Earlier this week, Hezbollah’s deputy secretary general expressed a willingness to renew talks for a ceasefire.  What is the U.S.’s response to that, and what does the White House believe the willingness of Israel is to begin those talks again?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Say that one more time — the beginning of that.  Sorry.

Q    The deputy secretary general of Hezbollah expressed support for a ceasefire deal. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Look, what I will say is, obviously, we do not have conversations here with Hezbollah or any of the Iran-backed groups.  We don’t speak to Iran.  That is not how we — we communicate. 

We will continue to have conversations with Israel about — about a way forward with Lebanon, about a way forward here.  We believe a ceasefire is the way to go in order to create space to have diplomatic conversations — that’s what we believe — and so that both sides can return back home to — to their respective borders. 

And that’s what we want to see.  And those discussions continue. 

Q    And just to follow up.  Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has showed a willingness to disregard the preferences of President Biden and the U.S. team in how he has prosecuted the conflict in the Middle East.  And I’m wondering if the White House is giving any new consideration to conditions being placed on aid delivered Israel.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  No.

Go ahead.

Q    I wanted to ask a question about the disinformation with the hurricanes.  And has the White House been in touch with the leadership of social media networks where a lot of this disinformation is being spread?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, obviously, as we have stated, and you — the president was very, very clear yesterday about misinformation, disinformation and how dangerous it is, especially right now when we’re — when he was speaking at the time — when we were dealing and trying to respond to disasters and preparing — at the time, when he was responding. 

So, we have made — we have certainly been in touch with — with trusted online publishers, influencers, other trusted messengers to — to meet people where they are, and that’s what we have been trying to do: be on those platforms, those traditional media outlets as well, to be very clear about making sure they have the accurate information. 

And so, that is one of the reasons, earlier this week, the White House launched the Reddit — the first Reddit account to ensure that even more people can — we can meet more people where they are so we can make sure that we [they] have that accurate information. 

So, that’s what we’re doing to make sure that we’re on those platforms, pushing out what we — what is the accurate information so folks out there, people out there who are certainly impacted — now impacted by two hurricanes has the information that they need.

Q    Are the platforms themselves doing enough to police the disinformation that’s on there? 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I mean, look, they’re private companies.  So, I’m not going to tell them what to do, what not to do.  I think everybody has a responsibility here to try to make sure that the information that they are providing — whether you are a leader, a national leader, a congressional leader, a former president — you have the — certainly, the duty to be accountable here and to make sure that you are sharing the right information, truthful information, not falsehoods that, you know, frankly, certainly put people in harm’s way and makes it hard for these brave men and women — you heard the president talk about this yesterday — who are on the ground providing assistance.  It puts them in harm’s way as well. 

Go ahead, Mary.

Q    Thanks.  To that end, Congresswoman Luna, who represents the Saint Petersburg area, said that she spoke with the president today about the response.  She is one of those people who has been spreading disinformation, misinformation about FEMA assistance.  Did that come up in the conversation?  Did the president, you know, directly talk to her about that and

encourage her to stop it?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Look, the president was certainly focused on what’s happening on the ground and making sure that the federal government is — is — any needs that are unmet are met, and that everybody who is on the ground, certainly local officials, elected officials who are trying to help their community has what they need. 

And, look, the president was very clear.  It is unacceptable.  It is unacceptable for bad-faith actors — right? — to — to continue to push out misinformation.  As I stated, it is dangerous.  It does not — it gets in the way of providing the assistance that we need.  We have heard — you all have reported on stories where people are not going for — asking for assistance because of the misinformation. 

And so, the president was really clear.  It is very, very clear. 

And one of the — one of the issues that we have heard — or the lies or falsehoods that are out there is the $750.  It is the beginning.  It is something so that people are able to buy, you know, diapers, to buy milk, are able to buy necess- — ne- — necessities that they need in the moment at the time after dealing with such a horrible event.  And the $750 is the beginning, and there is more to come. 

But it’s not helpful when people do that.  So, the president is not going to shy away from that.  He was very straightforward, very forceful about it twice yesterday when he spoke to the public.  And so, we’re going to keep — be very, very clear.  It is unacceptable. 

But the calls that the president made today was about making sure that Americans, people on the ground who had been affected by this hurricane — this most recent hurricane, Hurricane Milton — they have what they need on the ground.

Go ahead, Gabe.

Q    Thanks, Karine.  Following up on Jacqui’s question from earlier on the Afghan terror suspect.  NBC is reporting that he was a security guard for the CIA before he came to the U.S. and that he passed two rounds of vetting.  Does the administration believe there was adequate vetting?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, what I can say is I cannot comment on this directly because — because it is an active investigation.  As you know, that the Department of Justice is currently un- –moving forward with.  So, I’m going to be really careful. 

What I can say is every Afghan national who entered the U.S. was screened and vetted by intelligence, law enforcement, counterterrorism professionals, and with every new information that emerges that in- — individual that — if that individual could pose a threat to public safety, we take immediate action, and we take that action. 

And so, going to be — not going to speak to this particular case, but I can speak more broadly, and that’s the actions that we normally take.  That’s how we move forward. 

And the president has always been clear, protecting the American people will always be — always be his top priority.

Q    More broadly, what would you say to critics who say there isn’t enough vetting in these cases?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  What I can say is how I just ended my last question to you.  Protecting the American people is the president’s top priority.

Go ahead, in the back.

Q    Thank you, Karine.  From what you and other officials have said, I gather that the U.S. has at least two stated goals in Lebanon.  The first one, you said that you don’t want it to turn into another Gaza — 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    — you’re working towards cessation of hostilities, but you also support Israeli efforts in dismantling Hezbollah infrastructure in Lebanon.  So, how can those two goals exist in the same time frame?  Is the understanding to first allow Israel to push back against Hezbollah before going into negotiations?

AIDE:  Karine —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Sorry.

(An aide shows Ms. Jean-Pierre a phone.)

Oh, gosh.  Okay. 

Q    Karine —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  We got to move s- —

Q    Can you share those developments, Karine? 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  We have to move —

Q    What’s going on there? 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  No, I’m — I’m just trying to make sure that we’re out of here because the president is speaking at 2 o’clock.  That’s what they’re — they’re giving me updates on — on — we got to move pretty — pretty quickly.

On answering that question, Patsy, I’ll say this: Look, I think two things — both — both things could be true and — at the same time.  We believe that — and I said this moments ago — we want to see a cease- — a ceasefire deal — that’s what we want to see — to provide some space for di- — diplomacy so that — that would enable civilians to go back home on both sides — right? — to go back home — both sides of the border.

And so, we’re going to have those discussions.  We’ll — going to be able — hoping to be able to achieve that goal.  And we — we believe, ultimately, a diplomatic resolution is the way to — to move forward here. 

And to your point about Israel, we believe Israel has the right to defend itself.  That’s what we believe.  We’ve said that.

And what we understand is the operation that they’re moving forward with in Lebanon are indeed targeted.  We’re having those conversations.  We’re being very direct and having those doc- –conversations with the Israeli government.  That will continue.  And we have been very clear with this as well. 

Q    And —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  We protect — we believe and support and — in — in — and certainly support Israel’s so- — right to defend itself and certainly our — their — Israel’s security continues to be ironglad [ironclad] — our support for them.

Q    And — and just to pick up on your point that it’s targeted.  Have you — considering the fact that there are American citizens still in Lebanon —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    — have you received any Israeli guarantees that they won’t strike the airport in Beirut, as well as the road to the airport, which I understand goes through Hezbollah-controlled territory?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  We continue to have very, very direct conversation with the Israeli government.  That’s what we’re going to do. 

But how — how the shape and scope and the nature of their operations, of their campaign moves forward, we are going to have, again, very direct conversations with them.

Q    And then, finally, just quickly on Taiwan, Karine.  In response to Taiwan National Day celebrations, China is feared to respond by either conducting war games or sending its assets to the region.  Is the administration prepared on such an event, considering a lot of the military assets have been deployed to the Middle East?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, you’re talking about the speech that the Taiwan president made?

Q    Yes.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Look, that — it’s — it is — it is tradition, as you know, for — on that day, a long-standing tradition for Taiwan’s president to deliver remarks on 10/10.  It — it is routine, domestic-focus address that has historically prompted little response from Beijing.  This year should be no different. 

We are not going to speculate on what the PRC will or will not do this year, but we see no just- — justification, certainly, for a routine annual celebration to be used as a pretext for military exercises. 

We urge Beijing to act with restraint.  Our One China policy has not changed, and we’ve been really consistent about that in the past three and a half years.

Go ahead, Michael.

Q    Karine, just following up on my colleague’s question about the — the president’s call with some Florida officials and lawmakers.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    I know you mentioned that he had been clear yesterday with regard to disinformation around the hurricane response, but did it come up specifically in that call?  Was there a conversation with Florida officials?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I don’t have anything to share besides the president reaching out to elected officials, local and statewide, to offer up their assistance — his assistance, the federal government assistance to check in to see what else that they need.  We are dealing with, obviously, the impact of a pretty powerful hurricane, Hurricane Milton, and so that is his — was his focus on the call today. 

I think he’s been very — I mean, he said it publicly, right?  So, he’s been very public about how he feels about misinformation.  And as president, he felt that he needed to say something because it was harming — harming Americans out there who were impacted by — have been impacted, whether by Hurricane Helene, now impacted by Hurricane Milton, and they need to get the assistance.  Right?  They need to make sure that — we wanted to make sure they were pre-posi- — they were ready, whether evacuating, sheltered before — ahead of this hurricane.  And when you have this type of misinformation, disinformation out there, it certainly steps on that. 

And so, as president, he spoke very publicly twice — twice yesterday, and I think that message was sent loud and clear.

Go ahead.

Q    Thanks, Karine.  Since President Biden postponed his foreign trip due to — due to Hurricane Milton, has the president spoken with German Chancellor Scholz yet just about, you know, maybe rescheduling the trip, just kind of talking since there was a lot planned?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.  So, I think we’ve stated that we’re going to be rescheduling the trip.  That’s what we’re — we’re trying to work out all of the details.  That’s important to the president to do that. 

Wh- — when I have more information, obviously, you all will be one of the first to know.

And the president is planning to speak to both of the leaders very, very soon.  And so, once we have that information, we’ll certainly share that with all of you as well. 

I think I have to wrap it up here.

Q    On the trip?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yep. 

Q    So, the — will the leader-level Ukraine Defense Contact Group be rescheduled, or will it happen in the coming weeks at the ministerial level? 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, what I can say: On the leader level, I understand that that’s going to be the — that conversation is going to be postponed.  And so, that I can speak to. 

Q    Okay.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  That’s going to definitely be postponed. 

Okay.  All right.  All right.  In the back.  I haven’t called on you in a while. 

Q    Oh, thank you. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.  Go ahead.

Q    Just on the calls.  Florida Senator Rick Scott said that President Biden agreed that Congress should come back early to fund FEMA.  So, is there a more urgent need, and is the administration all in line with what we heard from the secretary, Mayorkas, talking about getting Congress to come back or not?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I mean, look, what we have — what we have been very clear about is Congress needs to act.  We had a CR.  We had a pretty robust ask in the CR for — for — to make sure that we continued to fund that — that emergency disaster funding.  Pardon me.  And so, that didn’t go through.  It was not — we were disappointed that it didn’t make it into the CR.  And so, that is unfortunate. 

But we’ve also been clear that Congress needs to act.  And what we have seen in the past is what — Congress can still act on emergency items, move forward emergency asks in — during recess.  That is something that they can do.

And so, we’re going to continue to say that.  We’re going to continue to be very clear.  We have to see this moving forward. 

You saw the letter from the president earlier this week saying that there’s SBA disaster funding that’s about to run out in weeks — in weeks.

Q    But is he going to call them to come back?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  We believe that Congress can do the job, right?  They can do this job.  They can make sure that we get that additional funding during recess.  We have seen them do this before.  It is not unusual.  It is something that they’ve been able to do when there has been an important decision to be made.  And so, that’s what we want to see.

All right.  I know we got to go.  The president is about to speak, so I don’t want to hold you guys up.

Thanks, everybody.

Q    Thank you.

1:56 P.M. EDT

The post Press Briefing by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas appeared first on The White House.

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

2:02 P.M. EDT

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Hi.  Good afternoon, everybody. 

Q    Good afternoon.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, the safety of all Americans is the Biden-Harris administration’s first priority.  As the security situation in Lebanon becomes increasingly volatile, I want to take a moment to talk about the numerous steps the Biden-Harris administration is taking to support Americans who seek to depart or relocate within Lebanon.

We are working around the clock to help Americans in Lebanon by providing as many options as possible to depart and offering loans to U.S. citizens who need assistance.

Since September 27th, the United States has secured more than 4,000 airplane — airplane seats for American citizens, lawful permanent residents, and their family members to depart Lebanon.  We have reserved seats for Americans and their family members on daily commercial airlines that continue to fly out of Beirut, and we have organized additional flights for U.S. citizens; lawful permanent residents and their spouses, children, and parents to depart Lebanon.

As long as the Beirut airport remains open, we will continue to make more airplane seats available daily.  To date, the number of seats available continues to exceed demand.

The U.S. Embassy in Beirut remains open and can help Americans who need emergency passports or other documentation.  We urge Americans to take advantage of these options.  

Ultimately, a diplomatic resolution is the only way to achieve lasting stability and security across the Isra- — Israel-Lebanon border.  We are in discussions for when we will be able to achieve that.

Now, earlier today, as many of you saw, the president and the vice president received an update regarding Hurricane Helene response and recovery efforts.

Under their leadership, FEMA has provided $344 million in direct assistance to survivors, along with an additional $180 million to ensure our federal partners can carry out their critical recovery work.

More than 8,000 federal re- — personnel are deployed, including FEMA Disaster Survivor Assistant teams that are in the neighborhood — in the — in neighborhoods across the affected states helping survivors apply for assistance.  These personnel across the Southeast, including Florida, will both continue Hurricane Helene recovery efforts and respond to the impacts of Hurricane Milton.

As the president has said, we will be there for the communities devastated by this storm for as long as it takes. 

The president and vice president received a briefing on the administration’s lifesaving preparations ahead of Hurricane Milton.  The president continues to mobilize a whole-of-government effort to prepare for Hurricane Milton.

Earlier this week, the president quickly approved the state of Florider — Florida’s and the — and the Simo- — Seminole Tribe of Florida’s request for an emergency declaration pre-Milton landfall.  He directed his team to keep working to increase the size and presence of our efforts as we prepare for Milton’s landfall.

The president spoke directly to Governor DeSantis, Tampa Mayor Castor, Clearwater Mayor Rector, and Pinellas County Chairwoman Peters to make sure we are meeting their needs and gave them his personal number so they can call him directly.

As the president’s — at the president’s direction, the administration has been in touch with more than 60 local officials in cities and counties along the likely path of impact to ensure needs are met in advance of the storm.

The president gathered his Cabinet, representing 16 agencies and departments, to ensure every corner of the U.S. government is assisting with Helene recovery and preparations for Milton.

And at the president’s direction, FEMA Administration — Administrator Criswell will travel to Florida tonight to join the pers- — the personnel on the ground and ensure every Floridian gets the help that they need.  FEMA is pre-staging a full slate of response capabilities in Florida and the region, including eight Urban Search & Rescue teams; three U.S. Coast Guard swiftwater rescue teams; 15.6 million meals, 13.9 million liters of water already pre-positioned; an additional 20 million meals and 40 million liters of water ready to deploy as needed; more than 1,000 staff already in the region.

And as the president and the vice president have said, any attempts to price gouge Americans, whether at the gas pumps, airports, or hotel counter, during this storm are unacceptable.  The Justice Department, FTC, and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau put out a statement warning consumers about those looking to take advantage of natural disasters.

The administration will also continue to work out — to — to work out and call out misinformation and conspiracy theories around the storm and federal and state responses.  This is wrong, dangerous, and it must stop immediately.  You heard the president speak to this just moments ago.

Everyone, especially those in positions of power, must do everything they can to encourage survivors to register for assistance, not discourage them by allowing these falsehoods to fester.

This storm will be catastrophic.  It will be catastrophic.  We urge everyone to listen to local officials and, if you are told to evacuate, do so — please do so immediately.

If you can’t evacuate or need a safe place to shelter, text “shelter” and your zip code to 43362 to get a list of open shelters near you.

With that, I will turn it over to Administrator Criswell, who is joining us virtually.  Thank you so much, Administrator.  I know you are incredibly busy today, but thank you for your time.

And with that, I’m going to just turn it over to you. 

ADMINISTRATOR CRISWELL:  (Via teleconference.)  All right.  Thank you very much, Karine.

So, good afternoon, everybody.  As you just heard from Karine, I just had an opportunity to brief President Biden and Vice President Harris on our preparatory actions as we prepare for Hurricane Milton to make landfall in Florida. 

The entire federal family is leaning forward for Milton’s response.  And right now, I am in North Carolina continuing to lead the response and recovery efforts for the impacts to Helene across many states.  But I will be traveling this evening to Florida to be with the team that I have there on the ground, as well as meet with the governor and his team, to make sure that we are working side by side to meet the needs of Floridians as Hurricane Milton passes through the state.

I want to deliver a very important message to the people of Florida: This is going to be a catastrophic storm.  It is going to be a potentially deadly storm.  Please listen to your local officials, as they will be giving you the best information about what you need to do where you are located. 

This storm is going to bring deadly storm surge, intense winds, flooding, but it is already bringing tornadoes across Florida.  So, if you do get an emergency message on your phone right now for a tornado warning, please seek shelter immediately. 

My heart goes out to all of the Floridians who have been in the path of many storms.  They have had impacts from Hurricane Ian, Hurricane Debby, Hurricane Idalia, and now Hurricane Helene and Hurricane Milton.  Floridians, they’re no strangers to these storms, but this one, Hurricane Milton, is expected to be catastrophic. 

And I promise you that FEMA is ready.  FEMA and the entire federal family will be there to provide those immediate lifesaving activities and begin to stabilize the incident after the storm passes. 

And, again, I will be there on the ground to assess the impacts and prioritize the movement of federal resources to where the state needs them most.

Today, tonight, and tomorrow, these are going to be tough as we watch the impacts move across Florida.  And, again, we’re already seeing impacts from this storm with tornadoes and high winds happening in different parts of Florida.

The most important thing is your safety.  And I need everyone listening to do everything you can to protect yourself and your family as Milton passes.

Some of you may still be able to safely evacuate.  Others, it may be too late.  Again, I need you to listen to your local officials.  They will know exactly what you are still able to do.

And if you receive, again, a tornado warning on your phone, through a NOAA radio, or from your local officials — there are tornadoes that are happening now — you need to seek shelter immediately. 

I have also been in contact with Governor DeSantis, Mayor Castor, Mayor Welch, and Mayor Dyer, as well as all the Tribal nations in Florida that are in the path of this storm. 

The president’s swift approval of the pre-landfall emergency declaration for Florida, as well as the Seminole Tribe of Florida, allows us to be able to employ the resources that we have staged to immediately begin to save lives and support the response activities.

In addition to the thousands of people that I already have on the ground in Florida for Hurricane Helene, as well as the previous storms from previous years, at the president’s direction, I sent an additional 1,200 search and rescue personnel, 6 incident management assistance teams, multiple power assessment teams, and dozens of medical facility assessment personnel into the area pre-landfall.

We’ve also staged over 500 ambulances, and the search and rescue teams include high-water vehicles and air assets, as well as boats, to support those lifesaving activities in the first hours after the storm passes.

As you heard Karine say, we’ve also pushed millions of meals and liters of water into Florida to support those immediate needs. 

And let me be clear: The movement of these resources and these commodities are not taking away from our ongoing response and recovery efforts in North Carolina and the other states that were impacted by Hurricane Helene. 

We are built for this.  We have managed multiple simultaneous catastrophic incidents before, and we are prepared to do this again. 

And I want the people to hear it from me: FEMA is ready.  Our agency is postured to respond to this storm and maintain our current response and recovery efforts for Hurricane Helene-impacted states.  And we will be providing and I will be providing regular updates to President Biden and Vice President Harris as this storm passes so we can make sure that we are getting all of the federal resources that are needed to support their response.  And they have directed me, as they always do, to make sure that Floridians continue to get everything they need. 

I want to be clear, we at FEMA stand ready to both continue our support to Hurricane Helene and respond to the impacts from Hurricane Milton.  This is what we do best.  We manage complex incidents.  We coordinate, we communicate, and we respond. 

And, again, I will be traveling to Florida later today so I can join my team, as well as our state partners that are in the field preparing for the impacts from Hurricane loteim [Milton].

My leadership team, they are the best of the best.  They are trained to work across multiple states and support the impacts that states are going to be feeling.  And I want to know — I want everybody to know that we are prepared for what we need to do to support Florida, as well as all of the other states.

Before I take questions, I just want to emphasize, once again, because this is extremely important: People need to listen to their local officials.  They need to take this storm seriously.  It’s going to hit the west coast of Florida as a major hurricane, and it will still be a hurricane as it departs on the eastern coast of Florida.  There will be flooding.  There will be tornadoes, storm surge. 

Take the actions you need to to protect yourself and your family.  We do not need to lose any lives as a result of this storm.  We have the time to prepare.  Make sure that you’re taking those actions now.

And with that, Karine, I’ll take any questions. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Thank you so much, Administrator.  I just want to remind folks that she can only hear us; can’t see us.  So, I’m going to start calling on folks right now. 

Go ahead.  Go ahead, Aamer.

Q    Thank you.  I appreciate you making this time.  Do you have an estimate of the universe of how many people are not heeding the evacuation orders and remain at risk?

ADMINISTRATOR CRISWELL:  I do not have an estimate, but what I can tell you is that I was in Florida on Monday.  I met with the mayor of Tampa and the mayor of St. Petersburg, and I saw people leaving the area.  People are listening.  They are leaving.

But we know there’s always a few that want to stay behind and protect their home.  This storm is different.  This storm is going to bring deadly storm surge, and so I want people who still have time to evacuate to make sure that they’re doing so but doing so safely, under the guidance and the advice of their local officials.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, M.J.

Q    Thank you, Administrator.  This is M.J. Lee with CNN.  The White House has been talking a lot about the threat of misinformation, disinformation as it relates to storm recovery efforts.  Can you talk to us about whether there’s one piece of incorrect information that you think, in your view, has been most damaging that you think would be the most important to clarify?

ADMINISTRATOR CRISWELL:  Well, honestly, I think all of it is damaging to our ability to be able to reach people.  It’s intentional to create distrust, and that level of distrust is, as the president said earlier today, un-American.  And what we need to do is make sure people can get the assistance that they need and they deserve. 

And so, I want people to be able to come to us, register for assistance so we can help them on their road to recovery.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Nandita.

Q    Thank you, Karine.  Administrator, you have said that FEMA has enough money to get through both Hurricanes Helene and Milton, but that you’re assessing how much more you need from Congress.  Is there an assessment that you can share with us?

ADMINISTRATOR CRISWELL:  We’re continuing to make that assessment, as we do not know what it’s going to cost us right now to get through Hurricane Milton.  I think, as I briefed all of you before, we went into Immediate Needs Funding in August of this year.  That allowed me to make sure I had enough money for this response, and I needed that for Hurricane Helene. 

Without going into INF, I probably would not have had enough money to support Hurricane Helene.

With the full authority to spend against the president’s fiscal year ‘25 budget, I’ve been able to start paying the recovery projects that we put on hold.  But the — the amount that we’re spending for Hurricane Helene and the amount that we anticipate we’re going to spend for Hurricane Milton, we are watching that very closely and assessing it every day so we can have a good estimate of how much more that we will need to be asking for in a supplemental.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Selina.

Q    Thank you, Karine.  Thank you, Administrator Criswell.  Selina Wang with ABC News.  Could you give any specific examples about the real-world impact that this misinformation is having, both in terms of are you seeing people who aren’t taking precautions because they don’t trust the government or FEMA or NOAA?  And then, in terms of the threat to FEMA workers, have you seen examples of threats against them on the ground?

ADMINISTRATOR CRISWELL:  Yeah.  I think the — the biggest thing is that — what I am hearing is people that are not coming to us and asking us for assistance.  They’re not registering for the help that they need, or they are afraid to approach some of our staff because they are unsure of what the government is doing. 

I think one of the biggest ones that I continue to hear is that we’re going to take their land from them.  Simply untrue.  When you register for assistance, we give you an initial amount of money, $750, to help support those immediate needs.  And there were rumors out there that if you a- — you received this money and you didn’t pay it back that we would take your home.  Simply untrue. 

This is a series of — of assistance that we give over time, those immediate needs.  We’ve already given out over $60 million in North Carolina alone for people’s property losses, as well as this immediate assistance.  We will continue to give that money out. 

And as it relates to my staff, I mean, it’s just demoralizing.  I think that they take it personally.  They have left their families and their homes to come here and support people in need.  But they’re focused.  They continue to stay focused on why they’re here.  They know their purpose, and that is to help people, and we’ll continue to do that

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Gabe.

Q    Thank you, Administrator.  You said before that you have dealt with misinformation in the past.  Why do you think that misinformation is so rampant this time around?  Is it because of the election?  Is it because of certain politicians?  Is it become — because of tech platforms?  Or is it because of, potentially, a foreign actor?

ADMINISTRATOR CRISWELL:  Yeah.  I mean, I have definitely seen misinformation before.  We have had misinformation for, you know, ver- — a long time.  But we have seen it increase recently. 

We saw a significant increase in the response in Maui and, even more — the greatest amount that I’ve seen in this response to Hurricane Helene.  You know, I don’t want to speculate as to why we’re seeing this increase.  It’s just damaging, and it’s — just makes it harder for us to do our job, and it’s a distraction for the people that are out there doing really hard work to help the people get the assistance that they need and deserve. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Ken.

Q    Could you just describe the — the storm is going to be making landfall at — late at night on — on the west coast.  To what extent does that add to the complications or the dangers for residents?  And — and just how unique is it, the fact that it will be a hurricane when it hits the west coast but also a hurricane when it exits the east coast of Florida?

ADMINISTRATOR CRISWELL:  I think any time we see a storm hit during the evening, it just complicates things — right? — because we know that we will have power outages as a result of this.  It will be dark.  People will have to try to protect themselves without the same level of light that they’re used to.  It just creates a whole other level of complication. 

But as we heard from Director Brennan earlier today, it is very rare for a storm to be a hurricane when it makes landfall and as it exits the state.  It’s going to move quickly, according to him, through the state, but that means it’s going to create these catastrophic impacts across the state.  We’re going to see the most significant storm surge on the west coast, but we know, from Hurricane Ian, how much inland flooding and flash flooding that happened on the east coast in the Orlando area. 

And so, we’re concerned about that, and that’s why I talked to the mayor of Orlando earlier today, to make sure he knew that even though the west coast is getting a lot of focus on this, that the east coast is going to have significant threats as well.  And that’s why I’ve also got incident management teams right there in the Orlando area to help work side by side with the local officials so we can get those resources in as quickly as possible when this storm is making landfall and moving across the state.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  And I know, Administrator, you have to head out. 

Akayla, you have the last question.

Q    Okay.  Hi, Administrator.  I’m just wondering if the administration is confident that the election will still be able to be conducted by November — that power outages, that roads will be safe to drive on so voters can cast their ballot.

ADMINISTRATOR CRISWELL:  So, you know, the election piece is with the states, and we have resources that we can help them with to ensure we meet whatever needs that they have, and — and we’ll continue to work with them if they have any specific requirements. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Thank you so much, Administrator.  Safe travels.  I know you’ve been in —

ADMINISTRATOR CRISWELL:  Thanks, Karine.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  — North Carolina for some time helping on the ground there.  We really appreciate everything that you’re doing.  And safe travels to Florida tonight.  Thank you. 

ADMINISTRATOR CRISWELL:  Thanks, Karine.  Thanks, everybody.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.  Aamer.

Q    Oh, great.  On the — the Netanyahu call earlier today.  Was the president told by Prime Minister Netanyahu how he intends to respond to Iran after the October 1 attack?  And then, secondly, the prime minister’s office and President Trump have confirmed they spoke last week.  Was the White House informed of that call ahead of time?  And do you know the contents of that call?  And just generally, are you comfortable with that type of conversation happening?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, a couple of things.  You a- — you just asked me a slew of things there.  I just — I do want to say, I know there’s the rabbi call that the president is going to be doing momentarily.  We’ll let you know when that happens.  I think we’re running a little bit behind, and I know that there’s going to be an opportunity for all of you all to — to tune in. 

Let me just give you a couple of just top lines on the call.  It lasted about 30 minutes.  It was 30 minutes long.  It was direct.  It was productive — obviously, the call that the president had with the prime minister of Israel.

They discussed a range of issues, and we are going to have a readout shortly that you all will — will have to — to get a better sense of what was discussed on the call.  So, I’m not going to get ahead of that.  I know the team is — is working through that at — at this time. 

So, as you all know, the U.S. and — and the Israeli government have been discussing — have had discussion since last week after — certainly since after the Iran attack.  And so, that — those discussions continued with the president and the prime minister.  Certainly not going to get into those discussions.  There’s going to be a readout.  Don’t have anything else beyond — beyond that to share.

But I can say that they did have a discussion about that, and it is a continued discussion.  It started off with, obviously, staff-level discussion in the last week.  And obviously, the two leaders had an opportunity to — to talk directly.  Like I said, it was productive.  It was direct.  It lasted about 30 minutes. 

And this is on top of more than a dozen calls that the pr- — president and the prime minister have had since October 7th of last year.

As it relates to your — one of your questions there about the — the book, look, as you know, there are —

Q    There wasn’t a — I’m sorry —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Oh, okay. 

Q    About — about the Trump conversation last week. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Oh.  Oh — wait.

Q    Did I — did I ask about the book as well?  But —

Q    We can come back to the book. 

Q    We can come back.  There’s plenty of questions, if you’d like to answer that as well.  But —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.

Q    — particularly about Trump’s conversation, I think that’s more pertinent to today’s call.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Well, say more about the Trump conversation.

Q    So, Trump spoke with Netanyahu last week. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Oh, I see what you’re saying.  Okay.

Q    And —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.  Yeah, okay.  (Laughs.)

Q    And were you guys aware what that — and are you —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Look, I — I don’t — I don’t — that’s something for, obviously, the Trump — the Trump team to speak to.  I can’t speak to that, about their conversation.  I just don’t have anything to add about that.

Q    Well, I guess what’s more relevant —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    — are we having, like, two — two different — a former administration and a current administration doing foreign policy at the same time?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — I mean, look, as you know, there’s one — one president as a — at a time.  That has been the way that we’ve done this — right? — in this country.  And so, that is what exists. 

The president — the current president — the President Biden had a conversation with the prime minister.  They’ve had m- — as I mentioned, more than — more than a dozen conversations since the past — the past year, since October 7th of 2023.  And I think what you have seen from this administration is the continued support for Israel’s security. 

You saw that over the past c- — past couple of days, obviously, since the — past couple of weeks.  When Iran attacked Israel, the president directed his military to protect Israel.  He was very proud to be able to do that.  And that support continues. 

They had a — as I said, a direct, a productive conversation, as they’ve had for many times.  This is — when you think about the president and the — and the prime minister, they’ve known each other for decades — for decades.  And so, that’s what I can speak to. 

I’m not going to get into the former president and his conversation with world leaders.

Q    And if I can just ask one about the book.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    Russia said today that the COVID testing material that was given to Putin by Trump was nothing abnormal.  Back then, there was a lot of trading going on of material.  Is that true?

And then, if it is true —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    — why was the president going after Trump yesterday at the Casey fundraiser over giving Putin this material?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I mean, look, that was a — a political event, so I’m going to let the president —

Q    Okay.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  — speak to whatever he — what he said at that event.  I’m not going to say be- — go beyond that. 

What I will say is, when it — as it relates to what happened in the last administration, how then the president behaved and — and what he was able to — you know, to do, whatever is being reported, I’m going to leave it to the 2020 — that time in 2020 to that administration. 

Look, what I can say and we can say very proudly and — and forcefully, I believe, is how this president responded to a once-in-a-century pandemic.  He put forth a comprehensive strategy to move forward, to get shots in arms, money in pockets, at a time where the economy was at a tailspin.  And this is a president that took that very, very seriously, along with a critical partnership that he had with the vice president, and that’s why we’ve seen the economy turn around.  That’s why we all sitting here today without masks on, because the president actually took this seriously and made sure that we were able to get out of the pandemic.  That’s what I’m going to speak to. 

The president said what he — he wanted to say yesterday, and I’ll leave it as that.

Q    But that — I guess, are you — is it just adding some misinformation then?  Because that — what the president — the last president at that time was doing what it sounds like he thought was the right thing.  Everybody needed material at that time. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m going to let the former president speak for himself and how he behaved and the actions that he’s took.  That is for him to speak to.  What I can speak to is what the president has done over the last three and a half years. 

And look, when we came into this administration, we did not have a comprehensive strategy to deal with COVID.  That did not happen. 

I mean, you had a former president who was telling people to inject bleach — to inject bleach.  And you have this president and this vice president who took it very seriously and put forth a comprehensive strategy to deal with a once-in-a-century pandemic.  And the economy is now — just looking at the data, the economy has turned around.  We are leading with the economy worldly, globally.  And, you know, we are in a different place.  We are in a different place.  And that is because of the leadership of this president. 

We all saw — you all — some of you were in this room — when the former president would come to the podium to talk about the — the pandemic and the lies that was spewing and what was happening.  And this president took it seriously.  That’s what I can say. 

Go ahead, Gabe.

Q    Thanks, Karine.  Regarding the Woodward book and Prime Minister Netanyahu, you said that — and you have referenced the dozen calls the president has had —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.  More — more than a dozen calls.

Q    — with the prime minister since the start of the w- –

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    As it was brought up last time, he hadn’t had one before this — before October — excuse me, before August 21st. 

In the book, Woodward reports that the president used an expletive when referring to Netanyahu and calling him a bad guy and other disparaging remarks.  What’s the White House response to that?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, I’ll say first that, look, there’s going to be many books that are written about this administration and many administrations.  It’s — it’s a typical thing to — to occur.  Nothing atypical about that. 

I’m not going to weigh in on particulars in each one of those books.  What I can say to that question that you asked me: I cannot confirm.  That is not something that I can confirm from here. 

Q    But does — does it speak of the relationship of President Biden and Netanyahu?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — and this is what I’ve said moments ago, Gabe, which is this president and the prime minister have known each other for decades, and their conversations, their — their relationship have always been honest and direct.  And this 30-minute conversation that they had today was also direct and very productive. 

And, you know, you — you have heard the president say he doesn’t agree with everything and they have disagreements, but because they have had these decade- — decades-long

relationship, they’re able to be honest with each other. 

I think what matters here is that this administration, this president’s commitment to Israel’s security is iron- — is ironclad.  And that will be — conti- — certainly be — be — continue to be the case.

Q    And quickly, on another topic, on the reporting in that book that he — that former President Trump spoke with Vladimir Putin at least seven times since leaving office, is that appropriate?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, we’re not aware of those calls.  I certainly can’t confirm any of those calls from here, but it if — but if it is indeed true, are we concerns?  Do we have serious concerns?  Yes, if it is true.  Again, I cannot confirm any of those calls. 

Let’s not forget, it is concerning, especially when we know the former president was lobbying against more aid for Ukraine — to Ukraine to defend themselves against Russia’s aggression. 

So, if true, it is concerning.  But again, I want to be really clear, I cannot confirm any of these calls. 

Q    But is it — how is it possible that the intelligence community wouldn’t know that —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I can’t —

Q    — a former president spoke with Putin?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — I hear you.  I just cannot confirm those calls happened. 

Q    And the president has not been briefed on this?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I cannot confirm any of these calls were true.

Go ahead.

Q    Thanks, Karine.  Given that the president canceled his foreign trip — he would have left, I think, tomorrow morning for Germany and Angola — can you give us just a sense of what the next few days will look like as he is monitoring Milton? 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    Will he be here the whole time, probably?  Is it possible he will go to Delaware over the weekend?  Are you guys talking about a possible trip to Florida at some point —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    — already?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, as you saw this morning, the president is going to continue to get hurricane briefings, not just on Milton and how we’re preparing and what’s happening.  Obviously, we’re all certainly very much focused — he’s going to be laser focused on that, as well as the vice president.  And so, he’ll continue to be updated, continue to get those briefings. 

I don’t have any travel to read out to you at this time, whether it is to the impacted areas or outside of that. 

What I can say is the president is going to continue to — to be laser focused on the storms and what’s happening, the pre- — the preparations, how we are still certainly responding to the immediate needs of folks who have been impacted by Hurricane Helene as well.  That is also very much in — in front of us and what we’re trying to do and get done there. 

But that’s going to be his focus.  You’ll continue to hear more from the president — I can guarantee you that — over the next couple of days. 

But what we want to share very, very clearly with Floridians out there: It is important to evacuate.  It is important to take this storm very, very seriously.  It will be catastrophic. 

You heard from the FEMA administrator.  She is headed down to Florida to — to be there with her team, to assist on the ground as we are pre-positioning and preparing for this storm. 

Q    And just back to the phone call with Prime Minister Netanyahu.  Did the president at any point in this phone call — you said that it was constructive — urge the prime minister to not take certain actions as they relate to either the situation in Lebanon or potential retaliatory strikes against Iran? 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, I’m going to say what I said moments ago.  This was a continued discussion on the leaders’ level.  As you know, the staff level has been talking since last week.  And it is certainly to continue to speak to the response on Iran’s attack and a — and a long — a long list of other — other conversations and issues that they wanted to discuss between the two leaders. 

I don’t have anything else to — to speak to or to say.  There’s going to be a readout shortly that will have a little bit more detail of that conversation.  I’m just not going to get into specifics from here. 

Q    Would it — would it be safe to say that the president now has a clear understanding of and a clear picture of what Israel’s plans are for retaliating against Iran?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  What I can tell you is they had a discussion, a con- — they continued their discussion on — on a response to Iran’s attack, a discussion — last week, a discussion that certainly started at the staff level, and now the two leaders were able to have a productive, straightforward, honest conversation, as they tend to do. 

I don’t have anything beyond that. 

Go ahead, Selina.

Q    Thanks, Karine.  So, Vice President Harris was also on that call between President Biden and Netanyahu.  Can you just explain the role she played in that call?  Did she just listen in?  Did she weigh in on the issues as well?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I would refer you to her team to speak to that.

Q    And just going back to the contents of the call.  I know there’s a readout coming out soon. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    But can you just describe the tone of that call in terms of was the president continuing to push back on issues that were being presented to him from Netanyahu?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  It was dir- — direct, and it was productive.  That’s what I’ll share. 

Q    And can we say at this point if Israel has made a decision on how they want to respond?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  They continue to have a discussion on Israel response to the attacked — Iran’s attack last week.  I’m not going to go into specifics or details.  There’s going to be a readout shortly. 

Go ahead.  Go ahead, Michael.

Q    Thanks, Karine.  Going back to your warnings against price gouging during the hurricanes.  I’m just wondering, does the administration have any reports that that’s actually happening, or was this just intended to be a preemptory strike to keep it from happening?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Well, I think certainly a preemptive st- — a preemptive attempt to keep it from happening.  We’re keeping a close eye on prices at the pump, at the airport, obviously, and also these hotel counters to just make sure that it doesn’t happen. 

We tend to see this type of behavior during this time, and we want to be very, very clear: It is not okay.  It is not — there is no time to do that.  But certainly when people are evacuating, when people are fearful about — about what’s — what’s to come, especially with a historic hurricane like Hurricane Milton, we want to make sure that this is not happening. 

And that’s why the Department of Transportation is on top of it.  You have DOJ, FDC, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.  And so, they’re going to certainly take actions here and — to protect consumers.  And that is what we want to make sure that we’re doing.  We’re protecting consumers.  We’re protecting Americans.  And so, that’s our focus. 

Go ahead.

Q    Thanks, Karine.  Going back to the reporting in the — the Woodward book.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    If former President Trump has been speaking to President Putin — he’s also had calls and meetings with other foreign leaders, both since he left office and since he announced his latest campaign for the presidency — is the administration at all concerned that he appears to be running a — a shadow foreign policy while campaigning for president against —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    — the incumbent administration?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  And so, look, I’m going to give you the same answer that I give to Aamer here, which is, as we know, it’s one president at a — at a time.  That is how we do our business here in this country, as you know very — very clearly. 

Look — and I said, if there was a — we cannot confirm this — if there was a call with President Putin, if that is indoo- — indeed true, yeah, there are concerns, especially when you had the former president lobbying against Ukraine aid.  Yeah. 

But I cannot confirm that.  I cannot confirm those calls.

Q    What about hi- — his meetings with foreign leaders such as Viktor Orbán, who has opposed aid to Ukraine as well?  Is — is —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Look, I’m going to let the for- — the former president speak to his calls with world leaders.  I’m not going to dive into that. 

But what I will say is that this president is focused at — at what’s at hand, right?  He had a conversation with the prime minister — 30 minutes, as I stated, half an hour.  It was direct.  It was very much honest.  It was to show that, you know, we’re going to continue to have those discussions with Israel on how they’re going to respond after Iran’s attack last week.  You saw what this administration, what this president directed his military to do.  And our commitment to Israel’s security continues to be ironclad. 

That is what I can speak to, and that is what we’re focused on. 

Q    One — one more —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  And as you know, we have a hurricane, Milton, that’s coming, and you heard from the president.  So, he has a lot to focus on —

Q    Right.  And one —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  — and that —

Q    One —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  — and as a — as his le- — as a leader, that’s what he’s going to do. 

Q    One more on the same topic.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Sure. 

Q    Traditionally, when — when former presidents do interface with — with foreign leaders, there — there is a process by which they can liaise with the incumbent administration to be possibly briefed on any — any policy concerns and — and possibly provide a readout of those conversations afterwards. 

Has President — has former President Trump availed himself of — of any resources that might be available to him?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I don’t have anything to speak to on that particular question.  But I — I understand your question.  I just don’t have anything for you at this time. 

Go ahead, Aurelia.

Q    Thanks, Karine.  One more try on the Bibi call.  Sorry. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Sure.

Q    Do — did the president, during this conversation, address the latest comments Prime Minister Netanyahu made, saying that Lebanon could experience the same level of destruction as Gaza if they don’t free themselves from Hezbollah?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, as I stated, they had a productive and honest conversation.  But what I will say very clearly about that particular question is we — we cannot and will not see Lebanon turn into Gaza — into another Gaza.  That is not what we want to see. 

The suffering in both Gaza and Lebanon adds even greater urgency, as you’ve heard from us, to our efforts certainly to end the conflicts and lay a foundation for lasting peace and security in the region. 

For over a year — you think about what has occurred for over a year.  You’ve seen Hezbollah has attacked Israel and rejected all off-ramps to this conflict.  That’s what you have seen. 

The suffering we are seeing in Lebanon could have been avoided — could have been avoided, if — if Hezbollah would have stopped its rockets’ attacks on Israel. 

So, look, I’m going to just reiterate what our position is when it comes to Lebanon.  We are working our way back towards a ceasefire process, and that’s going to create a space to negotiate a diplomatic resolution that only ends the fighting — that’s what we’re going to continue to do — and allow civilians from both sides of the Blue Line to return — to return home.  And we want to see that be done safely and certainly with security as well. 

And so, that’s what our focus is going to be on.

Go ahead, in the middle.

Q    Wh- —

Q    Thank you, Karine.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  No, no —

Q    I’ve got a — I’ve got a FEMA —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I keep trying to call her, and it’s a —  let me let her go.  Go ahead.  Go ahead.

Q    Thank you.  So, more on the — on the Middle East.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    At this point, does the White House understand that Israel is planning to attack energy facilities in Iran?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, we’ve spoken to that.  And, look, I’m not going to get into hypotheticals.  I’m not going to get that — get into that from here.  That has been asked of the president; that has been asked of us last week.

What I can say is that we’ve had discussions.  We’re continuing discussions with Israel on their response to Is- — to Iran’s attack last week.  I’m not going to dive into it.  I’m not going to get into it from here.

And so, you saw that happening on the staff level.  And now what you saw today was that happening on the leaders level. 

I’m not going to get into hypotheticals or speculations from here.

Q    And how would you describe right now the relationship between the president and Netanyahu?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I mean, look, they’ve known each other for decades.  They’ve known each other for decades.  And because of that, they’re able to have that frank conversation.  Because of that, the president is able to be honest, and they’re both able to be honest to each other. 

And I think what — what I can report to you, and I’ve said this multiple times already: The conversation that they had today was productive and it was direct, very much in line with many other conversations that they have had, not just in the past year but over decades. 

And I think you’ve heard the president speak directly about his relationship with the prime minister.

And so, they’ve known each other for a long time.  They have had a decades-long friendship.  And I think — I think that’s — that says — that says it all for me. 

Go ahead.

Q    Thank you.  Staying on the Middle East.  You said that the administration will continue evacuating U.S. citizens from Lebanon as long as the airport is open.  Do you have any guarantee that Israel is not bombing the airport?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Say that one more time, the last part.  I didn’t hear that.

Q    Do you have — does the White House have any guarantee that Israel will not bomb Beirut airport?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, we’re going to have very direct conversations with the government of Israel about the shape and the nature — as we speak about Lebanon, specifically, right? — and the ultimate scope of their campaign.  And those conversations are going to continue.

And I’m not going to get into specific conversations that we’re having, but it will be — it will continue to be very direct.  And — and that’s what you’ve seen over the past year, and that’s what’s going to continue.

Q    You also said that you are working towards a ceasefire and a diplomatic solution —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    — as this outcome to the crisis.  So, wh- — how exactly will this materialize, considering Israel has rejected a ceasefire, a diplomatic solution, and Hezbollah leaders are being killed one after the other?  So, who are you talking to when you talk about ceasefire?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Look, we want to see — as the president has said, we want to reach a ceasefire deal — that’s what we want to see — and, again, to provide space for that diplomatic resolution, those diplomatic conversations.  And we want to see civilians on both sides to return back home and — on both sides of the border, obviously.

And so, those discussions continue.  We have been very clear that those conversation have been continuing for some time now.  And ultimately — ultimately, we need a diplomatic resolution.  We understand that.  We have to have a diplomatic resolution, and that’s the only way to achieve that long-lasting stability — right? — when you think about security across the Israel — Israel and Lebanon border.

And so, that’s what we want to see.  It doesn’t stop us from having those conversations, to having those discussions.

Today, you heard from me, you heard from — from us, that the two leaders spoke about an array of issues.  They continued that discussion about how they’re — how Israel is going to respond to Iran’s attack from last week, and a bunch of other things that are incredibly important to both leaders. 

We’ll have a readout shortly that will share a little bit more.

Q    And one last question.  In two weeks, there is already eight hospitals in Lebanon that are out of service.  There is thousands of being — people being killed.  There is 1 million forced to flee their homes. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    And the Israelis has calling for more troops.  So, how can this not be a scenario in Gaza that we have seen it unfolding? 

And second, is — isn’t that a mission creep?  How do you agree with the Israelis on the outcome of the war if Netanyahu said, “We’re going to continue regardless of what the White House, more or less, is saying as long as we are not achieving our — our aims in Lebanon”?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Look — look, I’m going to say what I said moments ago.  We do not want to see Gaza — what happened in Gaza happen in Lebanon.  That’s what I said, and that is something that we do not want to see. 

And as we’ve said, Israel does have the right to defend itself and, you know, to go after their — their security threats that they see. 

But one civilian casualty is too many, and we’ve been very clear about that.  They must take — Israel must take every feasible precaution to prevent civilian harm.  And those are the conversation, discussions that we’re going to continue to have. 

And, look, you heard from us.  We announced some huma- — humanitarian assistance for Lebanon for the challenges that they’re dealing with — $157 million — we announced that last week — to deal with those — to those humanitarian challenges. 

And so, we’re aware of what’s going on, and we’ve been very clear.  We’ve been very clear on this.

Go ahead, Jared.

Q    Just two kind of clarifying questions — at least clarifying for me; they may be clear for others.  But have you — in the talks that the president has had with the Israeli prime minister, sort of beyond just kind of the details or the readout, is there now an expectation that Israel would inform the administration in advance of action it’s planning to take against Iran?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  What I can tell you: that the discussions continue on how Israel’s going to respond to that attack, to the attack from Iran last week.  Those discussions continue.  I’m not going to get into details from here or specifics.

Q    And then just quickly on — on the — Lebanon.  You talked about kind of the efforts being made to help Americans get out. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah, Americans who are in Lebanon.

Q    So far, are those all — are those all commercial flights at this point?  Or are you talking about, like, some military charters or diplomatic charters as well?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.  So, what I spoke to was commercial flights and what we’re trying to do: get some seats on — certainly on these flights.  I would refer you to the State Department.  They did a very well — a very good laydown of this as well, and they’re certainly helping to lead that effort.  So, I would refer you to the State Department on any specifics. 

Go ahead, Phil.

Q    Thank you, Karine.  You’re pretty consistent: You don’t often speculate about hypotheticals.  But today, on more than one occasion, you’ve said that if it’s true that former President Trump spoke with Vladimir Putin, then that’s concerning. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    I’m — I’m wondering: Why is this administration willing to speculate about that in particular?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I said if it’s true —

Q    Speculation.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  It’s speculation, but if it’s true — because I knew — right? — we all knew that you all will have — will have questions about — for us about the national security concerns, about our thoughts about this. 

And so, if it is indeed true — right? — we’re talking about President Putin here.  We see what’s happening in Ukraine.  Russia’s aggression in Ukraine.  That’s about democracy.  That’s about Ukrainians fighting for their freedom. 

And we’ve heard the former president say and lobby against the — the funding for Ukraine. 

So, yeah, if it is true, it is indeed concerning, because we’re talking about our national security here.  So, we wanted to be ver- — I want it to be very, very clear.  And so, I’ll leave it there.

Q    And then a second question.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Sure.

Q    Does President Biden regret making Merrick Garland his attorney general, as Mr. Woodward has reported? 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Look, the reason I’m able to speculate — because that’s a national security concern.  I wanted to be very clear about that.  But as I’ve stated many times before, there’s going to be many books written about an administration.  It’s not — it’s very much typical.  And I’m just not going to comment on every specific — every — every matter that comes up or any particulars that come up.

Q    And then a national security question.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah. 

Q    Mr. Woodward also reports that, according to intelligence reports, White House officials here believed that there was as much of a 50 percent chance that Russia would use a tactical nuclear weapon in Ukraine.  I mean, is — is — that 50 percent odds number, is that accurate?  And if so —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    — would this administration, you know, let the American public know that that kind of risk is real? 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Again, I’m not going to speak to everything that is in a book, every particular.  There’s going to be many books written, and we understand that.  It’s not atypical.  But I won’t respond to every piece in the book. 

All right, guys.  Got to go.  Thank you so much.  We’ll see you tomorrow. 

2:52 P.M. EDT

The post Press Briefing by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell appeared first on The White House.

Via Teleconference

11:34 A.M. EDT

MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ:  Hi.  Good morning, everyone.

Thank you for joining today’s press call to preview President Biden’s trip to Wisconsin and the Biden-Harris administration’s efforts to ensure every community has access to clean, safe drinking water.

Today’s call will begin with on-the-record remarks from White House Deputy Chief of Staff Natalie Quillian and EPA Administrator Michael Regan.  After their remarks, we will have a question-and-answer period, which will be on background and attributable to “senior administration officials.”

As a reminder, the contents of this call and the written materials you received over email are embargoed until tomorrow, October 8th at 5:00 a.m. Eastern.

With that, I will turn it over to Natalie.  

MS. QUILLIAN:  Great.  Thank you.  And thank you all for joining us today. 

I’d like to begin with the big picture.  So, since day one, the president and the vice president have been clear that all Americans, no matter where they come from, should have access to their most basic needs, including being able to turn on the tap and drink clean drinking water without fear.

We know that there is no safe level of lead exposure.  Lead service lines pose a severe health risk, especially in our children, damaging the brain and kidneys.

That’s why the president committed to replace every lead pipe in the country within a decade.

But he didn’t stop there.  He secured over $50 billion to deliver clean water through his Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, including $15 billion in dedicated funding for lead pipe replacement.

Since then, Americans have had their lead pli- — pipes replaced, especially in disadvantaged communities, many of which are communities of color that shoulder most of the burden of lead poisoning.

And tomorrow, the president is furthering his commitments to provide clean, lead-free water nationwide. 

He’ll be traveling to Milwaukee, Wisconsin, to announce EPA’s final rule that will require water systems nationwide to replace lead service lines within 10 years.  He will also announce an additional $2.6 billion from his Bipartisan Infrastructure Law for drinking water upgrades and lead pipe replacements.

This funding not only provides clean drinking water, but this effort is also creating good-paying jobs, many of them union jobs, in replacing lead pipes and delivering clean water.

This investment will accelerate lead pipe replacement, helping to deliver clean water to families, kids, and communities across the nation.

And in Wisconsin, we’re already seeing the results.  Wisconsin has an estimated 340,000 lead pipes, the 10th most lead pipes of any state.  And because of the president’s Bipartisan Infrastructure funding, Milwaukee’s lead pipe replacement timeline has accelerated from 60 years just down to 10 years.

And Milwaukee is now actively replacing lead pipes, using union labor, prioritizing replacements in disadvantaged communities with the most need.

And this announcement comes as part of the president’s commitment to spend his remaining months in office sprinting to the finish and delivering on his historic Investing in America agenda, which is improving the lives of Americans and planting the seeds for a better, more prosperous future for decades to come.

And now I’d like to turn it over to an amazing leader who is helping make this all possible, Administrator Regan. 

Administrator.

ADMINISTRATOR REGAN:  Well, good morning, everyone.  And thank you all for joining this call.

(Inaudible) in implementing President Biden and Vice President Harris’s Investing in America agenda.  Your partnership is helping EPA (inaudible). 

Since the earliest days of this administration, and even before, President Biden had a vision to build a 100 percent (inaudible).

(Inaudible) understands the urgency of getting the lead out of communities, because he and Vice President Harris know that ensuring everyone has access to clean water is a moral imperative.

We know that over 9 million legacy lead pipes continue to deliver water to homes across the country.  But the science has been clear for decades: There is no safe level of lead in our drinking water. 

In children, lead can severely harm mental and physical development, slow down learning, and irreversibly damage the brain.  In adults, lead can cause (inaudible) and even cancer.

But thanks to President Biden and Vice President Harris, we are moving farther and faster than ever before to address this critical issue.

PARTICIPANT:  Do we have an audio issue, Angelo?

MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ:  Yep.  Can we try your connection one more time?

PARTICIPANT:  Hold on one second.  We’re troubleshooting.  Sorry, everybody.  Hold on one second.

We — anything — is this better, Angelo?  This is Nick with Administrator Regan.

MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ:  Yep, that is better.

PARTICIPANT:  Okay.  Should we start from the top or is there a certain point we should pick up at?

MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ:  Let’s start at the top.  Thank you.

PARTICIPANT:  Okay.  Thank you.

ADMINISTRATOR REGAN:  Well, good morning, everyone.  And thank you all for joining today’s call. 

And I’d like to start by thanking the president’s deputy chief of staff, Natalie Quillian.  Natalie, I’m so grateful for your leadership in implementing President Biden and Vice President Harris’s Investing in America agenda.  Your partnership is helping EPA to make a lasting, tangible difference in communities all across the country. 

Since the earliest days of this administration and even before, President Biden had a vision to build a 100 percent lead-free future.

The president understands the urgency of getting the lead out of communities because he and Vice President Harris know that ensuring everyone has access to clean water is a moral imperative.

We know that over 9 million legacy lead pipes continue to deliver water to homes across our country.  But the science has been clear for decades: There is no safe level of lead in our drinking water.  In children, lead can severely harm mental and physical development, slow down learning, and irreversibly damage the brain.  In adults, lead can cause increased blood pressure, heart disease, decreased kidney function, and cancer.

But thanks to President Biden and Vice President Harris, we are moving farther and faster than ever before to address this critical issue, and EPA is at the center of the solution. 

I am very proud to announce that today, EPA has taken another historic step forward to ensure safe, clean drinking water for every child and every person in our nation.  Today, my agency is issuing a final rule requiring drinking water systems across the country to identify and replace lead pipes within 10 years.  The rule also requires increased rigorous drinking water testing and a lower threshold for communities to act on and protect people from lead in drinking water. 

And these actions will help protect millions across this country.  In fact, our new rule will protect up to 900,000 infants from having low birth weight, reduce up to 1,500 cases of premature death from heart disease, prevent up to 200,000 IQ points lost in children, and help close the water equity gap every single year.  But these benefits not only protect public health, they can also reduce health care costs, improve school performance, and boost economic productivity. 

In addition to finalizing this historic rule today, EPA is also announcing $2.6 billion in new funding under the president’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to help cities and states fund infrastructure upgrades to accelerate the removal of lead pipes. 

Folks, there has never been more federal funding available to remove lead pipes.  And let me just add that investing in our water infrastructure is not only an investment in public health, it’s an investment in local economies.  For every $1 billion invested in water infrastructure, we create approximately 15,500 jobs. 

President Biden is the president who is finally putting an end to this generational public health crisis, and, folks, delivering a lead-free America is President Biden’s legacy.

This is a matter of public health, a matter of environmental justice, a matter of basic human rights, and it is finally being met with the urgency it demands.  President Biden has kept his promises, and he is fighting every single day for a cleaner, safer, and healthy America. 

I’m truly grateful to everyone who helped us reach this moment, particularly those in EPA’s Office of Water, who worked tirelessly to finalize this rule. 

With today’s announcement, we have more than enough reason to be optimistic about what’s possible for the future of our country and the future of our planet. 

Now, with that, I’m happy to take a few questions.  Thank you.

MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ:  Thank you, Administrator, and thank you, Natalie.  With that, we will move to the question-and-answer portion of the call.  As a reminder, this will be on background and attributable to “senior administration officials” as they identify themselves.  Comments from Natalie and the administrator will be attributable to them specifically.

As some of you have done, please use the “raise hand” function on Zoom, and we will take a few of your questions.

Okay.  As you’re called upon, please identify yourself and your outlet.  We will start with Aamer. You should be unmuted now.

Q    Hi.  Thank — thank all three of you for doing this.  Two questions.  One, can you just give us a little bit of a preview of, in Wisconsin, where the president will be visiting and sort of how he will be highlighting this announcement?

And then, secondly, is there any disappointment in the president — considering the significance of this announcement — that Senator Baldwin won’t be taking part?  Thanks.

MS. QUILLIAN:  I can — this is Natalie.  I can answer that.  I don’t think we have any specifics yet on exactly — to share where he will be visiting, but as soon as we do, we’ll make sure you have those.  And I think it’s fair to say he will highlight the historic investments that we have made so far, including an additional $2.6 billion that he’ll be — he will be announcing tomorrow, as well as highlighting the stories of Americans whose lead pipes in Wisconsin are being replaced or have been replaced and the impact that’s had on their families and their children. 

And then we’re — you know, Senator Baldwin is a — an amazing partner of this administration and leading the charge in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.  So, we are just pleased to have such a great partner like her in Wisconsin.

MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ:  Thank you, Natalie. 

We will go to Rachel next.  You should be unmuted now. 

Q    Great.  Thank you, guys, for doing this and for taking my question.  I recall in the proposed rule, there had been some concerns raised about exemptions that could leave some places with lead pipes for significantly longer.  I recall Chicago being one of them — having lead pipes possibly for 40 or 50 years, even with these — this rule.  Is this still the case in the final rule?  And could you also send us a copy of the final rule on embargo?

ADMINISTRATOR REGAN:  Well, Rachel, thank you for that question.  And let me just say that the final rule is significantly more stringent than the proposal was.  Some of those numbers that you raised just here and now, those numbers have been slashed significantly.  So, what I would like to say is we are very sure that 99 percent of these cities will meet the deadline, and we’re still taking a look at those that fit in that 1 percent category. 

But let me be very clear:  Those that may fit in that 1 percent category, we will aggressively pursue a timeline that stays in line with the president’s vision. 

Q    Could you give us some idea of, you know — you said those numbers have been slashed.  Can you give us an example and how much it’s been slashed by? 

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Well, I’ll just say — and then I’ll turn it over to — to [senior administration official], who is the expert in our water office.  But, you know, the stringency — the off-ramp, if you will — is a significantly much higher hurdle to obtain, first and foremost.  We have really whittled down the flexibility in this rule. 

And, you know, secondly, this rule is a significant, significant step forward.  But we can’t forget — forget the resources from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and other programs in the water office that will help these cities achieve the president’s vision. 

[Senior administration official], I don’t know if you want to add anything to that. 

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Thank you, [senior administration official].  I would just add only that, as you know, Rachel, the numbers associated with number of lead service lines that exist in places like Chicago at this point are estimates.  And as we get more information about what number of lead service lines exist, then, through the inventories that will be created — the first one is due October 16th, for example — we’ll be in a better position to determine whether communities actually need more time.  And we’ll go through a process for that.

I will add to that that in communities like Chicago, we’re not only looking at and tracking where — how many lead service lines or whether they need extension, but we’re working extensively to ensure that they receive financing to tackle some of those lead service line issues. 

For example, recently, we announced a $336 million loan to the city of Chicago for replacing lead service lines.  And I know that Chicago is working with other cities in the Midwest and the Great Lakes regions to share best practices to accelerate the removal of lead service lines. 

MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ:  Thank you.  We will go to Annie next.  You should be unmuted now.

Q    Hi.  Annie Snider from Politico.  I have two questions.  First of all, I hope you can speak to the vice president’s involvement in this.  If I recall correctly, her office briefed the proposed rule, and my understanding is that she played an important role in the regulatory use of this. 

And then, second of all, this rule is coming out well within the Congressional Review Act window.  Are you concerned at all about this rule getting targeted if Republicans take control of Congress and the White House next year?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Well, let me just say that the vice president, as you have stated, has been a significant partner to EPA as we have traveled the country and really highlighted the president’s vision, which is a 100 percent lead-free future, as well as helping the public understand the implications of lead exposure. 

And so, the vice president has been very, very involved.  We have had a number of good, solid policy discussions.  And that engagement with the vice president, under the president’s leadership, has led to a very, very strong rule, as well as a very strong strategy for how we deploy these resources in the cities and towns that need it the most. 

So, we’re very, very proud of our partnership with the vice president. 

MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ:  Okay.  We will go to Emma next.  You should be unmuted now.  (Inaudible.)

Q    Hi.  This is Emma Gardner for Inside EPA at Inside Washington Publishers.  Thank you so much for doing this.  I just have a couple of questions. 

One, I’d be interested if you could give us a specific action level threshold in terms of parts per billion in the new rule.  And, secondly, I would love to know how the new rule approaches lead service lines that run underneath private land and if there are any incentives for landowners to replace them — the — those pipes themselves.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Emma, I’ll take a stab at answering your two-part question.  The first question was, if I heard you correctly: What — what’s the action level in the new Lead and Copper Rule improvements?  It’s 10 parts per billion.  That’s the action level, which, as you know, previously was 15 parts per billion. 

Just one thing to note: In terms of private side, our rule requires that for full li- — full lead service line replacement where systems have access to the full lead service line.  And we know that there are a variety of rules and laws out there that may influence whether or not a community have — has access to that or requires permission for a local entity to — to enter into private property.

In the event that there’s private property that needs to be entered into and permission needs to be granted, the rule requires that systems ask the member of the — the owner of the property four different times about — for permission to replace that lead service line in two wholly different ways.  So, we’re trying to ensure that water systems around the country, where they do have lead service lines that are in private property, have a persistent way to get in touch with the landowner to get permission to replace them.

MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ:  Thank you.  We will go to Jacob next.  You should be unmuted now. 

Q    Hey, folks.  Thanks so much for doing this.  I also have a two-part question.  Firstly, just trying to follow up on a question from a previous reporter that I don’t think was totally answered, but could you just speak a little bit to the degree to which you’re concerned about, you know, efforts to overturn this rule through CRA efforts in Congress in, you know, a future Republican-led Congress? 

And, secondly, can you speak to what conversations you had with stakeholders, particularly water service providers, and — and thinking about possible legal challenges that this rule might face, especially as the Supreme Court has, you know, limited the ability of the government to — to issue these sorts of regulations moving forward.  Thanks.  

ADMINISTRATOR REGAN:  Well, thank you, Jacob, for that question.  I’ll take the first part, and [senior administration official] can follow. 

Listen, this rule is grounded in science and within the four corners of our statutory authority.  And we have measured a number of times.  We’ve measured twice and we’re cutting once here.  We believe that it’s on solid legal footing, supported by the science. 

And listen, the outcomes are undeniable.  If you look at protecting up to 900,000 infants from being born with low birth weight or the reducing of 1,500 cases of premature death from heart disease, the cost benefits are at a 13-to-1 ratio. 

This is an opportunity to reduce lead exposure to millions of families all across the country, and we believe we’ve done it in a very strategic way, a legally sound way, supported by the science.  And the health benefits of this rule are undeniable.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Mr. Administrator, the second part of the question was regarding conversations with stakeholders.  And I would just say that we had repeated conversations with stakeholders throughout this process. 

We also received over 200,000 comments on the proposed rule.  The vast majority of them were supportive of the rule.  We met with stakeholders throughout this process.  We visited the cities where lead service lines are currently being replaced.

And we know that, as the administrator mentioned at the beginning, that this rule is built on actions that have already been taken and already underway both in states and communities across this country.  There are four states that already have requirements to replace lead service lines in 10 years — from Illinois to Michigan to Rhode Island to New Jersey.  There are communities throughout this country that, before this rule was in — put in place, where they’ve already been engaged in removing lead service lines — from Milwaukee to Detroit to Cincinnati to Pittsburgh. 

All across the country, communities are supportive and engaged in this effort today.

MS. QUILLIAN:  Angelo, can I just — this is Natalie.  Can I just jump in on the first question, too, to add to what Administrator Regan said?

Look, I think that we believe and hope that ending the poisoning of our kids from lead water should and could be a bipartisan priority.  And, indeed, we’ve seen many Republicans vote for the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law that made this possible. 

Now Wiscon- — Wisconsin’s other senator, Ron Johnson, did not vote for it, but we do think that this should be a bipartisan priority.  And I hope that all of our — our members of Congress would vote for keeping our water clean rather than continuing to have lead in the water.

MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ:  Thank you, Natalie.  We will have time for two more questions. 

Let’s go to Michael.  You should be unmuted now.

Q    Hey.  Thank you for this.  Appreciate the time, as always.  Just two kind of follow-up questions to some of the other questions that have been asked here.  Can you confirm that the 10 percent action level is not intended to be an individual homes action level? 

And then, secondly, how does the final rule deal with if — if a — if a water system exceeds the 90 percent of — you know, tests above 10 parts per billion, are — is that water system required to provide free filters to its citizens?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Mr. Administrator, let me take a stab at answering that question. 

Thank you, Mr. Hawthorne, for your question. 

I can confirm that the 10 percent action level is throughout the system, as you indicated.  It’s not just on an individual home.  But any individual who has an action level exceedance — it’s the 90th percentile, as you know, Mr.  Hawthorne.  But any individual household that has an exceedance of the action level will be required to be communicated with, get their test results, and be able to take action immediately. 

In addition to that, if the action level is exceeded on a repeated basis — four times in a five-year period, for example — then the community will be required to make filters available to all of the residents in the community, not merely the residents where the action level was repeated — reported.

MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ:  Thank you. 

And our final question will come from Miranda.  You should be unmuted now.

Q    Hi.  Thanks for taking our questions. 

What are you hearing from water providers about progress they’ve made on their inventories?  And any — you know, do — do you expect them to, you know, meet the — the October 16th deadline?  Or could there — could there be some — are you hearing about any challenges so far on that front?  Thank you. 

ADMINISTRATOR REGAN:  Well, thank you for the question, Miranda.  And we fully believe, as [senior administration official] has indicated, that these systems are, in many cases, moving forward already. 

I think it’s important for us to note that we know through conversations that these systems can step up and they can meet the challenge.  We have designed a very durable, strong rule that is grounded in the science, grounded in the law.  And we expect these water systems to step up and meet this rule, because under no circumstances do we want our children exposed to lead poison in their drinking water. 

And as Natalie indicated, this is a bipartisan effort here.  There have been folks on both sides of the aisle for a number of years who have been calling for the removal of lead service lines, which are the largest source of lead exposure in this country. 

And so, we fully believe that everyone can step up in a very cost-effective way and comply with this rule, and that is our expectation. 

MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ:  Thank you, Administrator.  And that’s all the time that we have today.

As a reminder, the contents of this call and the materials you received over email are embargoed until 5:00 a.m. Eastern tomorrow. 

If you have any questions, please feel free to follow up with us, and thank you again for joining you.

12:00 P.M. EDT

The post White House Press Call by Deputy Chief of Staff Natalie Quillian, EPA Administrator Michael Regan, and a Senior Administration Official Previewing the President Trip to Wisconsin appeared first on The White House.

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

2:06 P.M. EDT

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Good afternoon, everyone.

Q Good afternoon.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, today is a solemn day and a day of remembrance.

One year ago, on October 7th, Hamas launched a heinous attack against Israel. On a day that was supposed to be a joyous Jewish holiday of singing and dancing, Hamas terr- –terrorists streamed across the border from Gaza into Israel and massacred more than 1,200 innocent people, including 46 Americans, at a music festival.

They committed horrific acts of sexual violence. In many cases, these terrorists recorded their acts of barbarity and carnage, chilling, documenting the unspeakable atrocities they committed for others to see.

This morning, the president and the first lady lit a yahrzeit candle to remember all those who were massacred by Hamas in what was the deadliest day for the Jewish people since the Holocaust.

The president and the first lady were joined by Rabbi Aaron Alexander of Adas Israel Congregation for the candle lighting in remembrance of the victims of the October 7th attacks.

The rabbi recited “God Full of Mercy,” a Jewish prayer for the soul of a person who has died. It is recited during bur- — burial services and memorial services.

Rabbi Alexander is a family friend of the Goldberg-Polin family. Hersh Goldberg-Polin was abducted by Hamas on October 7th and held hostage for almost 11 months until he was murdered by Hamas.

The president also issued a statement mourning those who were killed and recognizing the more than 250 innocents, including 12 Americans, who were taken hostage. The president has met with many of their families and grieved with them. As he said this morning, “They have been through hell.” So many families have lost loved ones on October 7th and will never be the same.

President Biden and Vice President Harris have stood strongly in support of the people of Israel and they made clear again today they fully — they fully co- — they are fully committed to the safety of the Jewish people, the security of Israel, and its right to exist.

As both the president and the vice president said, we must bring the hostages home that are being — who are being held in Gaza.

President Biden continues to work around the clock to try to reach a ceasefire and hostage release deal that would not only bring the hostages held by Hamas home to their families, but also end the fighting and alleviate the suffering of the Palestinian people in Gaza, many of whom have been living in hellish conditions, and enable a much-needed surge of humanitarian aid in Gaza.

As we reflect on the past year and all that has happened since October 7th, we also mourn the loss of innocent life in Gaza where tens of thousands of Palestinians have lost their lives as a result of the conflict that Hamas’ terro- — terrorism has unleashed.

President Biden will never stop working to end the suffering of all people. And he continues the work to build the conditions for a lasting peace in the region so that after this conflict is over, Israelis and Palestinians can live securely, side by side, in a lasting peace with equal measures of safety, opportunity, and dignity.

Now, moving on to the hurricane — Hurricane Helene.

President Biden and Vice President Harris continue to s- — to use every tool available to help communities devastated by Hurricane Helene.

Over the weekend, President Biden ordered another 500 active-duty troops to move into western north Cali- — Car- — Carolina — North Carolina, pardon me, in addition to the 1,000 troops the president previously ordered to deploy to the state. This is on top of the more than 6- — 6,100 National Guardsmen and over 7,000 federal personnel all working together with their state and local counterparts to help people begin their road to rebuilding.

Over the last few days, the administration has contracted — contacted nearly 450 state and local officials across the region to offer further support.

And, to date, the president — the president — this administration has helped thousands of Helene survivors — Helene survivors just — jump-start their recoveries, providing over $210 million in direct financial assistance, with more coming every day. As the president has said, when it comes to this whole-of-government response, we are sparring no — sparing no — no resource here.

Unfortunately, scam artists and bad-faith actors and others who are putting politics over people are promoting misinformation about our efforts, including falsehoods about federal assistance. This is wrong, dangerous, and must stop immediately.

Elected officials at every level and on both side of the aisle have also called for an end to these conspiracy theories.

False information following a disaster can discourage people from seeking critical assistance when they need it the most. Everyone, especially those in positions of power, must do everything they can to encourage survivors to register for assistance, not discourage them by allowing these falsehoods to fester.
 
And finally, the president was briefed yesterday and again today on the potential impacts of Hurricane Milton, which forecasts to become a Category 5 storm and make landform — landfall Wednesday on the western coast of Florida.

As with Helene, FEMA and other federal agencies are actively pre-positioning lifesaving resources in advance of the storm.

And earlier today, the president approved the governor of Florida’s request for an emergency disaster declaration, which unlocks additional federal resources to help the state respond to the storm.

To everyone in the path of Milton: The time to prepare is right now. Visit Ready.gov or — or go download the FEMA — the FEMA app to make a plan today. The time is right now.

Please, please, please listen to local officials. It could save your life.

Now, the Biden-Harris administration is committed to preventing, detecting, and responding to health emergencies globally.

On Sep- — on September 27th, Rwanda’s Ministry of Health announced an outbreak of Marburg virus disease — MVD — and the Biden-Harris administration is working closely with the government of Rwanda to end the outbreak as quickly as possible.

As we have all experienced in recent years, health emergencies are a global issue we must address together.

CDC assesses that the risk of the infection with this virus in the United States is low, and there are currently no confirmed MVD — MVD cases outside of Rwanda.
 
Since learning of this outbreak, the United States has committed to ma- — to making nearly $11 million available to address urgent health needs in Rwanda and surrounding countries, and although there are currently no FDA-approved vaccines or drugs against MVD, the United States also contributed investigational vaccine and therapeutic doses, which arrived in Rwanda this weekend, just one week after we learned of the outbreak.

In addition, to keep Americans safe, we are implementing additional precautions for a small, select group of travelers arriving in the United States from Rwanda, including additional health screenings. These measur- — measures will advance ongoing efforts to protect public health and reassure the traveling public that the risk of MVD spreading during air travel is minimized.

And today, we saw the Supreme Court decision and what it means that women in Texas could still be denied critical emergency medical care because of the state’s dangerous and extreme abortion bans. We have been — we have seen and have heard the horrific stories of women being denied the care they need because of these laws.

Also today, in Georgia, the state Supreme Court reinstated an even more extreme abortion ban.

All of these laws were made possible when the former president han- — handicapped [handpicked] three Supreme Court justices to overturn Roe v. Wade. They are creating chaos and confusion for women and doctors.

The administration has been clear that all patients, including women experiencing pregnancy loss and other pregnancy-related emergency, must be able to access the emergency medical care they need, and that is required by federal law.

The stories we hear of women being denied care they need in emergency situation is completely unacceptable. That’s why the Biden-Harris administration has taken a number of important steps to make it easier for women to file complaints if they are denied this essential care and investigate and enforce federal protections under EMTALA.

But our fight is not over. After the Supreme Court’s order earlier this year, HHS issued a letter reminding hospitals and provider associations of their obligations under EMTALA, including providing abortion care as a necessary, stabilizing treatment.

We will continue to make those obligations clear. We will also continue to fight Republican elected officials’ extreme, extreme agenda. And we will continue to enforce federal law, support hospitals complying with the obligations, and defend the administration’s long-standing view that women have the right to access the emergency medicar- — medical care that they need.

And with that, Aamer. Thank you for your patience, you all.

Q Sure. If I could just follow up on two of your toppers.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah.

Q First on the abortion access rulings today. Not much is going to change with the shape of the courts immediately after November. So, what — what other avenues can the administration pursue —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah.

Q — in the little time that you have left?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: As you know, when Roe v. Wade was originally overturned because of the Dobbs decision that was done more than two years ago, the president and the vice president took action. The president, on that same day, made — announced some executive actions that he was moving forward with — obviously, with a whole-of-go- — -of-government approach here.

And so, we’ve taken actions. We’ve taken this very seriously. I don’t have anything to preview — preview to you right this time, at — at this moment, but we’re going to take this very seriously, as we have — as we have for the past two — two years.

And, look, it is important. It is important for people to be very aware of what’s at stake here. It is important for us to continue to voice what we’re seeing here: women being denied care and their lives putting — being put at risk. And so, we’re going to continue to fight.

As you know, there’s EMTALA. There’s other measures that the DOJ is using to protect doctors and also women who are looking for that care that they should be making on — about their own body themselves.

And we’re going to continue to call out these extreme agendas that we’re seeing from — from the other side, from Republicans.

Look, we’re going to — don’t have anything to preview today, but it is important to call this out. It is important to say how dangerous this is and how this is a freedom that has been taken away from women.

Q If I could just follow on the storms.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah.

Q What’s the confidence that FEMA is prepared to handle what could be two major disasters at the same time? And can you talk a little bit more about what’s — what they’re doing, specifically —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah.

Q — with Milton, while they’re still handling Helene?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah.

Q And then, finally, there was a report — I believe it was NBC — just as we were coming out, that Governor DeSantis is dodging calls with Vice President Harris and President Biden.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I mean, look —

Q Is that an issue? Is —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So —

Q Is politics starting to sink into this?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I mean, that’s really for the governor to speak to, right? I — we’ve — I — you’ve heard me mention — I believe in the gaggle last week when we were heading to Florida and Georgia — we invited the governor — right? — to come and survey the damaged areas with the president. Obviously, we were in Florida. We invited the — the governor of Florida to come. It was his decision to — to not — to not attend or not be there with the president.

The president has reached out around Hurricane Helene. He reached out. It is up to the governor. It is really up to the governor.

We know, I can say — and I think you’ve heard this from the FEMA administrator — she has been able to — to speak with the governor. She spoke with him yesterday in regards to Milton, that hurricane coming shortly. And so, we have been in touch with state — state and local officials — we — in order to be able to help the people of Florida who are dealing — who are going to be impacted, who were — who were impacted, certainly, by Helene.

And we’re going to continue to certainly pre-position on the ground. And we’re going to support — we’re going to con- — support the communities with whatever and — whatever they need and when- — whenever. That is our commitment. That is our commitment to the folks who are going to be impacted.

So, we’ve been in touch with state and local officials in Florida, and we’re going to ensure that we meet in advance what their needs are going to be. And FEMA is — and FEMA is on the ground supporting that — supporting that. So, that’s important.

It’s up to the governor. It is up to him. We are doing our part in — in the Biden-Harris administration, working –obviously, FEMA is work- — is on the ground, all-hands-on-deck, whole-of-government, robu- — robust approach here.

And so, again, that’s for Governor DeSantis to speak to.

Q Is it — but is it accurate that the president and the vice president have made outreach efforts —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: We — we — I mean — you —

Q — and they have not been answered?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: — you have — you — you’ve asked us. We have made outreach and — regarding, certainly, Hurricane Helene. And as I mentioned, the good thing is the FEMA administration — administrator, pardon me, was able to connect with the governor yesterday. I think that’s important.

But, look, we’re going to — we’re going to do the work. We’re going to continue to talk to local and state officials. That is important as well. We’re going to pre-position as this hurricane, Hurricane Milton, is com- — coming — coming towards, as it — as it seems, towards Florida.

Category 5 — that’s nothing to joke about. That is very, very serious. And so, we’re taking this serious, as the president has done many, many times when we’ve seen these types of storms coming — coming our way. So, we’re going to do our job, do our work here.

Go ahead.

Q Thanks, Karine. We’re learning that DeSantis refused to take a call from Vice President Harris specifically around Hurricane Milton. Can you just talk about that and any communication —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I — this —

Q — around this —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: This is —

Q — new hurricane?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Look, that is something for the governor to speak to himself.

If you have the president and you have the vice president reaching out to offer up assistance, provided to the pe- — your constituents, the people who live in your state, to make sure we are doing everything that we need to do, from federal response, and we’re reaching out, offering our support. That’s for the governor. And the governor — it’s up for — to him if he wants to respond to us or not.

But what we’re doing is we’re working with state and local officials to make sure that we are pre-positioned, to make sure that we are r- — ready to be there for the communities that are going to be impacted. We are doing the job that is needed — that we believe is needed for — to protect the communities and to make sure that they have everything that is needed.

You heard me talk about the declaration. We approved that for Florida. That’s moving forward. And so, we’re taking this very, very seriously. That’s for the governor to speak to. That is.

Q Trump and some of his Republican allies have been spreading misinformation about the federal response to Hurricane Helene. So, what exactly is the White House doing to combat that misinformation? And can you just talk about the impact it’s already having on the ground?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I — it’s a great question. Combating misinformation and disinformation is always, always critically important. It is.

You s- — you heard the lay down that I gave at the top. The reason I did that at the top is because we wanted to make clear that things are available to — to the public, folks who are impacted, and that misinformation, disinformation is indeed dangerous. It gets in the way in what we’re trying to do here. It does.

And there has been a lot of falsehoods. And let me just fact-check a couple of things, because it’s really important. It is — again, it is wrong; it is dangerous. And I also called out the — there are important people, people who have power, privilege, who are spreading these — these falsehoods, and they need to stop. They need to stop doing that.

So, disaster relief — this is a falsehood: disaster relief funds used on immigrants illegally in the U.S. The fact is no money is being diverted from response needs. That’s the fact.

Another falsehood: FEMA confiscating Helene survivor property. That’s false. That is not true. The fact is FEMA cannot seize your property or land, period.

Another falsehood that’s out there: FEMA will only provide $750 to disaster survivors to support their recovery. That is a falsehood. That is not true. The fact is this is an upfront payment for urgent needs like food and medication. Many survivors — many survivors will qualify for more assista- — assistance.

Another falsehood: FEMA, FAA are restricting airspace in North Carolina. That is not true. That’s false. The fact is there are no airspace restrictions in North Carolina.

So, we’re going to continue to combat these. It’s important to combat them. But people of — people who have a microphone and a podium should not continue to spread this falsehood. It is dangerous. It is incredibly dangerous.

Q But is the administration tracking that having an impact on the ground in terms of people being — people not seeking the aid they need because —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: That’s a concern.

Q Is that — is that happening?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: But — but that’s a concern. That is a concern. And it — you know, people who need help should seek help from the federal government. There is assistance out there. I talked about hundreds of millions of dollars are ready — already being provided to impacted areas.

And now we have Hurricane Milton coming. We can’t have this. We cannot. This needs to stop. This needs to stop.

If you care about your constituents, if you care about the people, if you care about Americans, you shouldn’t do this. You shouldn’t spread these falsehoods. It is dangerous.

Go ahead.

Q Thank you, Karine. Did the president get an update from President Herzog when they spoke this morning about the Iranian response?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, just a couple of things on that. And, look, the president — what you saw the president do is honor and commerme- — commer- — commemorate lives that were lost, as I sted — said at the top. And the president called President Herzog because he believed it was appropriate person for the president to call to express his condolences. It was a meaningful and important conversation.

And so, that’s what they spoke about. It — it was focused on commemorating this incredibly sad day.

Q Okay. So, there was not a detailed conversation about Iran?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I don’t have anything beyond that. It was about offering up his condolences and what — and what the Israeli people must be going through right now.

Q Hama- — Hamas reiterated over the weekend that they see Netanyahu as being the stumbling block to a ceasefire deal. It seemed like the president’s own remarks recently in the briefing room here kind of left open the — the opportunity for taking that analysis away as well. Do — does the president feel like he needs speak with Prime Minister Netanyahu?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: As the president said himself, there will be — he’s going to — there will be a call shortly, soon. I don’t have anything to preview for you at this time. As you know — you hear us say this many, many times — they have decades-long relationship. And in those conversations that they do have, it’s very honest; it’s very frank. And that will continue.

I don’t have anything else beyond what the president stated at this podium on Friday or many times before about this particular issue.

Look, we believe the best chance at getting these hostages home is through a ceasefire deal. That’s what the president is directing his team to continue to work on, and that’s going to be our focus.

Go ahead.

Q Karine, just given the projected path and strength of Milton that you were talking about, is any consideration being given to the president perhaps skipping his trip to Germany and Angola?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, the president is monitoring this very, very closely. I just talked about how he’s gotten updates about the hurricane and, obviously, continuing to get updates on what is happening on the ground as af- — after — after the horrible hurricane, Hurricane Helene.

And so, that will continue. I don’t have anything to share about a change in travels or his schedule. And so, certainly, if that — if that were to be, we would cert- — share that with all of you.

Q Is that something that has been discussed at all, the possibility —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: What I — what I —

Q — of a schedule change?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: — can say is that we are monitoring the — the hurricane, Hurricane Milton. As you just — as you just heard me at the top, it’s going to be a Category 5. Our — our job right now is to make sure we make it very, very clear to folks who are on the ground to please listen to local officials, to please be ready and take this very, very seriously.

And FEMA and other federal — federal agencies are preparing or pre-positioning on the ground to offer up assistant and to be ready — to be ready for the — when the hurricane hits. I just don’t have anything to share about any change in schedule.

Q Just a quick question on the Middle East. Is the White House currently doing anything to actively push the Lebanon ceasefire proposal that you all announced a couple weeks ago?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, what I can say is that — look, when it comes to — when it comes to the proposal that you just stated, the — the 21-day proposal, what we believe is ultimately — ultimately — and the — the Isr- — the Israelis have said this themselves as well — is that it needs — there needs to be an agreement that allows civilians to safely return to their homes on both sides of the border over the long term.

So, we’re going to be having regular consultations with the Israelis, with the Lebanese, and others regarding the right moment to — to press for such an agreement. But ultimately, that’s where we need to be in order for both sides — both — civilians on both sides to return home.

Q When you say you’re looking for the right moment to make a push for that proposal, are you saying that moment is not now, that you’re not actively pushing for that right now?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I mean, we are in regular conversations. As I said, we continue to have those discussions with the Israelis and the Lebanese on this particular issue. We believe that we need this. We need to have a space — I mean, you tal- — you heard me speak about this — to have some space, some diplomatic dialogue in order to get there.

And so, you know, that’s what you would need, is a ceasefire, in order to get there. We’re going to have those conversations, and we’re certainly — when the right moment to press for such an agreement, we will do so. But the conversation — those dis- — discussions continue.

Q Okay. But it would be correct to say that the White House is not currently, actively pushing on that proposal?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: What I can tell you is we continue those consultations with the Israelis and the Lebanese. That’s what I can share.

Go ahead.

Q Thanks, Karine. Following up on the president’s trip, can you just explain a little bit why the president is taking these trips now when there’s less than a month before the election? What is he trying to accomplish?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I mean, look, you’ve heard us talk about the importance of this travel. As you — he’s going to be going to Germany, obviously, and also Angola. The president is certainly looking forward to that travel. And I would say that — you know, we — as it relates to — I mean, each of them is very different than — than the other.

But we think it serves as a powerful symbol — a powerful symbol of the U.S.-Germany re- — partnership, as you think about the German piece of this trip, and our close cooperation on the world’s most pressing challenges, and so — and to ensure our people have every opportunity for safety and prosperity.

And what this visit is going to do, it’s going — it’s going to underscore the deep commitment and that transatlantic security resolute support. If you think about Ukraine and the self-defense of Ukraine, that’s going to be a big part of this visit — and continuing that support, continuing to do everything that we can to stop the Russian aggression. And so, that is going to be certainly a big part of that.

Continuing contributions to — to meet the NATO pledge also is going to be a big component of that.

And so, this is important, as we see what’s going on in Ukraine, as we continue to see Russia’s aggression, to have that conversation. You have seen the president’s leadership when it comes to Ukraine and what he’s been able to do to make NATO stronger, to have more than 50 — 50 countries’ support to support Ukraine in their fight against that aggression of Russia. And so, that’s a big part — certainly, it will be a big part of that — of that trip.

And when it comes to Angola, there’s going to be a bilateral meeting that the president will have, and this speaks to the U.S.-Africa relationship that we want to continue, that we want to strengthen. And so, that’s what you’re going to see. They’re very — two important relationships that is very much connected to what this president has done over the three and a half years, if you look at his global leadership. And the president is loo- — very much looking forward to it.

Q But let me put this way.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah. Sure.

Q He cou- — he could have taken these trips after the election. I mean, he could have taken them in — in December or January before he leaves office. So, what is so urgent about this moment —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: There’s not —

Q — that he needed to do it in October?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I appreciate that, but there’s not a lot of time. There really isn’t. Three months is going to fly by. There’s not a lot of time. And so, the president wanted to get this done. We had said when it — as it relates to Ang- — Angola and going to the continent, the president had made a commitment and a promise to go to Africa, to continue to show his commitment to that relationship. And that’s what — the president wanted to keep that promise.

And so, three months is not a lot of time. And so, this was the right period of time to go to get that done.

And we’re also going to go to Germany. As I talked about, that NATO — the — the — continuing that NATO pledge, continuing what we’re doing on — for Ukraine as they’re fighting against Russia’s aggression — all of these things are really important to our — yes, to our — to our relationships with those — with those partners but also to what we’re trying to do on behalf of this country, on behalf of Americans.

And so, it’s — three months is not a long time. As you know, that’s going to fly by. That’s going to fly by.

Go ahead.

Q Karine, the other day, the president said that if the Israelis strike back in Iran, they ought to do so in a proportionate fashion. He said that he did not believe they should strike nuclear sites, and then he seemed to suggest he didn’t think they should strike energy sites either. So, what, in the president’s view, would be proportionate?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: (Laughs.) I’m not going to get into — (laughs) — I appreciate the question. I’m not going to get into what’s proportionate, not proportionate — get into that back and forth.

What I can say is we are continuing to have discussions with the Israelis about their response, obviously, responding to Iran’s attack — almost 200 missiles — right? — that went flying into Israel — that we were able to, obviously, at the president’s direction, with the military being — the U.S. military aiding in — in the defense of Israel, which the president was really proud to be able to have done that. Our se- — our commitment continues to be very clear on Israel’s security. That’s ironclad.

Those conversations continue. I just don’t have anything to — to add beyond what the president stated.

Q From the best we can tell, the president hasn’t spoken with Prime Minister Netanyahu since around August 21st. That’s a long time given the degree of — of high activity the Israeli forces have been involved in. And it would seem to suggest that, at this point, they don’t have a whole lot to say to each other. But tell us why you think they’ve gone that long.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: (Laughs.) So, look, I would say this: In the past year, the president and the prime minister have spoken more than a dozen times — in the past year, and they’ve seen each other, as you know. I think you might have been with us at those moments when they’ve seen each other. And — and we have said — the national security advisor has said this, the president said this himself during — especially, as you said, during these past week or so, in these high-stake moments, if you will, the president’s team has been in touch regularly — regularly — practically daily — with the Israelis’ government.

And so, we’ve been in close communication and close contact, and that continues. That has been the case for the past year. And so, that’s certainly going to continue.

And, look, the president is going to say — is going to speak to the prime minister. He has said that. And once we have a — a call to speak to, we will certainly do that.

Go ahead, Jon.

Q Thanks, Karine. When the president came here into the briefing room late last week, he said that he expects the election will be “free and fair,” but he also said, “I don’t know whether it will be peaceful.” What can the administration do — what is the administration doing proactively to prevent that possibility of the election not being peaceful in any way, either leading up to —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah.

Q — November the 5th or in the aftermath?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, I’m not going to get into specifics from here. I think the president was asked a question, and he answered it very straightforward and very directly. And I think the president and myself and many others have spoken to what we saw on January 6th of 2021.

And so, obviously, we are — there’s always concerns, but — and — and not only that, you know that Americans care about our democracy. They care. They care about preserving and protecting the democracy. And I think that’s something a — this president has promised to do and will continue to do this in his remaining couple of months of — in this term.

I’m not going to get into specifics here. I think the president, as I said, was asked a question. He answered it directly, but he also said this is going to — I think this is really important — that this — he believes this is going to be a free and fair election. And so, I’m going to leave it there. I’m not going to get into details.

Q Separately — separately, in regards to the relationship or — or lack of a relationship between the governor of Florida and the leadership of this administration, does it make a coordinated response to tropical weather that much more difficult if the governor is not speaking to the vice president or to the president?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, here’s what I can say. We have been talking to state and local officials on the ground, and I think that’s important — over 15 local officials from communities along the likely path of the storm as we think about Hurricane Milton. And so, we have FEMA on the ground. Administrator Criswell is going to be in Florida — if she’s not there already — assisting, guiding, providing that help. She has spoken — she spoke to the governor yesterday.

And so, look, we’re going to do our job. We’re going to do what we need to do to make sure communities have what they need as this hurricane is coming our way at Category — potentially Category 5. And so, that’s not going to stop the federal assistance. That’s not going to stop the job that this president wants to see his team do. We’re going to have a robust — robust, all-of-government, if you will, federal response to this.

And you have seen that. You have seen that over the last three and a half years. When it comes to these natural disasters, we are going to make sure that we are there for the American people.

And anything else, I would have to leave it to the governor, to his actions, to how he wants to move forward in this. That is for him. That is a question for the governor.

Go ahead, Karen.

Q Thanks, Karine. You used the phrase “incredibly dangerous” a couple times, talking about the misinformation on —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah.

Q — the hurricane.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: It is.

Q And given how widespread it has been over the past few days and how much of an effort FEMA and the administration has made to combat that, how concerned is the president that what we’re seeing now with this storm is perhaps a preview of the misinformation we might have on Election Day or in the days following that?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, misinformation, disinformation is a problem across the board, and we have to combat it. It is. It is — it is something — whether it’s the election, whether what we’re seeing currently right now with Hurricane — Hurricane Helene that just came through — and obviously, Milton is on its way, sadly — we have to combat that.

And you’re — and I’m saying they’re dangerous, yes, because they are. They’re critically dangerous to have this misinformation, disinformation. And that’s why, at the top, I called out — you know, you have some powerful people out there who continue to — to spread conspiracy theories.

It is not helpful. It is not helpful to what we’re trying to do as we’re trying to assist Americans on the ground and trying to figure out how the best way to respond, what they ne- — what their needs are. And so, yeah, it’s not — it’s not ideal. It is dangerous, in fact.

And let’s not forget — I do want to say this — when dealing with Hurricane Helene, you heard from Republican governors, Democratic governors say — speak to their response. South Carolina Governor McMaster: Federal assistance has “been superb,” we “were asking for everything we need.” And Virginia Governor Youngkin: incredible — “incredibly appreciative of the rapid response.” Governor of Georgia, Governor Kemp, appreciated the president’s call offering any “other things we need”; thanked the president for giving aid to more counties.

I mean, this is — there’s a bipartisan response to Hurricane Helene, and you see that, you hear that from elected officials on both sides of the aisle. They’re very thankful for what the federal government has done and continues to do. But you have this misinformation, disinformation that wants to tear it apart. And this is a time for communities to come together, for all of us to come together. It doesn’t matter if you have an “R” or a “D” behind your name; it is a time to come together to actually deliver for these impacted communities.

So, yeah, it’s dangerous.

Go ahead.

Q Thanks, Karine. On the Boeing strike. Boeing is returning to wage talks, and just wanted to see if the White House is participating in any of those conversations, if there’s anything you can share on —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, as we’ve always stated, collective bargaining is something that this president believes in. It has worked. You have seen that work over the past couple of years in — in — under this administration, when we’ve called for it. I don’t have anything to share beyond — beyond that.

We always believe that it is important for both sides to come to the table in good faith and to make sure that the workers — right? — the workers certainly get their fair share.

Q And on the upcoming foreign travel. You — you mentioned that the trip Bi- — that Biden is going to — to Germany and Angola, but you were asked if it was being — you know, talked about maybe being pulled down. Just wanted to clarify that the trip is happening.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I don’t have any changes to the president’s schedule. That’s what I’ve said. And the president is looking forward to going on the trip, certainly — certainly. And you all know, you all will be the first to know — one of the first to know if any — if that changes.

Q And do you expect a call with Bibi before the election, or is Biden holding out until — or is the president holding out until after the election?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: The president said he was going to call the prime minister. I don’t have anything else to share on timing.

Go ahead, Nadia.

Q Thank you, Karine. I was wondering whether you could comment on remarks that former President Trump made this morning linking migration, crime, and genetics and, more specifically, this sentence, quote, “We’ve got a lot of bad genes in our country right now,” end quote.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Ugh. Well, that type of language is hateful, it’s disgusting, it’s inappropriate and has no place in our country. I just talked about misinformation, disinformation, and how we have seen a bipartisan response when it came to Hurricane Helene and how we’re trying to bring our country together. It is important to bring people together.

And tearing people apart, tearing communities apart is dangerous. And this comes from the same vile statements that we’ve ha- — that we’ve heard about im- — migrants being poisoned — poison the blood. That’s disgusting.

And so, this president, this vice president, we’re going to continue to forcefully reject this kind of vile, disturbing, hateful, hateful speech. It has no place — no place in this country. And we have to respect the rights of all — respect the rights of — of all of us coming together. That’s what we want to see — not tearing communities apart; bringing it together.

Go ahead.

Q Thank you, Karine. A few questions on China. Could you please share what message President Biden sent to President Xi on China’s National Day in the past weekend? And are they planning to talk by phone very soon? What’s the main purpose of this phone call, gi- — considering the upcoming government transition in the United States?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, to your question, on the National Day, the president certainly conveyed the same message that he has done in the past — the past couple of years, which is congratulating the Chinese people on — on occasion of PRC National Day on October 1st.

As it relates to a call, I just don’t have anything to share with you at this time.

Go ahead.

Q The president wrote a letter to congressional leadership asking them to add additional funding to the disaster relief effort, and I wondered if there was any more conversations behind the scenes happening to bring them back early.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, first, the letter is focused on SBA’s disaster loan program, which is — could soon run out of funding. And so, the president wanted to alert Congress on that. That’s what the letter primarily focused on. And in addition, the FEMA Disaster Relief Fund faces a shortfall at the end of the year.

And so, the president’s letter was urging Congress to — to speed up and provide that funding. And that’s what the president wants to see, and that’s what the president was calling for.

We want Congress to move appropriately, at appropriate speed to get this done. And here’s the thing: In the past, Congress has been able to take quick action even when there is a recess to address urgent problems, so this is nothing new. This is nothing new at all.

And so, the president wanted to be very, very clear about where we are and what the needs are and — and wanted to show — show to Congress by — in this letter the urgency of them acting.

They need to act.

Q Does he believe they should come back early?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: As I stated, this is not the first time Congress has been able to take action and to act on — when it comes to urgent problems, urgent matter. They’ve been able to do that during recess.

What we are going to continue to do is lay out the urgency of this getting done. We’re talking about SBA disaster loan program. This is important — important to communities, especially communities that are impacted.

Go ahead, in the back.

Q Thank you. I have questions on two topics. The first one, you mentioned the Supreme Court case regarding emergencies and abortions.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah.

Q The administration has not done much to enforce its interpretation of that law that hospitals have to provide abortions in medical emergencies, particularly for hospitals that patients have reported that’s not happening. Can you talk about the administration’s efforts to ramp up enforcement in that area in the next couple months?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah. So, I would refer you to HHS. This is under their — their purview. So, I would refer you to them.

Q And on the storms that are coming, and also on Helene. Florida and Georgia both have voter registration deadlines today. Some of the states that are in the path of the storm have them upcoming. Is the administration going to ask the states to extend those deadlines, or are you doing anything to prepare for storm damage to exist around Election Day —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look —

Q — making it difficult for people to go vote?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: No. Understand. And I’ve gotten this question multiple times, in var- — in variations. So, look, what we — this is why it’s important to do this type of response that we’re doing. We want to make sure that these — the communities are getting the response, they’re getting the recovery from this disaster, and we want to make sure that their voices can be heard in November.

So, I would certainly refer you to state el- — state election officials, and certainly CISA as well, to speak to that specifically. I just don’t have anything else to share.

But this is why — this is why what we’re trying to do, trying to combat this misinformation, disinformation, workly — working closely with local and state officials to make sure these communities have what they need so that we can get them back on their feet is so critical — is so, so critical.

As it relates to that specific question, I would have to refer you to the state though.

Q Are you seeing misinformation about the storm and voting, or just the storm response —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: What I am saying —

Q — in general?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: — is that misinformation, disinformation — I’m speaking to our response on the ground. Right? We’re trying to get funding on the ground. We’re trying to make sure that people who have been affected can reach out to FEMA, can reach out to federal — federal government asking for assistance. And that is something that’s really important, and that’s the misinformation, disinformation that I’m speaking to.

And so, what our focus is is making sure that that recovery, that response is getting to communities, because we do want to make sure — we want to make sure that communities, they’re able to have their voices heard in November.

Q Thank you, Karine.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Okay. Go ahead.

Q Thank you, Karine. Congratulations on the promotion.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Thank you.

Q You’re not leaving us in the briefing room, are you?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Unless you want me to. Do you want me to leave the briefing room?

Q No, sure don’t.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: All right. Okay.

Q So, the arms dealer that President Biden freed in a prisoner swap, Viktor Bout, is now, according to the Wall Street Journal, selling weapons to the Houthis. Does President Biden think that is a problem?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, a couple of things. I can’t confirm that report today, in — I believe, in the Wall Street Journal.

I do want to put out a couple of facts here that is important to note. Look, securing the release of Americans who are being held hostage and wrongfully detained is a big priority — is a priority for this administration. And I would note that we have been extraordinarily successful in getting that done. It is a top priority to get these Americans, again, wrongfully detained and held hostage.

And so, that is something — and it’s not easy. It is not an easy de- — easy thing to do. It is not — there are some difficult decisions that we have to make. We’ve been very transparent about that — very transparent.

As you’re talking about Viktor Bout, that was in rele- — in — related to Brittney — Brittney’s release. And so, even then, a year and a half ago, we were clear about decisions that have to be made on a number of occasions. And it’s — it’s incredibly difficult. And we’ve been transparent about it. We’ve been very transparent.

So, look, we’re going to continue to do what we can — do everything that we can to bring Americans home who are wrongfully detained and held hostage. And, again, frankly, we have had an extraordinary record of doing just that, and that’s going to be the president’s top priority.

Q And on this issue of funding, the administration has money to send to Lebanon without Congress coming back, but Congress does have to come back to approve money to send to people in North Carolina. Do I have that right?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Here’s what I’m going to be very clear about: The president and the vice president has had a — a robust, whole-of-government response to this. Hundreds of millions of dollars — I said it at the top, more than $200 million — that we have directly put towards survivors here for the di- — for disaster help, and that’s because of this president’s commitment to make sure that we are there for communities that are impacted.

We take this very seriously. Again, we take this very seriously. And before — before the hurricane hit, we pre-positioned more — more than 1,500 federal — federal folks on the ground to help.

And so, we have made sure that every state has gotten their storm — requested emergency declaration. They requested it, and we made sure they received it. We’ve taken this very seriously — more than $200 million that we have provided to the impacted areas.

And — but instead, people want to do disinformation, misinformation, which is dangerous — which is dangerous, because then it — what that — when — when folks on the ground hear that, they may not want to ask for the help that they need that is there for them — that is there for them. That’s our focus here.

Q But President Biden is fond of saying, “Show me your budget, and I will tell you what you value.” If he has got money for people in Lebanon right now, without Congress having to come back, what does it say about his values that there is not enough money right now for people —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: His values —

Q — in North Carolina who need it?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: His —

Q That’s not misinformation.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Wait. No, that is. Wait, your whole — your whole premise of the question is misinformation, sir.

Q Excuse me.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: What you don’t — yes, yes.

Q Which part?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: It’s misinformation.

Q Did — is there money —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I just — I just mentioned —

Q — to send to Lebanon right now?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I just mentioned — I just mentioned to you that we provided more than $200 million to folks who are impacted in the area, and I just shared with you that people are deciding not to —

Q $157 million is not (inaudible) —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: — not — no — but people are deciding not to —

Q 157 million is not (inaudible) —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: — no — no, but people are deciding not to —

Q President Biden sent a letter to —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: — not — wait —

Q — Congress that there’s not enough money to help people in North Carolina —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: We’re talking about the SBA disaster loan. Yes.

Q That’s money for people in North Carolina.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: And that’s important. And people in North Carolina need that. Con- —

Q The president is the —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Wait. This is nothing new.

Q — one saying it’s running out.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Peter, this is nothing new. Congress comes together. They provide money — millions of dollars for disaster relief. We’re asking them to do the job that they have been doing for some time.

Q And I’m reading from a letter that President Biden sent to —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Been doing for some time.

Q — Johnson, McConnell, Schumer, and Jeffries. The president’s letter is not misinformation. Would you agree?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: No, the way you’re asking me the question is misinformation. There is money that we are allocating to the impacted areas, and there’s money there to help people who truly need it. There are survivors who need the funding — who need the funding, and it’s there.
Q You can’t call a question that you don’t like “misinformation.”

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I said that —

Q That’s very unfair.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I actually said we have the money available to help survivors of Hurricane Helene and also Hurricane Milton.

Now, we’re — now, there’s going to be a shortfall — right? — because we don’t know how bad it’s — Hurricane Milton is going to be, and so we’re going to need additional funding. We’re going to need additional funding.

Q That’s exactly what I just asked about, and you said it —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: No —

Q — was misinformation.

Yes.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: What you’re asking me is why Congress needs to come back and do their job. That’s what you’re asking me.

Congress needs to come back and do their job and provide extra assistance, extra funding to Disaster Relief Fund. That’s what Congress needs to do, and we’re going to continue to urge that.

You may not want that, but that’s okay. That’s what this president wants, and that’s what the vice president wants.

Thanks, everybody.

2:55 P.M. EDT

The post Press Briefing by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre appeared first on The White House.

2:06 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT:  Hey, folks.  My name is Joe Biden.  (Laughter.)

Q    Welcome to the briefing room.

Q    Welcome, Mr. President. 

Q    We’ve been waiting for you. 

THE PRESIDENT:  Welcome to the swimming pool.

Q    Finally.  This is — this is great.

THE PRESIDENT:  Hey, look, folks, good afternoon.  The past two days have gotten some — we’ve gotten very good news about the American economy. 

Just yesterday, shipping carriers, after some discussion, and the International Longshoreman’s Union came to an agreement to keep their ports in the East Coast and Gulf ports open.  We averted what could have become a major crisis for the country.  And a tentative agreement, which includes record wage increases for dockworkers and shows the importance of collective bargaining and represents, I think, critical progress toward a strong contract. 

I especially want to thank the carriers, the port operators, and the longshoreman’s union for reaching this agreement at a time when the nation has experienced such terrible devastation from Hurricane Helene.  It was truly a service to the American people for all the parties to come together and to respond to our request to keep the ports open. 

I was determined to — to avert a crisis at this moment, because it’s a critical moment.  If we didn’t do this now, we’d have a real problem.  

I also want to thank my White House team for the work — they worked around the clock to bring the parties together. 

But, today, I — we got more incredible news.  Although the strength of the American economy is a — it’s about the strength of the American economy.  The new jobs report, as you all know and you’ve been reporting, created 250,000 jobs in September.  The expectation was for 150,000 jobs in September, which is — far exceeds that number.  Not only the previous two months — but not only that, the previous two months was revised up 150,000 — 75,000 jobs. 

And from the very beginning, we were told time and again that the polices we were pursuing — we’d put forward weren’t –weren’t going to work, make things worse, including some of the other team who are still saying they’re going to make things worse.  But we’ve proven them wrong.

You know, we were told our American — we’ve — we were told our American Rescue Plan was too big and it would crowd out private investment.  We proved them wrong.  It vaccinated a nation and got immediate economic relief to people in need. 

When I came to office determined to end trickle-down economics and to grow the economy from the middle out and the bottom up — I know you’re tired of hearing me say that over and over again, but that was the policy; it remains the policy — because when you do that, everyone does well.  When the middle class grows, the nation is stronger.  And the nation is stronger when there is a strong union movement as well. 

We were told it wouldn’t work, but I was also determined to do what was ignored for much too long.  Presidents have been authorized since the ‘30s to be able to spend the money given by Congress — to spend the money on hiring American workers and using American product where they were available.  And that’s what we did.  

We were told that was going to be a big problem, but all the money we — I was authorized to spend by the Congress has gone to building a mi- — to — gone to hiring American workers and using American products.  We were told it wasn’t going to be — I — we were told that was going to be a big problem, but it’s working. 

We were also told that our historic laws to invest in America and all Americans would crowd out private-sector investment.  Well, that was proven wrong too.

We’ve attracted nearly $1 trillion since we’ve come to office in private-sector investment from domestic and foreign companies investing in America — in America.  And not this stuff with sh- — shipping jobs overseas for cheaper labor and bringing back a product to America.  We’re building it here and sending it overseas.  And look at the results across the board.

Unemployment is back down 4- — to 4.1 percent.  And every month f- — that Vice President Harris and I have been in office, we’ve been — there’s been — we’ve created jobs every single month. 

The nation has now created 16 million jobs since I’ve come to office, more jobs created in a single presidential term than at any time in American history. 

Our GDP shows our economy grew at — at 10 percent under my administration.  Unemployment reached the lowest level in 50 years. 

We were also told inflation couldn’t come down without massive job losses or sending the economy into economic recession. 

Once again, the outside experts were wrong.  Inflation has come way down.  Wages have gone up, growing faster than prices.  The interest rates are down.  A record 19 million new business applications have been filed for.  The stock market continues to reach new heights. 

We’ve got more work to do though to keep getting — keep — to keep getting prices down, like more affordable housing, extending what I’ve done for seniors and lowering prescription drug costs by letting Medicare negotiate the prices — make sure that’s available to everyone. 

And, by the way, what we’ve done so far — just what we’ve brought down the prices for seniors under Medicare, it saved the taxpayers billions of dollars — billions of dollars.  Saved the taxpayers billions of dollars.  That’s important to note because they don’t have to pay the exorbitant and ratio- — irrational prices that these companies are charging.

The simple fact is we’ve gone from an economy in crisis to literally having the strongest economy in the world.  And — but we got — we — we got more work to do.  We’ve got more work to do to deal the — the things I’ve just mentioned.  And we’re going to have to deal with unforeseen costs of what this — this hu- — this hurricane is going to cost.  It’s going to cost a lot of money, and I’m going to probably have to ask the Congress before we leave for more money to deal with some of those problems, but that remains to be seen. 

I’ll take a few questions before I turn it over to —

Q    Mr. President —

THE PRESIDENT:  You pick out the questions.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Oh, okay.  Yes, sir.  (Laughter.)  Yes, sir. 

Go ahead, Josh. 

Q    Thanks again for doing this, Mr. President.  Two questions.  The first, Florida Senator Marco Rubio described today’s jobs report as having “fake numbers.”  What do you make of that?  And how worried are you that many Americans are hearing that the jobs numbers aren’t real? 

THE PRESIDENT:  Look, I’m going to be very careful here.  If you notice anything the MAGA Republicans don’t like, they call “fake.”  Anything.  The job numbers are what the job numbers are.  They’re real.  They’re sincere.  They’re — what we are. 

But — and, by the way, just look at how the EU talks about us, how they’d like to have an economy like ours.  Let’s talk about the rest of the world looks at us and what we’re doing. 

So, I — well, I don’t want to get going. 

Q    And — and then, secondly, could you clarify some of your comments yesterday with regard to strikes on Iranian oil facilities?  What did you mean by them, given some of the reactions we’re seeing in the market?

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, look, the Israelis have not concluded how they’re — what they’re going to do in terms of a strike.  That’s under discussion.  I think there are — if I were in their shoes, I’d be thinking about other alternatives than striking oil fields. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Weijia.

Q    Thank you, Karine.  Thank you so much, Mr. President, for being here. 

This week, Senator Chris Murphy said, “It’s certainly a possibility that the Israeli government is not going to sign any diplomatic agreement prior to the election,” which is what you have been calling for for so long, “potentially to try to influence the result.” 

Do you agree?  Do you have any worries that Netanyahu may be trying to influence the election, and that’s why he has not agreed to a diplomatic solution?

THE PRESIDENT:  No administration has helped Israel more than I have.  None.  None.  None.  And I think Bibi should remember that. 

And whether he’s trying to influence the election, I don’t know, but I’m not counting on that.

Q    You’ve said many times recently that you want to speak to him, that you plan to —

THE PRESIDENT:  No, I didn’t say “plan to.”  I didn’t say “want to.”

Q    You don’t want to?

THE PRESIDENT:  No, I didn’t say that.  You’re making it sound like I’m seeking an inv- — speak- — I’m assuming when they make their judgment of how they’re going to respond, we will then have a discussion. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Selina.

Q    Thank you.

Q    Thank you, Mr. President, for being here.  What are you advising the Israelis to do in terms of their retaliation to Iran?  And at this point, you still haven’t spoken to Netanyahu.  Is it fair to say that you have little personal influence over what he decides to do?

THE PRESIDENT:  No.  Look, our — our teams are in contact 12 hours a day.  They’re constantly in contact.  I’ve already had my presidential daily brief.  We’ve already had interface between our military, our — the diplomats.  It’s in constant contact. 

They are trying to figure out — this is High Holidays as well.  They’re not going to make a decision immediately.  And so, we’re going to wait to see what they — when they want to talk. 

Q    But over the past few months, they’ve consistently defied your administration’s own advice.  So, do you believe that the Israelis are going to listen to the advice you’re giving them?

THE PRESIDENT:  What I know is the plan that I put together received the support of the U.N. Security Council and the vast majority of our allies around the world as a way to bring this to an end. 

One of — look, the Israelis have every right to respond to the vicious attacks on them not just from the Iranians but from the — everyone from Hezbollah to the Houthis to — anyway.  And — but the fact is that they have to be very much more careful about dealing with civilian casualties.

Q    So, how should they respond?  You expressed concerns about attacks on Iranian oil facilities.  How should they respond?

THE PRESIDENT:  That’s between me and them.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.  We got to move on.  Go ahead, Tam.

Q    The election is a month away.  One, I’d like to know how you’re feeling about how this election is going.  And then, also, do you have confidence that it will be a free and fair election and that it will be peaceful?

THE PRESIDENT:  Two separate questions.

Q    Very much.

THE PRESIDENT:  I’m confident it’ll be free and fair.  I don’t know whether it will be peaceful. 

The things that Trump has said and the things that he said last time out when he didn’t like the outcome of the election were very dangerous. 

If you notice — I — I noticed that the vice-presidential Republican candidate did not say he’d accept the outcome of the election.  And they haven’t even accepted the outcome of the last election.  So, I’m — I’m concerned about what they’re — what they’re going to do.

Q    Are you making any preparations?  Getting security briefings related to domestic security?

THE PRESIDENT:  I always get those briefings.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.  We got to move on.  Go ahead, Akayla.  And we have — do a couple more.

Q    Hi.  Hi, Mr. President.  When are you considering imposing sanctions on Iran?  And would you include oil in those sanctions?

THE PRESIDENT:  That’s som- — that’s be- — that’s under consideration right now, the whole thing.  I’m not going to discuss that out loud.

Q    And just on your comments yesterday on the port strike.  You said by “the grace of God,” it’s going to hold.  Is there any reason you think that this —

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, there’s more to do.

Q    — this temporary suspension —

THE PRESIDENT:  It’s a month from now, and there’s more to do in terms of everything from the whole notion of me- — me- — excuse me — mechanization of the ports and the like.  There’s more to more to re- — more to resolve.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Danny.

Q    Thanks, Karine.  Thank you, Mr. President.  Last night, you said that there’s still a lot to do to avoid an all-out war in the Middle East.  I mean, firstly, aren’t we pretty close to that definition already?  And — and, secondly, what — what can you really do to stop that happening?

THE PRESIDNET:  There’s a lot we are doing.  The main thing we can do is try to rally the rest of the world and our allies into participating, like the French are, in — in Lebanon and other places to tamp this down.  And — but when you have proxies as irrational as Hezbollah and the Houthis and — it’s a — it’s a hard thing to determine.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Toluse.

THE PRESIDENT:  I’ve got to go, kid.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I know.  I know.  (Laughter.)  He’s telling me, “I got to go.”

THE PRESIDENT:  I said I’d take a couple questions.  (Laughter.)

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right. 

Q    We’ll take (inaudible) —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  You’re the la- — you’re the last one, Toluse.

THE PRESIDENT:  I think she’s decreasing her credibility.  (Laughter.)

Q    First — first time in four years; you have to take some more.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Toluse, you’re going to be the last one.

Q    Thank you, Mr. President.  Thank you for — for spending some time here with us.  There have obviously been a number of crises that the country has been facing over the past several days with the hurricane, with port strike, with the situation in the Middle East.  Can you talk about how your vice president, who is running for the presidency, has worked on these crises and what role she has played over the past several

days?

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, she’s — I’m in constant contact with her.  She’s aware of where — we all — we’re singing from the same song sheet.  We — she helped pass the l- — all the laws that are being employed now.  She was a major player in everything we’ve done, including passage of legislation, which we were told we could never pass.  And so, she’s been — and her — her staff is interlocked with mine in terms of all the things we’re doing.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right, sir.  Thank you, sir.

(Cross-talk.)

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  It’s up to you, sir.  (Laughs.)

(Cross-talk.)

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Totally up to you, sir.

(Cross-talk.)

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.  All right.  Go ahead.  Go ahead.  Go ahead.  Go ahead.

(Cross-talk.)

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah, Nandita.  Nandita.

Sir — sir — no.  No.  Sir — I didn’t call on you, sir.  I didn’t call on you.  Nandita.

Q    Pope Francis is calling for a day of —

Q    Thank you.  Thank you, Karine.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Nandita. 

Q    — prayer —

Q    Mr. President —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go, Nandita.

Q    — and fasting.  What’s —

Q    Mr. President —

THE PRESIDENT:  On Pope Francis —

Q    Yeah.

THE PRESIDENT:  — calling for a day of prayer and fasting —

Q    A day of prayer and fasting this Monday, October 7th.  You reaction, sir?

THE PRESIDENT:  I will prayer and fast.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.  That’s —

(Cross-talk.)

Q    Mr. President, what is acceptable to you in terms of Israel’s response?  How long are you okay with Israel bombing Lebanon?  What is acceptable to you?

Q    Mr. President —

(Cross-talk.)

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right, guys.  That’s it.  Thank you, everybody. 

THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Thank you, Mr. President.  Thank you, sir.

THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you.

(Cross-talk.)

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Thank you, every- — thank you, sir.

Q    Mr. President, on Ukraine.  Have you made a decision on long-range weapons?

Q    Do you re- — want to reconsider dropping out of the race?

THE PRESIDENT:  I’m back in.  (Laughter.)

Q    What made you want to come here today, Mr. President?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right, everybody.

Q    Thank — thank you, Mr. President.

Q    Thank you. 

Q    Please come back. 

Q    Thank you, Karine.

Q    Karine, can we do that again?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  No.  (Laughter.)

You hear- — you heard I was already told that.  (Laughs.) 

Q    So, that’s why we were late? 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I mean, are we always on — any — always on time?  (Laughter.)  I — I could call myself out for that.

All right, everybody.  Thank you so much.  Thank you, Mr. President.

Okay.  So, this week, the United States has faced a — a number of competing challenges, from tensions in the Middle East, to a port strike that threatened our nation’s supply chains, to a historic hurricane that washed away entire communities.

Moments like these underscore the importance of American leadership and resolve, and they show what is possible when we come together.

Under the leadership of President Biden and Vice President Harris, we were able to successfully protect our allies, ensure the viability of critical supplies, stand up for good-paying union jobs, and get resources to people impacted by the storm in North Carolina and beyond.

In the Middle East, the president showed that our ironclad support for Israelis’ security is not just a talking point; it saves lives.  Prior to Iran’s attack on Israel, the president convened his national security team in the Situation Room to monitor developments in real time, ensure we were prepared to assist in Israelis’ defense, and protect U.S. personnel in the region.

Under the president’s leadership, the United States successfully defended Israel an- — from Iran’s missiles, standing shoulder to shoulder with the people of Israel.

On the home front, the president and his team brought union workers, ocean carriers, and port operators to the table to — successfully to resolve a strike that threatened U.S. supply chains and the economic progress this president has made to lower prices for the American people.

And in the Southwest United States — Southeast, pardon me, United States, the administration pre-positioned 1,500 federal personnel, along with critical resources like food, water, and fuel, to ensure that communities in the path of Hurricane Helene were prepared ahead of the storm. 

Now, we are getting more resources into the hardest-hit communities every day, and we have provided over $45 million directly to individuals and families to help them recover.

And a wide range of bipartisan officials, including the governors of every affected state, are working together with us and have praised the federal response. 

These response- — responses underscore why leadership matters.  The president’s leadership in this moment helps to save lives, pra- — protect critical alliances, and ensure that our economy remains strong.  But more importantly, it proves that nothing is beyond America’s capacity when we do it together.

And really quickly, because I know you all a- — asked for this.  This is the week ahead.  Next week, the president will travel to Milwaukee, Wisconsin, to discuss his administration’s work to replace lead pipes in the state and across the country through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.  This law is investing historic resources into our communities and creating good-paying jobs.

The president will also be traveling to Philadelphia for a campaign engagement. 

He will also travel to Germany and Angola to underscore the enduring strength and importance of two strategic bilateral relationships in addressing a comprehensive range of global stra- — challenges.  The value of strong alliances and partnerships in the defense of freedom and democracy has never resonated more in Europe, Africa, and beyond.

President Biden has made revitalizing our international alliances and partnerships a key priority, recognizing that today’s challenges require global perspectives and shared responses.

Those are the details I am able to share with — for now, but certainly, we will have more in the upcoming days. 

And finally, n- — finally, we have Lael Bran- — Brai- — Brainard — (laughs) — our national economic adviser to the president.  She’s going to provide more information on how the president helped reopen our ports, as well as the strong job market economy report that we saw today, showing that more than 250,000 jobs this — this September under the president — President Biden.

MS. BRAINARD:  Well, thanks, Karine.  And it’s good to see everybody today.

It is a good day for American workers and families.  We saw more than 250,000 new jobs created in the month of September.  We saw unemployment back down to 4.1 percent at a time when inflation is back down to pre-pandemic levels.

The East Coast and Gulf ports are opening back up, and dockworkers are getting back to work on the basis of a strong tentative agreement on wages and a contract extension between the International Longshoreman’s Association and the United St- — States Maritime Alliance.

Just a week ago, the negotiation had totally stalled out.  The union and employers had not spoken to each other for months.  The last time a wage offer had been put on the table was in the middle of 2023.

The president and the vice president directed us to get the parties back to the table to reach a good deal.  We worked around the clock to help them find common ground. 

And the president was clear throughout that process on three things: We needed to get the union and the employers back to the table on the basis of a strong progress on wages so nothing would get in the way of hurricane recovery; Taft-Hartley was off the table because collective bargaining works; and workers should share in the large profits of the ocean carriers, particularly after those dockworkers sacrificed so much to keep goods moving for the American public during the pandemic.

And as a result of the hard work that I undertook along with Secretary Buttigieg, [Acting] Secretary Su, a number of people in the White House.  We are seeing dockworkers get a fair share of the industry’s record returns.  We’re seeing ports opening so consumers and businesses can get what they need.  And we don’t expect to see any effects on our economy or for consumers, businesses, and farmers because we have strong supply chains that we built in the wake of the pandemic. 

The president and the vice president have consistently supported the collective bargaining process.  When employers and workers come to the table, they find a good outcome. 

That’s a vastly different approach from previous administrations that might have busted unions and rolled back worker protections. 

And finally, I would simply say that the data that we’re seeing, the data we saw last week confirms that our economy is delivering for workers. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.  I’m going to take a couple of questions. 

Go ahead, Selina.

Q    Thank you so much for being here.  Would you say at this point that the U.S. has achieved a soft landing?  And if not, at what point will we be there?

MS. BRAINARD:  Yeah, I would say that, look, we have seen unemployment — the lowest average unemployment rate of any administration in 50 years, and we have seen inflation come back down to pre-pandemic levels. 

That is exactly the kind of growth that you would want to see.  Growth has actually been revised up.  It’s been above 3 percent over the last year, and we’re continuing to see very resilient consumers.  So, yes, that’s exactly the kind of Goldilocks results that you would want to see.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Josh.

Q    Thanks again for doing this.  If I could ask about an otherwise strong jobs report.  You still have manufacturing employment dip by 7,000.  What do you think is happening in the manufacturing sector right now?  Is this response to higher rates, or are you seeing something else going on?

MS. BRAINARD:  Yeah, so I think if you look more broadly across the administration, you have seen manufacturing jobs growing by more than 700,000, in contrast to the previous administration that actually saw manufacturing job losses even before the pandemic. 

And I think the right way to think about this — because we have so much new investment dollars from the Investing in America agenda, the right way to think about it is to look at construction and manufacturing jobs together.  And there, what we’ve seen is continued growth. 

That construction workforce is hard at work with factory construction that is multiples of the previous administrations.  That construction of factories is going to turn into the manufacturing jobs of the future. 

So, we see that investment in today’s economy, whether it be in chip manufacturing or clean energy, that is going to result in tomorrow’s manufacturing jobs.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead.

Q    Thank you, Karine. 

Just after the last Fed rate cut, do you think the administration has won its fight against inflation?

MS. BRAINARD:  So, I would say, if you look at the data on inflation, it is now back down to pre-pandemic levels.  Don’t forget, nobody said that could happen with a strong labor market.  I think people just really need to go back and see some of the predictions.  Nobody thought we could have the strongest recovery in our peer economies — strongest on jobs, strongest on growth — and get inflation down as fast as we did. 

And so, that just shows that the president’s investments and the focus on supply chains has really worked. 

Q    And then just a follow-up on the consumer confidence

numbers.  I mean, there was, you know, an upward revision in August, but now it’s down in September.  I’m just sort of wondering if you can comment on that.

MS. BRAINARD:  Yeah, so I think the most recent Michigan sentiment numbers actually are showing strength.  And, you know, if you look at what consumers are talking about, they’re talking about good jobs, good job opportunities.  And we’ve seen a lot of people moving into new sectors with better wages, and there is now a lot more confidence that interest rates are coming down, inflation is down, and that’s going to enable consumers to feel more confident about investing in some of those bigger-ticket items.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.  Just a couple more. 

Go ahead.

Q    Thank you.  On the jobs report, the data also showed that the employment picture in July and August was also brighter than previously thought.  For Americans who are concerned about the rate that they may pay on their mortgage or their car that they might buy, what do you see that doing to the path of interest rates going forward?

MS. BRAINARD:  You know, I think that we are now in a part of the recovery where inflation is back down, and that’s really what is going to determine whether interest rates continue to fall.  And market interest rates have remained low.  Mortgage rates have come all the way down close to 6 percent.  We anticipate, because inflation is back down, that that will continue to show through to market rates.

Q    And on the hurricane that ravaged the Southeast, what are your early indications of how that could impact economic growth and the jobs picture in November, with so many in that region out of work?

MS. BRAINARD:  Yeah, so we do think normally with a hurricane of this size, with the devastation that it has caused in many communities, that it will affect the employment statistics for that month.  But what we know is that, generally, you see the economy overall bouncing back very quickly and the growth numbers really becoming sort of strong pretty rapidly because of all that rebuilding activity that we are committed to. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Jacqui.

Q    That was my —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Oh, okay.

Q    — on interest rates.  Yeah.  (Laughter.) 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead.

Q    How concerned are you right now about the instability

in the Middle East and its impact on oil prices?

MS. BRAINARD:  Yeah, so, it is something that we track very closely.  Obviously, prices at the pump right now, $3.18 on average — not that I track it closely, but that is today’s number — (laughter) — and below $3 in many states.  We believe that global markets are well supplied, and continue to expect that in the U.S., we’ll continue to see those low gas prices. 

And of course, we have really effective ways of addressing some of those geostrategic volatility.  We’ve used it in the past.  We have the capacity to use it again. 

So, right now, markets are very well supplied, and we anticipate them to remain so. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right, last question to — oh — 

Q    Yeah, I’ll —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  No, I — I can go to Gerren too.  (Laughs.)  Go ahead. 

Q    Thanks.  A federal judge in Missouri issued an injunction blocking the president’s student loan program hours after a judge in Georgia allowed it to advance.  What is the White House’s message to this dizzying legal battle?  And that was lifted up as an economic policy to, particularly, closing the racial wealth gap.  And what is your message to Black and brown Americans who are really relying on this relief?

MS. BRAINARD:  Yeah.  So, student loan debt relief is so important for so many young people who are trying to build wealth, particularly for people who are first generation, to be able to invest in small businesses, to invest in starting a family, to invest in a house for the first time.  So, we are going to continue to work to deliver that debt relief to so many students who deserve it. 

I do want to say that we have 5 million Americans who have already received debt relief.  And, you know, you can go on TikTok and other social media platforms and see their testimonials what a difference it makes in their lives.  And that is why the president, vice president going to continue working so hard to deliver.  

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Awesome.  Thank you so much, Lael.

MS. BRAINARD:  Thank you.

Q    More Americans are food insecure.

MS. BRAINARD:  Thank you. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Thank you.  Thank you so much. 

Q    Could you address food insecurity?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I appreciate it. 

Q    The numbers are rising —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Thank you, thank you.

Q    — according to the USDA.  Food insecurity numbers? 

Maybe, Karine, if you could address it?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  No.  Not — not right now.

Q    Food insecurity?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — I’m — I’m not talking to you, sir.

Q    Okay.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m just not.  It would be nice if you would be less disrespectful in the room.

Q    I’m just asking questions.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Inappropriately. 

Okay.  Go ahead, Josh.  I don’t know if — maybe you guys are done with me.  Maybe I can walk out.  (Laughs.)  You guys got — you guys got all the best.  (Laughs.)  You guys got all the best. 

Go ahead, Josh.

Q    So, if we were to, like, zoom out —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    — President Biden came in here today. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    He’s going to be with Pennsylvania Senator Bob Casey this week.  Then he goes to Germany and Angola.  He said he’s singing from the same song sheet as vice president Kamala Harris on the campaign.  How does he see his public role in the next few weeks as we get closer to the election?  What does — what’s he trying to achieve?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — look —

Q    And how’s he thinking about it?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I think he’s doing his job as president, right?  I think that’s the most important thing.  I mean, I started off at the top, at least of this — this part of the program, where I said that we’ve had three major events happen this week.  And what did the president do?  What did the vice president do?  They worked shoulder and shoulder to deal with these major events. 

Now we see a deal with the port — a negotiated deal with the ports.  Obviously, it — it — that collective bargaining is extended until January 15th, which is incredibly important, especially in the midst of a hurricane that we saw — this historic hurricane that we just saw — Hurricane Helene. 

We s- — we see what’s happening in the Middle East.  The president and the vice president continue to have diplomatic conversations, if you will, to deal — to de-escalate, to deal with what we’re seeing in — in that — in the region.

And the hurricane.  You saw the — the vice president in — in Georgia; the president in North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, himself, and also in North — also in Florida, pardon me. 

And so, I think what you’re going to see is him continuing to do his job, working closely with the vice president. 

Look, before Hurricane Helene, President Biden was planning to campaign this week, and you heard — you heard me say he’s going to go to Pennsylvania.  He’s going to go to Wisconsin next week.  And so, we have — you know, we — we have — you all have covered how much of a whirlwind week this has been. 

And so, the president is going to be president.  He’s going to be commander in chief.  And obviously, he’s going to be supporting his vice president. 

I can’t speak specifically about the campaign because of — we do respect the Hatch Act here — at least for myself, as a federal employee, and many of us here. 

And so, look, he’s going to continue to — to do the work that he’s doing.  We saw strong jobs numbers.  That’s one of the reasons he came out.  He came out because he wanted to talk about that.  He wanted to talk about what we have seen this week.

And so — and so, look, we’re going to continue to doing the work, and I think that’s what the American people want to see. 

Go ahead, Selina.

Q    Thanks, Karine.  So, former President Donald Trump threatened to revoke the legal status of Haitian migrants.

What is the president’s reaction to that?  This is something that the former president had tried to do during his own administration. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Look, here’s the fact.  The fact is they are here legally, right?  That is the fact.  TPS, that’s what it gives you.  And honestly, I wouldn’t take legal advice from the former president.  I don’t know.  That’s not something I would do. 

Go ahead.

Q    And how concerned is the administration about the economic impact of Hurricane Helene?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Look, as you can see, we have been working around the clock.  The president directed his team very early on to work around the clock to make sure that the states who were — that were affected, the states that he’s visited and the vice president has visited over the past couple of days, got everything that they need.  And we — and we did that by pre-positioning — pre-positioning some of the personnel — about 1,500 federal personnel — to do that. 

What we are doing: We’re going to make sure — obviously, we’re going to always monitor any of the economic impact.  But we’re going to continue to make sure that we are dealing — we are focused on lifesaving and life-sustaining efforts.  That’s the focus that we’re going to have here. 

And we’re going to continue to monitor.  But obviously, reacting and providing the needs of the states right now, of the — of citizens who are living in those states is probably the most key and most important.  And continue to call on Congress to move forward with additional funding. 

As you know, in the CR there was a robust ask for funding — for disaster funding, and that didn’t make it in the bipartisan CR.  And so, we got to get that done.  And we’re going to continue to have conversations with Congress.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Nandita.

Q    Karine, I tried asking the president this —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Nandita, I’ve called on you, like, three times today.  (Laughter.)  I know some folks in the back are just going to be like, “Yeah.” 

Q    I appreciate it.  I appreciate it.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So — yeah.

Q    I tried asking President Biden —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  (Laughs.)

Q    (Inaudible.)

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I hear you, Kimberly.  I hear you.

Go ahead.

Q    What is acceptable to the U.S. in terms of Israel’s response, right?  How long is the U.S. comfortable with Israel bombing Lebanon?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — I know you guys are going to ask this question every which way, and I totally understand that.  We are having conversations, discussions.  We’re in contact with the Israelis on — on what’s next. 

We have been very clear there will be consequences.  You saw the joint statement with the G7.  There’s going to be consequences.  There’s going to be sanctions.  And I’m not going to preview those sanctions from here. 

But we have always said Israel has the right to defend itself.  And we — and you saw just on Tuesday night — and not just Tuesday night, in April — how — how much we are prepared to defend and protect Israel, because that is our ironclad commitment. 

I’m not going to get into pu- — into diplomatic conversations in — in the public here.

Q    And there was a report that quotes U.S. officials saying the White House wants to take advantage of the massive blow to Hezbollah’s leadership and infrastructure to push for a new Lebanese president in the coming days.  Can you comment on that?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m not going to comment on that.  I’m not going to comment on sources or reporting out there.  That is — that is not something I’m going to speak to, sourcing that I can’t even verify from here. 

Go ahead.

Q    Thank you.  On the port strike reaching a tentative agreement.  The White House and several officials were involved in — in the 90-day extension of those talks.  I’m wondering what the significance of that timeline is and whether the election being five weeks away played any role in it?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Look, this is about the right thing to do for workers.  Many of those workers put their lives at risk during the pandemic.  We have always said collective bargaining is — works.  We believe it works.  And we have seen — we have seen parties reach a fair agreement when you put — when you have — when they come in — come to the table and — in good faith and do that collective bargaining.  This is what’s important. 

It was important to this president to get this done.  This is not about an election.  This is about what is the right thing to do for the American people.  This is the right thing to do for — for workers, again, who — who deserve higher wages, who deserve benefits. 

And so, the president is proud to have been able to do that.  His team — obviously, with his team, in the dir- — and he directed his team to do this.  And so, now collective bargaining is going to continue, and we’ll see where we are in the next couple of — couple of months. 

But this is not about politics for this president.  He — and you have seen that in the last three and a half years when we’ve been in these types of situation where there was negotiation, and we have been very, very clear: collective bargaining and supporting workers.

Q    On congressional funding.  You mentioned some of the items that were lacking in the short-term funding bill that Republicans had put forth.  I’m wondering if the president has spoken with any members of the Big Four in Congress to bring those concerns to them directly. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, I don’t have any conversations to speak to that the president has had with members of Congress. 

I mean, you saw him on the road.  He was able — you saw him in a bipartisan way on the road in North Carolina, South Carolina, in Georgia, and — and Florida.  And he — you saw him with Republican congressional members and governors and Republican — and Democratic congressional members and also governors.  And you saw that bipartisanship. 

I’m certainly not going to get into any private conversations that they have had.  But we will continue to speak to congressional leadership and members about getting that extra funding.  It is important.  They need to act.  They need to act. 

AIDE:  Karine, you (inaudible).

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead.  Go ahead.

Q    Hey, thanks, Karine.  Can you talk about how President Biden will be marking Monday’s one-year anniversary of the October 7th attack on Israel?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, obviously, it’s going to be a painful — a painful day for — for many, including for — for all of us here.  And so, we will have more to share on how we will be commemorating that devastating day that we saw a year ago.  Don’t have anything to share at this time. 

Q    And — and, secondly, this was President Biden’s first time — correct? — to the press briefing room —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    — since he’s —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yep.

Q    What — why not —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  And you’re welcome. 

Q    Yeah.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  You’re welcome.  I know you’re — I know this —

Q    I know.  I know.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I know the way — the way this question is going to go.

Q    We appreciate it.  I —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  It’s going to be great.  It’s going to be great.  (Laughs.)

Q    Let’s — let’s do it again.

Q    I would have preferred a further question, but that’s all — that’s all right.  (Laughter.)  But real quick: Why not — why didn’t he come in the three and a half years before? 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I —

Q    Why —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I mean, he came today.  And you got to see him.

Q    Yes.  Yeah, but —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  And you were here. 

Q    — you know, I mean, he had the opportunity —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Aw, man.  Come on.

Q    All right.  All right.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Come on.  He was here.  He took your questions.  And he —

Q    It seemed like he wanted to stay a little bit longer.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — (laughter) —

Q    Every Friday?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  He is — he is — every Friday?  (Laughter.)  Friday — Friday with the POTUS.  Friday with the POTUS.  We —

Q    I’ll bring ice cream.  Bring ice cream.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Well, no, you guys got to bring the ice cream.  You guys got to bring the ice cream. 

(Cross-talk.)

Okay.  I’m going to do a couple more.  Go ahead.  I haven’t called on you.  Go ahead.  Go ahead.

Q    Thank you, Karine.  I want to go back to Haitians and the TPS.  But first, you know, it was — it’s another week of misery in Haiti. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    There was this report from the World Food Programme describing acute hunger.  What more can the U.S. do to improve the situation in Haiti?  And conc- — if there’s no improvement, is it conceivable that the TPS for Haitians will never be lifted?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, on your last question, I’ll do that first — the last part of your question, I’ll do that first.  I — we — I can’t predetermine what TPS status is going to be.  It’s not something that I can do from here.  Obviously, as you know, that is a decision with DHS and the State Department.  They decide TPS and the best way to move forward.  So, I’m not going to get into a hypothetical about that.

But as it relates to Haiti more broadly and to the question of instability and what’s happening, look, despite that — despite the instability that continues, the recent deployment, as you know, of MSS mission is a unique opportunity to build a foundation of security and bring hope to Haitians that deserve to live their lives free of violence. 

And so, to that end, the United States has delivered well over $300 million to support the MSS mission, while urging the international to community — community to support that — that mission as well.  The United States will continue to hold those undermining Haiti’s institutions and committing serious human rights abuses accountable.  That is our commitment. 

We are committed to doing our part both to address immediate security needs and invest in Haiti’s long-term successes.  We stand with the people of Haiti and will continue supporting their aspirations of more security, certainly democratic and prosperous future.  That is our commitment, and we’ll continue to support the mission. 

Go ahead, Michael.

Q    Thanks, Karine.  It seems as if the president has spoken with pretty much every governor in the affected —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  He has.  He has.  That was affected in the region.

Q    But has he spoken with Governor DeSantis of Florida?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Touché.  Good point.  So — (laughter).  Touché. 

So — and I think we read out that he spoke to the governor of Tennessee on our way back from — back from our trip to Florida and Georgia yesterday. 

I don’t have a — a conversation to read out with the Florida — the governor of Florida.  But what I can say is that we have been in touch.  Our team has been in touch with local officials on the ground.  We are committed to providing what is needed in the state, obviously, to those who were affected in the state, and are committed — our commitment is clear.  The president has always said it doesn’t matter if you’re in a red state or a blue state; he’s a president for all Americans.  And that’s — continues to be, certainly, his commitment. 

Go ahead.

AIDE:  Last one.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I know.  I’m getting — I’m getting pulled.  But go ahead.  Then I’ll come back to you.

Q    Thank you, Karine.  The president seemed to suggest that he is asking — or he seems to be suggesting that Israel should consider other alternatives, rather than attacking Iranian oil facilities.  But should Israel make such an attack, how is the administration preparing for an Iranian retaliation on the Strait of Hormuz that would disrupt oil supply and disrupt oil prices globally?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, also as the president said, we continue to have these discussions.  I’m not going to get into hypotheticals Israel — about Israel’s response to Tues- — Tuesday — Tuesday night attacks. 

What I will say is that we understand that they are still determining what exactly they will do.  That is something that we understand. 

I’m just not going to prejudge.  I’m not going to get ahead of anything, and the discussions to continue.

Q    But can we say that the administration is preparing for that possibility?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — I’m just not going to get — I’m not going to speculate.  They’re still — I’m — I’m telling you, they’re — still haven’t decided what their next steps are going to be. 

Q    Okay.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So that’s what I’m saying to you.  That’s what we understand.  I don’t have anything else beyond that.

Q    And on Angola — on the President’s trip, Karine.  Amnesty International is criticizing the administration’s, quote, “silence” on human rights violations in Angola ahead of the president’s visit, calling out the administration’s focus on private-sector investment to counter China.  This is obviously in reference to the Lobito Corridor.  Do you have a response?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Look, I mean, I — we get this question — this type of question about human rights violations any time he meets, he travels and if that’s going to come up.  The president, as you know, has never shied away from direct conversation about human rights and democracy in any conversation, and I could expect that he will do the same in this upcoming trip. 

And so, I don’t have anything beyond that, but the president has never shied away from that.  Never shied away.

Go ahead.

Q    Thank you, Karine.  Does the administration have any concerns about how the — the aftermath of this storm could impact the vote, whether it’s talking to the Postal Service about mail-in ballots that may not be getting to people or impacting the infrastructure in these critical states?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, we are go- — using every available resources to help this com- — the community respond.  That’s what we’re going to do and recover from this disaster.  That is our commitment.  That’s what you’ve heard from this president. That’s what you heard from the FEMA administrator and so many others in the president’s administration, and certainly that means ensuring that Americans’ have — voices are heard this November.  And so, that is our commitment.  We want to make sure that people’s voices are heard. 

And so, any specifics on where the infrastructure is and what that looks like, certainly, I would have to refer you to the state election officials on — on those and — and cybersecurity and infrastructure and all of those pieces — on what that looks like for them.  But — but —

Q    Have any of the states voiced concerns to the administration?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — well, I cannot speak to that.  I have not heard of that. 

But look, our commitment, again, is to make sure that the resources available so that community can respond to recovery and also get back on their feet and deal with this disaster.  We want to make sure — we want to make sure that Americans’ voices are heard this — this November. 

That is im- — important and so — but certainly that is something that state elected officials can speak to more directly, but we’re going to try and make sure they get back on — back on that.

And I haven’t called on you yet.  Go ahead.

Q    Thank you. 

Q    Former President Trump is accusing the Biden administration of using FEMA funding to support undocumented migrants.  How is the White House responding to that?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:   I mean, it’s just categorically fla- — false.  It is not true.  It is a false statement.  And look, the fact of the matter is — I think the Washington Post fact-checker did a piece and the headline recently, just moments ago, not too long ago, and the headline was “No, Biden didn’t take FEMA relief money to use — to use on migrants – but Trump did.”

I’ll leave it there. 

Q    And a quick follow-up —

Q    Karine?  Karine? 

Q    — on that?  A follow on — 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yep.  Yep.  Yep.   

Q    Secretary Mayorkas had said earlier this week that he was concerned that FEMA didn’t have enough funding until the end — for the rest of the hurricane season.  Now that President Biden has seen the damage firsthand in the Carolinas, Florida, Georgia — we heard him say at the podium he may have to call Congress back from recess — what exactly is he waiting for to be able to make that call?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — look, here’s the thing: We put forth a pretty substantial, robust — I mentioned this moments ago — to be part of the CR.  We were disappointed that it was not part of the CR.  And if congressional Republicans were serious — if they were really, truly serious — about doing something for the communities that was impacted by Hurricane Helene, they would join us in calling for additional funding.  This is what we’ve been doing.  And so, if they’re serious, they would get to — to work and get that done. 

Just like in the — with the border, if they were serious about the border, they wouldn’t vote against their own bipartisan proposal that they worked with us on — they’re against it now; they weren’t — they would move it forward.  It would actually start fixing the broken system that we’re seeing right now. 

And, you know, they can — if they really want to help us in dealing what we’re seeing, whether it’s at the border or getting more funding for disaster monies that’s going to be needed to get into the communities, they should be serious.  Congressional Republicans need to get serious here, and they’re just not.

Go ahead, Akayla.

Q    Thanks, Karine.  Just a quick question on the port strike suspension.  Is the White House going to continue to be in touch with ILA to sort of support those negotiations as they continue?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I think, look, there’s congressional — congressional — collective bargaining continues.  I think that’s really important.  That’s what we’re seeing, and that’s what we want to continue to see.  And so, we will be in touch as necessary. 

But I think what’s important is they came up with an agreement.  That’s because of this president’s leadership.  And the way to get this done is getting col- — is continuing that collective bargaining, and we believe that certainly works. 

Thanks, everybody.  All right.  Have a great weekend. 

Q    Thank you. 

2:55 P.M. EDT

The post Press Briefing by President Biden, Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, and National Economic Adviser Lael Brainard appeared first on The White House.

Aboard Air Force One
En Route Tallahassee, Florida

11:20 A.M. EDT

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: All right, we can do this really quickly.

So, today, we’re going — we’re on our way to Florida and Georgia, where the president will s- — will further survey damage caused by Helene and meet with state and local leaders regarding ongoing response efforts.

The president will participate in an aerial tour of the affected areas on his way to Perry, Florida. On the ground, the president will then visit the Keaton Beach community and receive an — an operational briefing.

From there, the president will head to Valdosta, Georgia, followed by a visit to the f- — to the rural community of Ray City, where he will meet with residents and local business owners who are trying to move forward in the wake of this disaster.

The president spoke with Governor Kemp this morning to discuss disaster response operations and other — and offer further support as needed.

The president and his entire administration will continue to do everything in our power to help the people of Florida, Georgia, and every community affected by this storm.

Yesterday, we announced that the president approved 100 percent federal cost share for emergency response a- — activities in Florida and Georgia, as well as Tallahassee [Tennessee] and North Carolina. This means that the federal government will cover 100 percent of the costs associated with things like debris removal, first responders, search and rescue, shelters, and mass — and mass — and mass feeding.

This latest announcement builds the president’s previously approved requests for major disaster declarations from the governors of Florida and Georgia, which unlocked additional assistance for residents on their road to recovery.

As a result, the pres- — the Biden-Harris administration has provided nearly $4 million directly to individuals and families in need of critical financial assistance.

Still, we know there is more work to be done. And we will be here, doing that work, for as long as it takes.

As you can see, I have Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack standing next to me here to discuss what assistance the U.S. Department of Agriculture is providing to help people in Florida and Georgia, including farmers and rural communities.

And with that, go ahead, Mr. Secretary.

SECRETARY VILSACK: Okay, thanks very much.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Just hold on tight. (Laughs.)

SECRETARY VILSACK: Obviously at USDA, our thoughts and prayers go out to all the families who have been impacted by this storm. Our job, obviously, is to try to keep farms viable and operational, to basically get as much help as quickly as possible to as many people as possible.

Let me start by, first of all, recognizing the stress that a lot of the farmers are under and the important role that we think the Farm Stress line — Hotline provides for farmers who are in trouble. Going to give you one — a telephone number for folks to call if they’re feeling a little bit stressed out to get some help. It’s 883-381-7243. 883-381-7243. In addition to that Stress Line, obviously we’ve got a number of programs.

When people think of the Department of Agriculture, they normally think of the crop insurance programs and risk management tools. We’ve given instructions to our crop insurance carriers to expedite, as quickly as possible, the loss adjustments that are necessary to make payments. Many of these farmers, particularly in the Southeast, have exercised the additional coverage for hurricane and wind damage. We expect and anticipate under those coverages, hopefully, payments can be made within 30 days. That is consistent with the president’s instruction to try to get folks as much help as possible, as quickly as possible.

In addition to the risk management tool for crops, we have a variety of other programs — programs that help repair structures and fences, programs that help eliminate soil erosion, programs that help remove debris, programs that will pay for the loss of livestock. This is particularly true in Georgia, where you’ve got a lot of contract poultry facilities where poultry houses have been destroyed by the — by the — by the storm. So we’re going to be there to try to provide help and assistance to get those fact — get those folks back on their feet. Help with feed for livestock if you have to travel an extended distance to get feed because of the storm.

There are a lot of uninsured losses, and there are programs to make sure that those uninsured losses are also covered.

And also there are obviously damage to trees and forest in the area. We have programs to assist in that area as well.

So, that’s on the farm side.

We’re expediting — we’re — we’re sending search teams or will send search teams into the counties where we’ve seen the most damage and most impact so that the — the farmers can go into their county office, get the k- — help, assistance, and direction that they need to be able to make application for whatever program fits their — fits their need and their losses.

I want to also say that part of our job is obviously to coordinate with FEMA. We have over 190 folks from USDA that are currently at the regional center in Atlanta or in the D.C. headquarters working collaboratively with FEMA to make sure that we’re coordinating and collaborating.

I would also say that we’re investing in rural communities. When we get to the recovery stage after we’ve assessed damage and try to triage things, we’ll begin working with communities in terms of housing, housing repair, water and wastewater treatment facilities that need repair, electric lines that need repair. We’ll be there to provide help and assistance through programs.

And we also have, obviously, a food assistance responsibility. We’ve already provided these — these states with flexibility in terms of child nutrition programs and senior nutrition programs, in terms of the types of meals they can serve, and — and the location of those meals.

And obviously, any governor who requests disaster SNAP assistance will get it from the department as quickly as we possibly can get it.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: All right. We don’t have that much time. But go ahead, Darlene.

Q Could you talk a little bit about what is being done to — there was a story on the radio this morning about bananas being stuck at one of the ports. And, you know, th- — they only last so long. Is there anything being done to get food that’s stuck at ports out and — perhaps to places like Asheville that have been affected by the storm?

SECRETARY VILSACK: Well, the — a lot of what we’re talking about in terms of the ports are in containers. And so, it’s going to be difficult to get to the containers based on the fact that there’s a work stoppage there.

That’s why the president has urged the shippers, in particular, to focus on getting this thing resolved and making sure that the collective bargaining system works. That’s the most effective way of getting the bananas to wherever they need to go.

And hopefully, the shippers will come to the table, union will come to the table, collective bargaining will work, and we’ll get this thing resolved quickly.

Q Secretary Vilsack, you know, we’ve just gone through a period of pretty intense inflation that affected food prices. To what extent are you concerned that the kind of double whammy of the port strike and this — this really large-scale hurricane are going to exacerbate the kind of pressures on food prices that we saw that are just, you know, abating now?

SECRETARY VILSACK: The current food inflation rate at grocery stores is around 1 percent, which is about half the 20-year average. So, it is good to see that it has come down.

At this point, a short labor stoppage at — at the ports should have minimal impact and effect on prices. Obviously, if we’re talking about a longer situation of duration, that may have an impact. But at the end of the day, that’s why the president has been so forceful in suggesting people need to get to the table and then get — get this resolved.

This is the first strike in 50 years. These people know how to get to “yes.” They just need to get to “yes.”

Q Can you define —

Q Can you tell us what the impact has been —

Q I’m sorry, wait. Can you define, please, what you mean by “shorter” and “longer”?

SECRETARY VILSACK: Well, the hope would be that this thing ends tomorrow. All right? That would be short.

The re- — the reality is our assessment is, if this lasts a couple of weeks, we’re not talking about a significant disruption. If you get into months, then, obviously, that’s a situ- — a different situation, which we’ll cover it when — when and if that occurs.

Q Can you tell us what the impact on American farmers in terms of their exports? You know, how much runway is there for —

SECRETARY VILSACK: Most of our exports go through the West Coast. It’s about $90 million on a — on a daily basis —

MILITARY AIDE: I’m so sorry. We’re about to land, and it’s going to be a very quick stop.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Okay.

SECRETARY VILSACK: The — the biggest impact is on imports.

Q Karine —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I am so sorry, guys.

Q — very quickly on the student loan debt. There was a Georgia judge that just is letting it expire. Do you have any reaction to that? It’s —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I’m not going to — to get into that.

Q Thank you, Mr. Secretary.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Thank you, Mr. Secretary.

I’m — it’s an ongoing matter, so I can’t get into that at this time. So, I’m just — I’m not going to get into the litigation.

Q Is he meeting with Kemp? Is he meeting with DeSantis while he’s there, please?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, a couple of things. DeSantis is not going to be there, but we have been in touch with his team. We understand that he has other areas to survey today, so — but we have been in touch with his team.

As you know, the president has been committed — a full — a full administration, all the agencies are han- — all hands on deck in trying to make sure that we deal with the — the devastation that we’re seeing. You saw the president yesterday in North Carolina and South Carolina, the vice president in Georgia. And now we’re going to Florida — Florida and Georgia ourselves.

And so, the governor can speak for his travel today, but he won’t be there. But, obviously, we’ve been in touch with his —

Q (Inaudible) about Governor Kemp as well?

Q (Inaudible.)

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Well, we — look, we — the president spoke to Governor Kemp this morning. He won’t be there, but we obviously are inviting them. They are welcome to join us. And we are doing everything that we can to make sure that we give — give some relief to folks on the ground, to Americans on the ground dealing with this disaster.

Q Has he spoken —

Q He spoke to Governor Kemp. Has he spoken to Governor DeSantis?

AIR FORCE ONE CREW MEMBER: If you could just please take your seats. (Inaudible.)

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Okay. Sorry, guys.

Q Has he spoken to DeSantis?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I don’t have a call to — to read out.

Q Has he spoken to Governor Kemp again today?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE: We just spoke to Governor Kemp, as I said at the top.

I’m sorry, guys. We got to sit.

11:30 A.M. EDT

The post Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack En Route Tallahassee, FL appeared first on The White House.

1:16 P.M. EDT

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.  I just have a couple things at the top, and then I’ll turn it over.

So, we’re headed to South Carolina and North Carolina, where the president will meet with state and local leaders and personally survey the devastation caused by Hurricane Helene.

In South Carolina, the president will engage with first responders and state and local officials.

In North Carolina, he will take an aerial tour of areas in western North Carolina that were impacted by the storm.

Today, the president announced that he is directing the Department of Defense to deploy up to 1,000 active-duty soldiers to support the delivery of food to communities impacted by the storm.

And I can announce that tomorrow, the president will visit impacted communities in Florida and Georgia.

In North Carolina and South Carolina and across the affected areas, the Biden-Harris administration has remained focused on using every tool available to help people and their communities begin their road to recovery and rebuilding.

In fact, President Biden recently approved an additional major disaster declaration for Virginia, unlocking more resources to provide survivors with direct disaster assistance.

To date, more than $10 million has been provided directly to those affected by Hurricane Helene.

As the president said yesterday, we will be there until the work is done.

And now I’m going to turn it over to the Homeland Security Secretary Mayorkas, who is going to speak to the federal response — update on federal response.

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  Good afternoon. 

So, the — the president has expressed his need as a commander in chief to see firsthand the impacts on the ground.

This is not the first trip that I’ve taken with the president for that purpose.  We were in Mayfield, Kentucky, together.  He has said there is no substitute for interacting with the individuals, with the victims of these extreme weather events, and that is why he’s taking this trip.

He has directed me and every member of the Cabinet to devote the full force of our personnel and our resources to the assistance of the victims of Hurricane Helene, which is really of historic strength.

I can provide you with some data, if you would find — find that helpful.  Unfortunately, I forgot my glasses.  But I will say that — remember something about the data: It changes every hour because we are continuing to pour resources in every hour.  But what the data will do is give you a — a good understanding of the magnitude of the federal response.  It’s really quite breathtaking.

So, more than 4,800 personnel from across the federal workforce are deployed, more than 1,000 of whom are from FEMA.  We have shipped over 8.8 million meals, more than 7.4 million — million liters of water, 150 generators, and more than 225,000 tarps to the region.

As of today, search and rescue teams have conducted nearly 1,500 structural evaluations and hundreds of rescues and evacuations.  And additionally, of course, federal search and rescue teams are deployed.

The — the status of the federal response is dependent on the conditions on the ground.  So, in certain areas that are remote, mountainous, and that have been hit hard, we’re still in search and rescue.  In others, we are already in response and recovery mode.  It varies according to the — the demographics of the — and topography.

Voluntary organizations, World Central Kitchen is deployed — are supporting mass feeding operations with bulk food and water deliveries coming via truck and aircraft delivery.  Some of these areas are remote.  We are doing airdrops and the like.  We’re getting assistance from the Department of Defense and other resources.  The Salvation Army is deployed.  The National Guard is deployed.  I think — I think it’s almost 6,000 members of the National Guard are deployed across the six states.  And our FEMA administrator, Deanne Criswell, is on the ground. 

I think that gives you a good sense of the magnitude of the operation. 

You should know that in — in the six impacted states, we had declared emergency — emergencies — emergency declaration prior to Helene hitting.  We had pre-positioned assets.  And, as Karine mentioned, the president, upon request of the particular states — I think it’s five now; I’ll — I can confirm that — has declared major disaster declarations. 

Q    Is there — what are you doing speci- — you mentioned sending water, but what are you doing as far as getting the drinking water back online in — in places like the president is seeing?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  For that, I would turn to Michael Regan, the EPA administrator.  I — I think, in South Carolina, he mentioned there are two systems that are not fully operational, but that’s South Carolina specific.  But I — I would have to defer to — to Michael Regan.

Q    Talk to us a little about how confident you’re feeling in the amount of funding right now.  The president mentioned that he needs — was thinking about bringing Congress back to pass more funding.  Is that something you think might still need to happen?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  We — we are meeting the immediate needs with the money that we have.  We are expecting another hurricane hitting.  We do not have the funds.  FEMA does not have the funds to make it through the season and what — what is imminent.

Q    So, does the president want lawmakers to return to Washington?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  I would defer to the — to the president for — for the timing of that.  But we have, of course, made a significant request of Congress with respect to stable funding for the Federal Emergency Management Administration, which should not be a political issue.  This is something that Americans need desperately.

Q    (Inaudible.)

Q    Can you talk a little bit about — I’m sorry — how the rol- — like, how the role of climate change comes into the request for more funding — you know, the — the sort of revamping of the entire FEMA operation to begin with?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  This is — let’s — let’s speak factually.  The severity and frequency of extreme weather events have only increased.  It is an impact of climate change.

When — I — I mentioned Mayfield, Kentucky, a small town that was absolutely decimated by a tornado of unprecedented strength and length.  And we — I remember one of the factories in that small community, people had gone into a safe room that was built precisely for extreme weather, and that safe room was decimated because the building codes of yesterday are not equipped for the extreme weather events of today and tomorrow.

Q    The president spoke to us on the tarmac about how the dockworkers strike is playing into this.  D- — could you give us a sense, one, if the — the strike is slowing down the response at all, and whether the companies involved are at all profiting off of the misery that’s taking place on the ground?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  I cannot answer the — the second question.  I am not that attuned to the dynamics of the strike.  I’ll leave that to the experts who- — whose portfolio covers that.

But I will tell you that we are not short of supplies right now with respect to the delivery of goods to the people in need.  Are — we are — we are not seeing adverse impacts from that strike with respect to our response to Hurricane Helene.

Q    The president has a very active travel schedule over the next couple of days, with North Carolina and then Florida and Georgia as well.  Is there any sense that he’s kind of playing catch-up after the initial criticism over the weekend and the fact that Donald Trump got down to Georgia on Monday?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  Oh, absolutely not.  What — what I said yesterday and I’ll repeat — this is a very, very important point: The president is focused on being there for people without disrupting the emergency operations.  What he does not want to do is in any way impair or impede the rescue that we are providing. 

And so, he’s been in close touch with local and state officials to determine when is the right time to visit so that the visit is productive and not counterproductive.  And he has responded accordingly, according to the guidance that he’s received, and that’s why he’s traveling today and tomorrow.

Q    And is there any update on the estimate of how much this is going to cost the federal government and how much you would be seeking from Congress for help?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  So, as I mentioned, we have the immediate needs right now.  On a continuing resolution, we have funds, but that is not a stable source of supply, if you will.

This is a multibillion-dollar, multiyear recovery.  The magnitude of it —

Q    Did you say million or billion?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  Billion.

Q    Okay.

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  Multibillion-dollar undertaking and a multiyear undertaking.  We have — we have towns that have disappeared, literally. 

Q    Can you — either one of you just tell us a little bit about what — what the president is going to see?  I know we said western North Carolina, but will we fly over Asheville?  What — where are we headed?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, we’re definitely, as I stated, western — doing an aerial tour of western North Carolina.  He’ll be able to see a little bit of Asheville.  We’ll certainly have more for you when we get on the ground. 

But, look, I think this is really important.  And I — and to, I think, your question, Danny — the reason why we are on top of this, as the president has been throughout his three and a half years and taking this very seriously — when — when the secretary started talking to you all, he talked about being commander in chief — the president takes this very, very seriously.

And we pre-positioned.  We — you — you heard the administrator from FEMA.  She came to the briefing room on Thursday, hours before the hurricane actually hit, because we wanted to send a message to Americans, to folks who were in the region to please listen to law enforcement, but also lay out there were 1,500 personnel on the ground — FEMA personnel on the ground being ready to really take this on. 

And so, as the secretary said, the president is going down today.  He’s going to be in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia and Florida, as I said.  But he — we also did it at the direction of the folks on the ground. 

So, yes, there may be other leaders who decided to go a couple days ago, but we actually did it a way that we know that we were not taking away resources from emergency operations.  And I think that’s what’s important here. 

And you’ve seen that be- — the — the secretary talked about Kentucky.  There’s been other — we’ve been to Florida a couple times — right? — with what we have seen over the past couple of years with — with natural disasters. 

And so, this is a president that is going to take this seriously.  He’s going to see for himself and thank, obviously, the — the emergency workers on the ground.  And so, this is — this is what we do as president.  This is what we do.  This is what he does, and our secretary.

Q    Just on the funding.  You know, we have two months left in hurricane season.  Can you just characterize a little bit — if you don’t get more funding, how much trouble are we in if another big storm hits?  Does that translate —

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  Well —

Q    — into lives lost?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  Well, there — there are a couple things.  It’s very important to note that even though we’re on a continuing resolution, we — we do — can obtain spend-fast funds so that we can dip into funds that are slated for the duration of the year to meet immediate needs.  So, we — we are meeting the moment. 

But that doesn’t speak about the future and the fact, as I mentioned earlier, that these extreme weather events are increasing in frequency and severity, and we have to be funded for the sake of the American people.  This is not a political issue. 

Q    Karine, how is the president continuing to get updates about the Middle East while he’s traveling today?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Well, let’s —

Q    Let me —

Q    Sorry.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Let’s let — so we —

Q    One more —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  — because he has to go back to be with the president.

Q    (Inaudible) about the fuel shortages that is being done right now? 

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  I’m sorry?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  The fuel shortages.

Q    Fuel shortages.

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  Of — that people are suffering.  So, we — look, there are — there are different types of challenges that people victimized by this historic hurricane are — are suffering: fuel, potable water in certain areas, power, communications.  And we are meeting each of those challenges with the full force of the federal government as well as our state and local partners. 

So, if you take a look at power, at the — at the height of this hurricane, 5.1 million people were without power.  We have delivered power — when I say “we,” the collective “we” — the public-private partnership — to 3.6 or 3.8 million of those individuals.  And so — and we are continuing to pour resources and efforts in. 

Q    Do you think North Carolina was properly prepared for the impact of the flooding?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  They were prepared, but they were as prepared — and this is something we have to take stock of when we speak of preparation.  Preparation doesn’t necessarily mean preventing suffering when you are speaking of extreme weather events of historic magnitude.  You have people in rural areas, difficult-to-access areas, and when — when a force of this strength pours through, it’s going to have a calamitous impact. 

And the — the question is: Have they done everything that they can?  Have they followed the instructions of local officials?  And that is what is key. 

And I should say it is very important, if you don’t mind, to — to communicate the means of accessing relief.  People have an 800 number to call.  That’s 800-621-FEMA.  They can access relief at DisasterAssistance.gov, or they can use the FEMA app.

And for those people who do not have communications, we are actually going to them.  We are in shelters.  We are going door to door as we increase access to remote areas.

Q    Thank you, Mr. Secretary.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.  Thank you so much. 

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  Thank you, Karine.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Thank you.  Thank you, Mr. Secretary.

Q    Thank you.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.  So, to answer your question — I do want to hit one more thing.  But to answer your question, as you know, yesterday, the president was being regularly updated on what was happening in the Middle East.  He’s going to continue to do that.  We always say: The president is president wherever he is.  And so, that’s going to continue. 

He spent, as you — also, speaking of yesterday, he spent hours in the Situation Room.  And so, this is something he is monitoring very, very closely, and he will certainly be able to do that on this trip. 

Just a couple of things — because I do want to it- — reiterate something that he’s talked about — at the top.

Look, the president is calling on USMX and the owners of these foreign carrier- — carriers it represents to come to the table and put forward a fair offer to the longshoremen now.

This should be easy for them to resolve.  We’re recovering from a hurricane, and they need to do so as soon as possible.  They’ve made hundreds of billions in record profits since the pandemic — profits up as much as 800 percent.  These workers kept our ports open during the pandemic.  Their work is essential as communities recover from the hurricane — from Hurricane Helene.  Now is the time for these foreign carrier owners to negotiate a fair contract. 

So, we just want to make that really clear.

Go ahead.

Q    Are there — are there any plans at the moment for the president to speak with Netanyahu directly?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  He — he talked about this.  We don’t have anything to read out to you.  But he also said — the president said this, and Jake Sullivan said this at the podium — they have been in regular communication with — with our — with Jake’s Isra- — Israeli counterparts throughout the last couple of days — almost daily, obviously — since almost a year now.

And so, that will continue.  And when we have a call to — to speak to or to announce, we certainly will do that.  Don’t have —

(Cross-talk.)

Q    Clarification on —

Q    Oh, sorry.  (Inaudible.)

Q    It’s okay.  Don’t worry.  The — a clarification, though, on Iran.  So, the president was saying that he was expecting sanctions.  I wondered if — if there was discussion about how Israel should respond to Iran, particularly given, you know, the — the type of the — the missile strike and the fact that they’re — they’re saying they’re done now with it.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So — so, two things there.  Look, as it relates to any response from Israel, we’re having conversations with them.  We’re having discussions.  I’m not going to prejudge.  I’m not going to get ahead of that.  And as the president st- — stated, that he did have a conversation — he joined a call with the G7, and they discussed Iran’s unacceptable attack against Israel and to coordinate on a response to that — to this attack, including new sanctions, as you just mentioned, Colleen.

President Biden and the G7 unequivocally condemned Iran’s attack against Israel.  President Biden expressed the United States’ full solidarity and support to Israel and its people and reaffirmed the United States’ ironclad commitment to Israel’s security.

There is going to be a joint statement, as the president mentioned.  I don’t want to get ahead of that.  And certainly, you’ll have all that information.

Q    Karine, what new sanctions?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Not — I said I’m not going to get ahead of that.

Q    Are —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m going to let — I’m going to let the joint statement —

Q    And are you —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  — from — from the G7 —

Q    Are you counseling restraint in those conversations with Israel?  Are you saying —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m — I’m not —

Q    — “Whatever you do” —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  We’re — we’re having discussions. Certainly not going to prejudge.  I’m not going to get ahead of it.  But we are having discussions with re- —

Q    What’s your advice though?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m not going to share th- — I’m not going to be doing that out on — on Air Force One.  We’re going to have those discussions — those private discussions.  And not going to get ahead of those discussions or prejudging.

Q    And is Israel’s limited — so-called limited incursion into Lebanon delivering the results that they wanted?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  You would have to speak to — you would have to speak to Israel directly and IDF.

Q    What’s your judgment?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  You’d have to speak to them directly, because it is their — it is their operation.

Q    Does the president think Tim Walz won the debate?  (Laughter.)

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, what I can say is the president watched — caught some of the debate.  And, as you know — and I’m going to be really mindful, because it’s a debate, 2024.  As you know, been covering and focusing on this trip.  During this trip, he’s been focused on this.  Obviously, this was a historic hurricane that hit this region, but he and — he and the vice president and the entire team are working hard to the response to — to Helene.  And so, he — he was able to — he was able to — to manage to catch some of it.  But I haven’t spoken to him in detail about it.

Q    I think the president said on the tarmac that he had not directly spoken to the dock strikers or any of the companies.  Is that going to change?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I don’t have anything to preview at this time, but this president basically answered the question pretty directly.  I don’t have anything else to share.

All right, guys.  Okay.  All right.

Q    Thanks, Karine.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Thanks, everybody.

Q    Appreciate it.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  See you on the ground.

Okay.  Be careful.  It’s very, very bumpy.

1:36 P.M. EDT

The post Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas En Route Greenville, SC appeared first on The White House.

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

2:48 P.M. EDT

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Good afternoon, everyone.

Q    Good afternoon.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m going to be really quick here.  I have the national security advisor, Jake Sullivan, to talk about the latest in the Middle East, so I’ll turn it over to him.

MR. SULLIVAN:  Thank you, Karine, and good afternoon, everyone.  I’m here to provide a brief report on the Iranian ballistic missile attack against Israel that occurred earlier today.  I can take just a few questions, because this is an ongoing situation and I need to get back to my desk.

Today, Iran launched nearly 200 ballistic missiles towards targets in Israel.  The United States military coordinated closely with the Israeli Defense Forces to help defend Israel against this attack.  U.S. naval destroyers joined Israeli air defense units in firing interceptors to shoot down inbound missiles.

President Biden and Vice President Harris monitored the attack and the response from the White House Situation Room, joined in person and remotely by their national security team.

We are still working with the IDF and the authorities in Israel to assess the impact of the attack, but at this time — and I stress “at this time” — we do not know of any deaths in Israel.  We are tracking the reported death of a Palestinian civilian in Jericho in the West Bank.  We do not know of any damage to aircraft or strategic military assets in Israel.

In short, based on what we know at this point, this attack appears to have been defeated and ineffective.  This was first and foremost the result of the professionalism of the IDF, but in no small part because of the skilled work of the U.S. military and meticulous joint planning in anticipation of the attack.

We’re also aware of reports of a terrorist attack in Jaffa that took the lives of a number of Israeli civilians and wounded several others today.  Our condolences go out to the families of the victims and to the family of the Palestinian civilian in Jericho.

Obviously, my update here is based on early reports, and we reserve the right to amend and adjust as necessary as we gather more information.  The word “fog of war” was invented for a situation like this.  This is a fluid situation.

We will consult with the Israelis on next steps in terms of the response and how to deal with what Iran has just done, and we will continue to monitor for further threats and attacks from Iran and its proxies.  We are particularly focused on protecting U.S. servicemembers in the region.

And with that, I’ll take just a few questions.

Yeah.

Q    Thanks, Jake.  Is the administration making any preparations to evacuate U.S. citizens from Lebanon or elsewhere in the region?

MR. SULLIVAN:  We have been very clear for some time now that U.S. citizens should avail themselves of commercial means to depart Lebanon given everything that’s going on.  We have said that from this podium, from multiple podiums.  We continue to say that.  But we have not begun triggering a noncombatant emergency evacuation — a NEO — and do not have an intention to do so at this time. 

If that changes, we’ll let you know.  But we continue to reinforce the point: American citizens in Lebanon should follow the guidance from the State Department, which is to find civil- — civilian commercial means to depart, because in extremis, we may not be able to get them out safely.

Yes.

Q    Thanks, Jake.  What is the U.S. view on whether Israel should retaliate?  And what is your concern about this leading to a wider escalation of war in the region?

MR. SULLIVAN:  We’ve had some initial discussions with the Israelis in the aftermath of this at the military level and also at the White House to prime minister’s office level.  We’ll continue those conversations in the hours ahead.  I’m not going to prejudge or get ahead of anything.  We want to have some deep consultations with the Israelis, and I’ll have more to report to you after we get the opportunity for deeper discussions.

Q    And escalation —

MR. SULLIVAN:  Yeah.

Q    — in the region?

MR. SULLIVAN:  Obviously, this is a significant escalation by Iran, a significant event, and it is equally significant that we were able to step up with — with Israel and create a situation in which no one was killed in this attack in Israel so far as we know at this time.

We are now going to look at what the appropriate next steps are to secure, first and foremost, American interests and then to promote stability to the maximum extent possible as we go forward.

Yeah.

Q    Back in April, the president’s message to Israel was to take the win when the U.S. and Israel were able to intercept the barrage of Iranian missiles.  Is he recommending a similarly limited response this time?

MR. SULLIVAN:  I will not, from this podium, share the president’s recommendations.  He will have the opportunity to share them directly.  We’re going to have, as I said, ongoing consultations with the Israelis this afternoon, this evening.  It is too early for me to tell you anything publicly in terms of our assessment or in terms of what our expectations are of the Israelis or the advice that we would give them.

Q    So, will he be speaking to Prime Minister Netanyahu today?

MR. SULLIVAN:  I don’t have anything to announce from this podium, but I can tell you that he is tracking this minute by minute.  We are very much deeply in touch with the Israelis, and insofar as we have calls to read out, we’ll make sure to read them out with you.

Just last question, then I’ll turn it over.

Q    Thank you, Jake.  In April, after Iran struck Israel, the U.S. issued a number of sanctions as a consequence.  This morning, the president said there will be severe consequences if Iran carried out this attack.  What are those consequences, and are they more severe than sanctions?

MR. SULLIVAN:  Totally legitimate question, and that answer will come based on the conversations and consultations we have with our Israeli counterparts.  It’s too soon for me to stand before you today and give you an answer. 

What I can tell you is this: We are proud of the actions that we’ve taken alongside Israel to protect and defend Israel.  We have made clear that there will be consequences — severe consequences — for this attack, and we will work with Israel to make that the case.

Thank you very much.

Q    Thank you.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Thank you, Jake.  Thank you, Jake.

Okay.  On to the rest of — rest of the programming here.

This morning, President Biden was briefed by his homeland security adviser, Liz Sherwood-Randall, on the latest impacts of Hurricane Helene.  And this afternoon, he will receive an interen- — interagency briefing on the Hurricane Helene response and recovery efforts.

At the president’s direction, the Biden-Harris administration continues to use every tool available to get assistance and resources to the communities that need them the most.

Yesterday, the president approved a major disaster declaration for Georgia, which will unlock additional assistance to help those recovering.  This is in addition to the major disaster declaration swiftly approved by the president following requests from North Carolina, South Carolina, and Florida, as well as requests for emergency assistance across seven states. 

Tomorrow, the president will travel to Raleigh, North Carolina, where he will visit the state emergency operations center to meet with local officials and also first responders. 

And the vice president will travel to Augusta, Georgia, tomorrow and will then head to North Carolina in the coming days. 

As of today, thousands of personnel from across the federal workforce are deployed and supporting state-led Hurricane Helene response efforts across the six affected states, including over 1,200 personnel in North Carolina. 

Still, there is more work to be done, and the Biden-Harris administration will be there for these communities every step of the way. 

Now, as you can see, we also have Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas.

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  Thank you, Karine, and good afternoon. 

Before standing at the podium, I was at FEMA’s National Operations Center being briefed by our personnel as well as state emergency personnel.  I thought it very moving and very telling that North Carolina’s emergency management director described Hurricane Helene as catastrophic and noted the fact that numerous towns situated along the river had virtually disappeared, had been completely destroyed. 

In fact, Hurricane Helene is of a — an historic magnitude: this many states hit this hard.  The wind field of the hurricane stretched 350 miles from its center.  More than 100 fatalities have been reported.  Hundreds and hundreds of homes and businesses destroyed. 

Our hearts break for those who have lost loved ones, and we pray for the swift assistance and rescue of those who are currently missing. 

We are in different phases of a post-hurricane environment, depending on the state and the location within the state.  In some areas, we are still in search and recovery — search and rescue operations.  In others, we are, in fact, in the response and recovery phase. 

I thought I would give you some of the latest statistics based on the briefing that I received, and I should say that these numbers are, as you can all well understand, quite dynamic and fluid.  They change minute by minute and hour by hour. 

But just as devastating as the hurricane has been, the re- — the response of federal, state, and local authorities has been extraordinary.  We have more than 2,000 federal personnel

dedicated to this effort.  On the ground, we have more than 1,200 urban search — urban search and rescue personnel.  FEMA staff deployed over 1,200.

Karine mentioned the major disaster declarations and the emergency declarations previously issued.  I should note that in the six states most severely impacted, those emergency declarations were issued before the storm hit, and we had thousands of personnel dedicated there. 

We have delivered more than 2.6 million ready-to-eat meals and more than 1 million liters of water.

At its peak, there were 5.1 million customers without power.  We have reduced that amount — and not just the federal government in support of the state and local authorities, but working very closely with the power companies and the other utilities, we’ve reduced that number of customers without power by 3.8 million people. 

And so, the — the operation is very, very significantly underway.  We are working in support of our state and local partners.  This is an all-of-government, frankly, all-of-community effort. 

And with that, I’ll take some questions.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.  Go ahead, Gabe.

Q    With regards to how many were unaccounted for.  Yesterday, Liz said about 600 were unaccounted for.  Do you have an updated number on that, Mr. Secretary?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  We do not have an update, but that work is still underway.  And I know, for example, within the Department of Homeland Security, the Coast Guard has recently rescued approximately 21 people through their patrols. 

Q    And there was also discussion yesterday on whether resources may have been better pre-positioned in other parts of the country.  There were many assets in the Big Bend region of Florida, some in North Carolina.  But should the government have pre-positioned more in the North Carolina area?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  Well, we actually pre-positioned our personnel and state and local personnel were pre-positioned in all six of the most heavily impacted states.  This is a — an historic hurricane.  It reached not only industrial areas but, of course, as we also point poignantly see, rural areas as well.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead.

Q    Yeah.  Thanks, Karine.  Liz yesterday, focusing on the — the pre-positioning here before the storm, said that the — that it was focused on the Big Bend region of Florida.  So, what pre-positioning was taking place there that wasn’t taking place in the North Carolina, western North Carolina area?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  Remember that the pre-positioning of assets, to include personnel as well as equipment and the like, also depends on the terrain and the access points.  And so, we — we pre-positioned where we think the impacts are going to be greatest.

And we have seen the impacts hit mountainous regions that are inaccessible.  We now have roads destroyed.  There is a significant amount of mud.  We understand that people are still situated in the mud, and therefore we cannot undertake debris removal until we are assured that the search and rescue operation has been completed. 

Q    But what sorts of —

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  We have to be very careful about the lives that still can be saved. 

Q    But what sorts of things were done in — was done in North Carolina before the storm came?  Like, what was the federal presence there, emergency-wise?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  I don’t have the specific numbers of the personnel already situated —

Q    Okay.

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  — but we can get you that data. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Weijia. 

Q    Thank you, Karine.  Thank you, Secretary.  Despite all the proactive things that the federal government did and its response, the sentiment, according to my colleagues on the ground, from people is that the federal government is not doing enough to help.  “Where are they?  Where is the help?”  What is your message to those people? 

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  I would say the following: that we are there and we will continue to be there and we will reach the most difficult to access locations.  We are relentless in our efforts to ensure the safety and security of all.

And as Karine pointed out, we will be there for the long haul as well.  And I must — I must pay tribute to the heroic men and women not only of the Fer- — Federal Emergency Management Administration but throughout the federal government and throughout the state and local enterprise. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead.

Q    Thank you, Secretary, for talking about electric power.  I’m curious about the status of cell phone service, as the Associated Press is hearing reports that people are having a tough time using their cell phones, being able to make calls, even reach you.

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  Yes.

Q    What are you doing, and what is the status of that right now?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  So, in fact, communication has been difficult in — in a number of areas, if — if not impossible.  A great deal of infrastructure has been demolished.  We are working with the private communications companies as well as the FCC to ensure that we can rebuild communication towers.  We have, for example, deployed 50 Starlink satellite systems to help with the reconstruction of that infrastructure.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Karen.

Q    You mentioned that there are roads that have been destroyed.  There are places that are so hard-hit that it’s hard to get to them right now.  Can — the president mentioned land bridges yesterday in working with the Defense Department.  Can you talk about what the effort is right now to get to some of those hard-hit areas and what the timeline is looking like to reach the people that are in need there right now?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  So, this is, at the president and vice president’s direction, an all-of-government effort.  So, it’s not only by land, but we have deployed air assets.  The Department of Defense has been of extraordinary assistance.  I don’t recall exactly the number of Army Corps of Engineer that have been deployed.  I think it’s close to 6,000.

So, it’s an all-of-government effort to reach individuals, not just by land but by air as well.

Q    And how quickly do you anticipate getting to some of those areas that have been cut off because of the roads being flooded and destroyed?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  As quickly as we can.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  We’ve got to start wrapping up.  Go ahead, Jeff.

Q    Thank you, Karine.  Mr. Secretary, do you have a sense of how much money it’s going to cost, A, to do this relief effort and, B, to do the rebuild effort once we get there?  And how much of that will be covered by insurance companies, and how much will be covered by the government?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  So, this is a multibillion-dollar undertaking in terms of the search and rescue and the response.  I should note that we already have approved approximately $1.7 million in individual assistance that individuals —

Q    Million or billion?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  Million.

— that individuals will be able to access.  I believe it will be as early as tomorrow.  It is a direct deposit into their accounts. 

But the rebuilding is something that is not for today but that is going to be extraordinarily costly and is going to be a multiyear enterprise.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Toluse.

Q    Thank you, Karine.  Thank you, Mr. Secretary.  Two questions.  First, about the president’s decision to go to Raleigh.  Do — can you give us a little bit of a breakdown as to why he’s going to that location and what he will see and whether or not he’ll be able to see any of the harder-hit areas in the western part of the state?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  So, the decision of where to go and when to go is a decision that must be calibrated according to the capabilities and needs on the ground.  And so, the president and the vice president have been quite deliberate to take those sensitivities into account, to work with state and local authorities, and ensure that their visit is constructive and not in any way interfering with the urgency of search and rescue operations and the work underway on the ground.

And so, they selected the timing and location of their visits accordingly.

Q    And another question about the upcoming election.  Obviously, North Carolina is a very important state.  Do you have — and ballots are supposed to be going out in — in the coming days.  Do you have any sense of how much impact the hurricane had on the ability to carry out the election and carry it out safely?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  Well, the state and local authorities are in charge of their respective election efforts.  They are — have that top of mind, and we are going to be able to make sure — they are going to be able to make sure that people have the ability to exercise their fundamental right to vote.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Kevin, last question.

Q    One of the issues we’re hearing about in North Carolina is not just downed power lines but flooded substations.  Do you have a sense of how long it will take to get those back online and what the administration can do to help remedy that?

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  So, the president, as Karine mentioned, is going to be briefed in a — in an interagency effort.  Secretary Granholm and other representatives of the Department of Eng- — Energy are going to be there.

It is — as am I, of course.  It is a multiphase approach.  Not only do we have to bring in some additional infrastructure, but there is going to be damage and the like that is going to take time and money to replace and reconstruct.  Precise figures I don’t have.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.  Thank you so much, Mr. Secretary.  Appreciate it.

SECRETARY MAYORKAS:  Thank you, Karine.  Thank you all very much.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay. 

Q    Thank you.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Thank you.

Okay.  I do want to give some stats — some additional stats so that you all have this.

More than 4,500 personnel from across the federal workforce — that’s the numbers as of today.  FEMA has shipped 7.1 million meal- — meals ready-to-eat, more than 7.5 million liters of water, 150 generators, and over 95,000 tarps.  Nearly 1,300 urban search and rescue personnel on the ground.  The Department of Defense has 30 high-water trucks and 22 helicopters.

So, just wanted to make sure you guys have that.  Those are the numbers as they are today, the most accurate.

And I just have one more thing at the top, and then we will go to Josh to kick us off.

So, collective bargaining, as you hear us say many times before, is the best way for workers and companies to reach a fair deal, including one that gives workers the pay and benefits they deserve.  It’s important that both parties come to the table and negotiate in good faith, as we talk about, is what we’re seeing with the ports situation.

As you saw the president say in his statement earlier today, he has urged USMX to come to the table and present a fair contract to the workers of the ILA that ensures they are paid appropriately in line with their peers. 

Shippers have made record profits since the pandemic, and in some case, have seen profits grow in excess of 800 percent compared to their profits prior to the pandemic.  Executive compensation has grown in line with those profits, and profits have been returned to shareholders at record rates.  It’s only fair that workers who put themselves at risk during the pandemic to keep ports open see a meaningful increase in their wages as well.

As the president said, dock workers will play an essential role in getting communities the resources they need out of the aftermath of Hurricane Helene. 

Now, this administration will be monitoring for any price gouging activity that benefits foreign ocean carriers, including those on the USMX board as well.  It is time for USMX to negotiate a fair contract with the longshoremen that reflects the substantial contribution they — they’ve been making to our economic comeback. 

And with that, Josh, it’s good to see you. 

Q    It’s good to see you.  If we can step back — 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    — Americans right now are seeing chaos in the Middle East, death and destruction from Helene, and now a port worker strike.  And I’m curious for — how worried should people be about what seem to be three kind of unraveling issues, and what is President Biden doing in terms of changing his schedule or taking additional steps —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    — to try to reassure them?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, I think a couple of things here that I would note is that I hope the American people have confidence in this president — someone who has experience, who’s been a u- — a U.S. senator, a vice president, and now president for three and a half years — to get the job done, to make sure that he has the American people front and center on everything that he does.  It doesn’t matter if it’s for- — foreign policy issues, world issues, here in the United States, obviously.

And you’re right.  There are three major events, if you will, happening all at the same time.  And this is a president that spent a lot of his time in a Situation Room with the vice president getting updates, being hands- — hand- — hand-on — hands-on on getting updates and — and talking to — and obviously, communicating with the Israeli government on what was going on and how to move forward and really monitoring the situation, really.

And he has been — he and his team have been having regular conversation.  Well, his team has been ha- — regular conversations with represent- — representi- — representatives, as it relates to ILA, USMX, for the past several days, all the way up until yesterday.  And he’s been getting updates on that as well.

The hurricane — you’ve heard from — you’ve heard and seen, obviously, updates from us on what the president has been doing — having conversations with governors, local officials; trying to make sure they are getting everything that they need; directing his team to make sure that — I just laid out some of the things that are already on the ground, whether it’s water, food, generators, assistance that is needed to really deal with the impact — this horrible impact that this hurricane has had. 

And so, this is the job of the president, right?  Unfortunately, there are going to be events like this, and this is where you see the leadership of a president show up, direct their team to do everything that they can on behalf of the American people, be that lead- — have that world — global leadership, as you see from this president. 

And so, he has been doing that not just today, not just in the last couple of days, but three and a half years.  And I think this should send a message to Americans: It matters.  It matters who sits behind that Resolute Desk.  It matters what the leadership looks like.  It matters.  And you see that almost every day in this administration.

Go ahead, Karen.

Q    You had mentioned that the vice president is finalizing a trip, potentially, to North Carolina later.  The president had mentioned he might go to Florida and Georgia later this week.  Is there any more you can give on that trip?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I don’t have anything more to share on that.  Obviously, our big thing is — is always to make sure that we don’t take away from — from the emergency operations on the ground.  We want to make sure there’s — it’s the right time to go. 

The president said he’s going — he wants to do it.  We’re working through it.  I don’t have a date or time at — at this — at this moment.  But tomorrow, he’s going to go to Raleigh, North Carolina, as I mentioned.  He’s going to really thank the frontline workers who have been really heroic in the past several days in what they’ve been able to do.  And he’s going to also survey the impacted area. 

So, that’s what you’ll see from the president.  We’ll certainly have more to share. 

He does truly want to go to Florida and Georgia to say thank you directly to frontline workers there, meet people, see folks who have been impacted by this horrible storm — a historic storm, I should say.  And so, we’ll certainly have more to share. 

Q    And just a funding question.  Last week, when Administrator Criswell was here, she had said that the agency had enough money to conduct lifesaving measures for this disaster.  Days later now, given the scope of the damage and that large number of people still unaccounted for, the Homeland Security secretary said that there’s still search and rescue operations in many places.  Is there still enough money for lifesaving measures for this particular disaster? 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, I would let FEMA speak to that directly. 

My understanding is I don’t think anything has changed from when the FEMA administrator was here just this past Thursday. 

But I think what’s important to note is we’re going to be in touch with state and local officials to ensure that they have everything that they need in this time, in this moment — all the federal assistance, all the federal resources.  We are committed to that. 

Obviously, we had pre- — we had presented Congress with a robust funding request that did not make it into the CR.  We are obviously disappointed by that.  And so, those convert- — con- — those conversations are going to continue.  We want to see Congress act.

As we can see — just what we’ve seen from the past couple of days, it is important to have federal assistance for — for Americans who have lost everything — who have lost everything. 

Go ahead, Jeff.

Q    Karine, briefly, back on the topic of the Middle East.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    Did the United States have a heads up from Iran that this missile strike was coming?  And if so, what channels — through which channels did you receive the heads up?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  As you know, we — there are — there are conversations that we have and that are not necessarily — what — here’s what I can say.  I’m not going to speak to private diplomatic conversation.  I’m not going to get into that. 

What I can say is that what you saw today, what you heard from Jake Sullivan is that we are going to continue to be there for Israel, to defend Israel.  They have the right to defend themselves. 

What you saw today — what’s happening, the developments of what you saw today and what you heard from the president directing the Department of Defense to make sure that we assist Israel, and what we — in the — in the operation that we saw coming from Iran.  We were — we — you heard from us earlier today.  You heard from the president. 

And so, we’re going to continue to make sure that we are there to defend Israel, and we are committed.  As you heard from Jake as well, there will be consequences.  This is an ongoing, developing situation.  And so, you will hear more from us. 

I’m not going to get into any — into any intelligence or any diplomatic conversations that we have from here. 

Go ahead, Kevin.

Q    When it comes to the dockworkers strike, should Americans be prepared for shortages of goods?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, I know that there’s been a lot of reporting on that, on the impact of — impact that this will have on the economy.  And so, look, what we see and how we see this moving forward, as it relates to the economy and — and potential impacts, is that we’re going to continue closely monitoring the situation.  We’re going to — what this could have potentially on the supply chain impacts, assessing ways to address any concerns if necessary. 

And the president and the vice president, as I said at the top as well, are being briefed.  They were briefed on the agency assessments that show limited impacts on critical consumer needs at this time, including in the important areas of fuel, food, and medicine. 

And so, the president has dir- — directed — remember, he started the — he started the Supply Chain Disruption Task Force very early on to deal with what we saw related to the pandemic. 

And so, they’re going to meet every day.  This task force still exists.  They’re going to meet every day and prepare to address potential disruptions if necessary. 

And so, we are — we are engaged extensively with labor industry, state and local officials, ocean carriers, and rail and truck companies, including multiple meetings with retailers, grocers, manufacturers, and ar- — and agriculture. 

So, this is something — when it comes to the supply chain, as we — obviously, as I just mentioned, we started — the president started the task force.  We are taking this very seriously, and we’re going to monitor this very closely.

Go ahead, Weijia.

Q    Thank you, Karine.  Yesterday, when the president was asked whether he was aware of a limited ground operation into Lebanon by Israel, he said, “I’m more aware than you might know.”  Can you elaborate on what he meant?  Did the president play a role in determining the size and scope of that ground operation?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  No.  I mean, this is — when it comes to any military operations that — that Israel has, IDF, it is for them to speak to.  It is — it is for them to come to their determination of what that looks like. 

What we have been very clear about is that Israel has the right to defend itself against Iran-backed groups, including Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis.  And we have always been clear about that.

We understand, as I’ve stated, and I’ll give a little bit more today, the Israeli- — the Israelis will be conducting limited operations to destroy Hezbollah infrastructure that would be used to threaten Israeli citizens.  And this is in line with Israel’s right to defend itself and — and its citizens and safely return their — their civilians to their homes. 

So, we support that right to — to defend themselves against Hezbollah and all — again, all of Iran-backed groups.  And we’ve been very consistent about that and will continue to be so. 

Q    And then, I know there is a lot going on, but will the president sit down and watch the vice presidential debate tonight?  Where?  With who?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  (Laughs.)  As you — as you just stated, there’s a lot going on.  There’s a lot going on.  I mean, the question that I got from Josh moments ago is — there are multiple events happening all at once, and the president is going to continue, certainly, to deal with all of these events on behalf of the American people. 

Look, you heard from the president just a couple days ago.  He has complete confidence in — in Tim Walz. 

I’m going to be really mindful, you know, because it is a — a campaign event.  I’m just going to leave it there. 

Q    But is he going to watch?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  He’s going to be very, very busy.  Continues to be very busy with all of the events happening today.  But he has complete confidence in — in Tim Walz.

Q    Thank you.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead.

Q    Thank you, Karine.  You spoke about wages earlier.  Can you talk about the president’s view of the ILA’s push to put restrictions on automation?  That’s a major sticking point

in those negotiations. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Look, what I will say — I’m not going to go point by point with what they’re negotiating.  We believe — we believe it is important that workers get fair pay and also benefits.  That’s what they deserve. 

I just laid out what — what the shippers were able to do.  Right?  They were able to get — they were able to regain their profits, some of it in excess of 800 percent, since the pandemic.  Right?  Executive compensation has grown in line with those profits, and profits have been returned to shareholders at record rates. 

And so, you know, the ILA, these workers deserve to get paid what they’re worth.  They deserve that.  They put their lives at risk during — you know, they — they worked.  You know, they had to work during the pandemic to keep ports open.  That was not an easy thing to do.  They put themselves at risk.  And so, now they deserve fair wages.

Yeah.

Q    Is there anything particularly about technology, their concern that robots could —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I hear the question.

Q    — potentially replace their jobs?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m not going to get into specifics here.  What we believe is that they should get their fair — their fair wages and benefits, just like their peers.  And — and so, we believe that collective bargaining is the way to go.  Both sides need to — to continue to have conversation and do that in — in — obviously, in a way that leads to a way that workers get their fair share.

Q    And just a question on tomorrow’s travel.  Why isn’t Harris traveling with Biden, since she will be going to North Carolina, as you said, in the coming days? 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Well, she’s going to Georgia.  So, the president is going to do North Carolina, South Carolina, and she’s going to go to Georgia.  So, I think it’s a — it was a way to make sure that we cover — we cover all fronts.  And then, she’ll go to North Carolina in upcoming days.

Go ahead, Ed.

Q    Tha- – thanks, Karine.  So, on the port strike.  So, with the rebuilding of North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia, isn’t it a bad time to have supplies stuck at 36 ports, as of right now?  So, how long, then, until the president decides he should step in in this strike?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, a couple of things.  According to FEMA, it — the strike is not impacting the relief of — recovery efforts at this time because supplies were pre-positioned.  You heard — you heard the FEMA administration — administrator mention this just last week.  You heard that from — from the secretary just moments ago. 

So, any specifics on that, obviously, I would refer you to them. 

Look, we have a Supply Chain — Supply Chain Disruptions Task Force.  They’re going to be monitoring the situation.  This — there’s a reason why the president put that together to assess the supply chain.  And so, they’re going to be there to work with any potential disruptions. 

But I — in your — in your question to me about when is the president going to be involved, the president’s message has been very clear.  I just laid that out for one of your colleagues. 

We’ve been very clear when it comes to these types of moments here that labor, when it comes to negotiating, there needs to be — collective bargaining is incredibly important.  Workers need to get their fair share.  They need to get what they deserve: pay, paid benefits, wages.  It is important that happens. 

 The president is going to continue to be regularly briefed, and we are urging USMX to come to the table to present a fair proposal to ILA. 

 Q   So, Taft-Hartley is off the table indefinitely?

 MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — I’ve spoken to this.  This is not — this — we — we have not used Taft-Hartley, and we’re not planning to.

 Q   One quick one, if I could, on Iran.  So, Iran — obviously, we saw what happened today.  They also have an active plot to assassinate one of the candidates in the U.S. election, which could be seen as a direct election interference.  Is there any talk of consequences for Iran in terms of limiting their revenue, going after their oil exports?

 MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, you heard Jake speak to this — on what — there will be consequences.  You heard Jake say this.  This is an ongoing situation.  He had to get back to his desk to make sure that he continues to monitor what’s happening, occurring, having conversations with — with his counterparts as well in Israel. 

 But this administration has not lifted a single sanction on Iran.  We cannot forget that.  Rather, we continue to increase pressure.  That’s what we have seen.  Our extensive sanctions on Iran remain in place, and we certainly will continue to enforce them.  And you heard from the national security advisor; you heard what he said today.

 Q   But oil — Iran’s oil exports have reached record levels now — one report showing 3.2 million barrels per day, according to OPEC.  That’s about $90 billion a year.  So, when do we cut off that revenue?

 MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  We have not lifted any — a single sanction.  If anything, as I said moments ago, we increased pressure.  That’s what we have been doing.

 You’ll hear more from us.  Jake was very clear when he was here at the podium about consequences.  And so, I’m going to let — I’m going to let that be for now.

 Go ahead.

 Q   Thanks.  Six months ago, the vice president was in Los Angeles when Iran conducted its first wave of strikes, and the vice president joined virtually when she joined the national security team for a briefing that day. 

 Today, she’s the nominee.  She was in the Situation Room.  I’m just wondering if you can elaborate at all about what her engagement has been like today and what it will be like in the next 48 hours as Israel plots its response?

 MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I mean, you just answered your own question.  The pres- — the pres- — the vice president joined the president today in the Situation Room as they were monitoring the situation, as the president was listening to his team and hearing feedback on what was happening on the ground. 

 She was there.  She was alongside him in getting that — in getting that update, and she is — many times has been in the room or, as you just said, has called in when it’s come to really important, critical national security issues. 

 And so, that has been the way that they have worked together in the past three and a half years, and that’s the way it’s going to continue as — as we work through what’s next. 

 Q   Does it make any difference, though, participating virtually versus being here in person today?

 MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  No, I wouldn’t — I — I wouldn’t say there’s a difference.  The point — the point is, she’s in the room.  She’s side by side with the president.  She’s getting an update from the national security team and others that is part of his — a part of his team on these important issues.  As we talk about foreign policy and what’s going on in the world, she’s part of it.  She’s there.  She was there for a majority of the time that the president was in the Situation Room today as we were watching what was occurring.  And that’s going to continue. 

 Go ahead, Gabe.

 Q   Thanks, Karine, the president walked the picket line last year with autoworkers in Michigan, which is a swing state.  Why not walk the picket line here?

 MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, I — I think that message has been really clear — it really has — on what the president wants to see.  We’ve been very clear about making sure that there is a — a — there is a — there is a way that these workers get their — get their fair pay — right? — get their wages. 

 And the president’s team has been having these conversations.  Secretary Buttigieg and also secretary of the Department of Labor and also NSC [NEC] Director Lael have been having regular co- — communications, and we’ve made our message really clear on collective bargaining, how important it is and how — or how USMX needs to come to the table and present a fair proposal to ILA.

 Outside of that, I don’t have anything else to share, but

I think our — I think we’ve been loud and clear on what we want to see and what we believe the workers deserve. 

 Q   Has the administration been as involved in this strike as it was during the UAW strike?

 MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, let’s not forget, there’s been multiple strikes — right? — over the last three and a half years, and we’ve been pretty consistent and pretty steady.  The president has been called the most pro-union president in modern — in modern history, if you will.  And so, we have delivered our message directly to USMX.  We have been very, very clear — and also the other senior officials that I listed.  It’s been very clear.  We’ve delivered those message, and we have been in touch with both parties.  And so, we’re going to continue to do that. 

 And what we want to see is collective bar- — bargaining in the best way for the workers to make sure they get their fair pay, to make sure they get the benefits that they deserve. 

 During the pandemic, they did the hard work.  They put their lives at risk to make sure that the ports were open.  And let’s not forget, these executives have made record profits — record profits.  And so, these workers deserve an increase as well. 

 Q   And quickly on the Middle East —

 MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

 Q   — if I may.  Is the U.S. — the bottom line — is the U.S. urging Israel to measure its response?

 MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  What I will say is what Jake Sullivan said to you all just moments ago: We’re going to continue the conversations.  We’re going to — there will be consequences.  We were con- — we are going to continue to be there for Israel, help Is- — help Israel defend itself.  That — when it comes to Israel’s security, that continues to be ironclad. 

 I don’t have anything else to share beyond that. 

 Go ahead.

 Q   Thank you.  Just turning back to the strike for a minute.  I wanted to get a sense — you had mentioned the president is — calls himself the most pro-union president.

 MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Not just him. 

 Q   Not just him, of course. 

 MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Oh, yeah, union members.

 Q   Others say the same thing. 

 MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

 Q   But could you expand a little bit on his relationship with Harold Daggett, the head of the union, and also —

 MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

 Q   — the vice president’s relationship with him?

 MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, I don’t have anything to — to read out on their relationship or private conversations.  What I can say is, you have s- — you have heard me say multiple times, his senior officials, White House senior officials have been in touch with both parties, and we are urging USMX to come to the table — to come to the table with a fair proposal. 

 We cannot say this enough.  We believe that these workers deserve a fair pay.  They deserve a benefits and that — that meets the — the level of their peers. 

And so, that’s what we’re going to continue to say and have those conversations.  You read and saw the president’s statement earlier today.  And the message is going to be very, very clear here.  And those conversations are continuing.

I don’t have a relationship to speak to.  I don’t have any — any preview to speak of at this time.

Q    Okay.  Is it just — Karine, you said that they have actually spoken to each other, though. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — no, I’m saying I don’t have anything to —

Q    You’re saying you can’t (inaudible)?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  — read out.

Q    Okay.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — I don’t have anything for you at this time.

Q    Okay.  And then just sort of related to that, you have — you sort of made a very clear point that the — in the sort of immediate days here, there — many experts say there isn’t an immediate impact that consumers will feel but that, as, you know, Harold Daggett has pointed out himself, after one week, two weeks, three weeks, that dynamic would change significantly.  And is — can you say anything o- — about how long the president is willing to wait?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, a couple of things.  We’re going to closely monitor the situation.  You heard me talk about the — the supply chain task force.  I do want to lay out: A number of our agencies, they put out assessment that showed limited impact on critical consumers’ needs at this time. 

So, on energy, for example, from the Department of En- — Energy, the strike will not have any immediate impact on fuel supplies or prices.  On food, from the Department of Agriculture, we should not expect a si- — a significant changes to food prices or availability in the near term.  On medicine, from the Department of Health and Human Services, immediate impacts across medicines, medical devices, and infant formula for consumers, parents, and caregivers should be limited.

But, of course, we’re going to closely monitor this and any — for any potential supply chain impacts. 

Look, and we have this task force.  This task force came into play obviously during the pandemic to deal with the situation that we were dealing with because of a once-in-a-century pandemic.

And so, they’re going to monitor it very closely.  And so, we’re — you know, what we’re going to continue to do is be very clear on our message to USMX: They got to come forward with a fair proposal that is fair to the — to the workers.  And so, that is our message.  And they are hearing that from senior officials from the White House.

Go ahead.

Q    Thank you.  I have two questions regarding Africa.  For Angola, President Biden is traveling to Angola, as you’ve mentioned.  Could you provide — there are 54 countries on the continent.  And I — as well as other leaders from the administration have traveled over there, what is your message to other African nations as well as the African (inaudible)?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I would say that the president traveling to the continent sends a positive message to other nations.  I know you’re asking me about other countries, but the president is going —

Q    (Inaudible.)

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  No, wait.  But the president is going to the continent.  I think —

Q    But he’s only going to one country.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Wait.  Wait.  But the president — and you just mentioned too in your question that other — other officials have gone to other countries in the continent, right? 

And so, if anything, you have seen our commitment to building on that relationship with th- — with those countries in the continent. 

As it relates to Angola, he’s going to have bilateral meetings there.  He’s going to have multilateral meetings as well to discuss increased collaboration on shared priorities.  And let’s not forget the PGI, what — an initiative that this president started.  That’s going to be the — Africa’s first transcontinental open-access rail network that’s going to start there. 

So, I think if you think about it, what the president has done this past three and a half years, going to Angola is a connecting — connecting factor in some of — in this key initiative, the PGI.  Right?  We’re talking about a — a historic effort in this open-access rail network. 

And so, that’s going to be a big deal for everyone, every country in the continent.  And so, if anything, this shows the president’s commitment, and he said he was going to go.  He’s keeping that commitment.  But it’s not just that. 

He wants to make sure that we’re advancing cooperation with the continent when it comes to the economy — right? — when it comes to technology.

And so, that’s what you’re going to see from this president.

Q    My other question is: Today is Nigeria’s Independence Day.  Do you guys have any remarks or any statements? 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I will talk to National Security Council.  I don’t have anything to share with you at this time.

AIDE:  Karine, you have time for (inaudible).

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.  All right.  Go ahead.  Back — in the back, yeah. 

Q    Me?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    Ahead of tonight’s debate between J.D. Vance and Tim Walz, there are reports that VA staffers have accessed their medical records at the VA.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Wait, say that one more time.  I — I missed that.

Q    That’s okay.  There are reports that VA staffers have accessed —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.

Q    — the medical records of J.D. Vance and Tim Walz, you know, as there’s rising interest in them as part of the election.  Is that acceptable?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Wait, the — there are medical records that were asc- — accessed?

Q    Accessed by VA staffers.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  On —

Q    On their medical records —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Of —

Q    — when they were —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Of J.D. Vance?

Q    And Tim Walz.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.

Q    Is that acceptable to this administration?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — this is the first I’m hearing about this, so I have to get some more information on that.  I — this is the — literally the first time I’m hearing about this.  So, let me get back to you because I’m — I need to get the full context of that question.

All right, everybody.  Thank you so much. 

Q    Thank you, Karine.

3:35 P.M. EDT

The post Press Briefing by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, and Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas appeared first on The White House.

Oval Office

5:08 P.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, folks, good — good afternoon.  I just received a briefing from Governor Cooper and FEMA Director Criswell and the staff and — to provide me with a firsthand account of the historic impacts of Hurricane Helene.

I want to express condolences to all the families — to all the families whose loved ones have died or are missing.  Matter of fact, it’s almost equally as bad missing — not knowing whether or not your brother, sister, husband, wife, son, daughter are alive.  And we want you to know that a lot of us have experienced that and we understand what you’re going through. 

And — and, to the survivors, I want you to know the administration is going to be there — and we just talked about this — until we finish the job.  It’s going to take a hell of a long time and a serious amount of assets. 

With federal support, the state has reopened 220 roads, which are going to help responders reach people and get the support they need quickly.  Right now, thousands — thousands of federal personnel are deployed in your communities, supporting search and rescue, debris removal, power restoration, and getting cell networks back online so folks can connect to their loved ones.  We’ve — we deployed 30 Starlink receivers, and there are 10 more on the way to western North Carolina.

And FEMA is on the ground, supporting the communities and registering people for disaster assistance.  And talking with the governor, it’s going to take a while.  Right, Gov?  It’s going to be a long time.

And — and we — there are thousands of line workers working around the clock to help get power back up in — in North Carolina. 

Additionally, Governor Cooper and I have spoken about my traveling to North Carolina and — to survey the damage as soon as I can, without taking resources or diverting resources on the ground.  And we’re going to stay as long as it takes when we get this thing going. 

But I’m going to North Carolina on Wednesday.  It’s the plan now.  We’re going to be landing in Raleigh for a briefing with the emergency operations center, and I’ll then do an aerial tour of Asheville.  It’s too much for me, in terms of interrupting access to help there, to — to land in Ash- — and to survey the damage other than — other than through the air. 

And then, it’s my plan to travel to Georgia and Florida as soon as possible after that. 

And — and I don’t know.  Governor, do you want to add anything?

GOVERNOR COOPER:  Yeah, thank you, Mr. President.  We appreciate the resources that are coming our way. 

This has been a devastating storm, as you know, and we’re grateful to have had Administrator Criswell here on the ground all day today.  And she’s going to be staying and making sure we surge assets into the area to get people food and water and to get the power back on.

And obviously, we are grateful for the search and rescue teams as well. 

Thank you so much. 

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, thank you. 

Any questions on this issue?

Q    Sir, is it your sense from the governors you’ve spoken to that they have all the resources they need right now?  Or are there things they need immediately?

THE PRESIDENT:  They need things immediately.  They’re getting them immediately.  Some access — it’s a matter of getting access to the people who need it. 

And so, that’s why we’re talking about land bridges, to be able to get the Defense Department in there to get water, for example, from a place that, in fact, they can’t get to because the roads are gone, the roads are closed. 

We’ve contacted the — the — we have the Defense Department agreeing that they’re going to — they’re providing for helicopters from — from the base there to get as much in as we can.  It’s going to take a long time. 

But, Gov, what am I leaving out that you need?  Or —

GOVERNOR COOPER:  We’ve talked about a lot of resources that we need: medical, making sure that we are getting additional —

THE PRESIDENT:  Yes.

GOVERNOR COOPER:  — helicopters for land bridges, search and rescue. 

All of those things are happening now.  We just know that the commodities are going to have to continue in for weeks, because — for example, Asheville, the largest city here and — but that supplies a lot on the water — their water system is completely down.  So, getting water in here on a sustained basis is going to be critical. 

And we are discussing the strategies to continue those efforts and to surge those efforts.

Q    Mr. President —

Q    Mr.  President and — and Governor Cooper, Donald Trump has a- — has accused both of you of ignoring the disaster —

THE PRESIDENT:  He is lying.  Let me get this straight: He’s lying, and the governor told him he was lying.  The governor told him he was lying. 

I’ve spoken to the governor, I’ve spent time with him, and he told him he’s lying.  I don’t know why he does this.

And the reason I get so angry about it — I don’t care about what he says about me, but I care what he — what he communicates to the people that — that are in need.  He implies that we’re not doing everything possible.  We are.  We are.

And you — and you spoke to the gov- — I assume you’ve heard the Republican governor of Georgia talk about that he was on the phone with me more than once. 

So, that’s simply not true, and it’s irresponsible. 

I don’t know what the governor wants to say about it, but let me tell you what I think.

Q    Mr. President, in retrospect, do you wish that you had put more resources in North Carolina, knowing what you know now? 

And do you wish that you had spent the weekend here in Washington rather than in Delaware?

THE PRESIDENT:  Come on, stop that game, will you?  Why I was in Delaware — it’s 90 miles from here, okay?  And I was on the phone the whole time working on that.

And the resources —

Q    Sir —

THE PRESIDENT:  The question is not whether we get more re- — this is a list of every resource we’re getting in there, but the question is how to get it in.  It’s hard to get it from point A to point B.  It’s hard to get it if some of these roads are wiped out, communities are wiped out.  There’s no ability to land.  There’s no ability to get trucks through.  There’s no ability to get a whole range of things through. 

So, I mean — anyway —

Q    Mr. President, can —

THE PRESIDENT:  If I sound frustrated, I am. 

Q    Can you talk a little bit about the — the death toll?  We were speaking in the briefing today about it could be as much as 600, maybe 700.  That’s such a huge number for the United States of America.

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, first of all, the death toll, the confirmed death toll is high enough of well over 100.  Okay?

There are roughly — is it — correct me if I’m wrong, Gov or Deanne, but there are about 600 people still unaccounted for, if I’m not mistaken.  Is that about right?

GOVERNOR COOPER:  Well, we know, Mr. President, because cell phone service is down —

THE PRESIDENT:  Yes.

GOVERNOR COOPER:  — that there are a lot of people that haven’t been able to get in touch with them.

But what’s happening now — and we’re getting assistance from you to coordinate even more efforts — is we’re doing door-to-door welfare checks on people to make sure that they are accounted for. 

We know there will be more deaths, because this was an unprecedented, devastating storm that was something that people in North Carolina, in western North Carolina have never seen before. 

So, we are working as hard as we can to get in touch with everybody and to make sure that we are telling relatives where — that people are safe and also making sure that search and rescue — because we have rivers that are still rising.  The danger is still occurring for a lot of people.  

THE PRESIDENT:  And, by the way, as — as the — FEMA can tell you, they have pre-positioned an awful lot of material, an awful lot of material throughout that area, from the Bend all the way up into Tennessee. 

And so, the idea that we weren’t prepared — the question is no one knew exactly how devastating it would be.  We knew it would be significant and we’ve got a lot already in place, but there’s more. 

But here’s the point.  I’m going to be asking the American people to continue to help fund the needs of these people.  It’s not going to be one hit and it’s over.  It’s going to take a hell of a long time.  It’s going to cost a hell of a lot of money.  But this is United States of America, and we’ve got to do it. 

Q    Sir, what can Americans do right now —

(Cross-talk.)

Q    Sir, Americans that want to help, what can they do right now to help?

THE PRESIDENT:  Ameri- —

(Cross-talk.)

Q    If people want to help —

THE PRESIDENT:  If peop- —

(Cross-talk.)

THE PRESIDENT:  If people — if people —

(Cross-talk.)

Q    You guys, the President is still taking questions.

Go ahead, sir.

THE PRESIDENT:  If — if people want to help, there’s means by which they can contact — who should they contact?

DR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL:  The American Red Cross. 

THE PRESIDENT:  And contact the American Red Cross and get as much — they’ll get information.

DR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL:  It’s an excellent way of contributing, which works very closely with FEMA.

THE PRESIDENT:  And by the way, as — as the governor said, we’re working on making sure that the — that the hospitals are up and running, that they have the capacity to deal with the concerns of people and the needs. 

So, there’s a lot to do, and this is just beginning.  And we’ve been through this before but not — not like this.  This is the worst ever. 

Q    Is this storm a consequence of climate change, Mr. President?

THE PRESIDENT:  Absolutely, positively, unequivocally yes.  Yes, yes, yes. 

Thank you.

5:17 P.M. EDT

The post Remarks by President Biden After Operational Briefing on the Hurricane Helene Response and Recovery Efforts appeared first on The White House.

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

2:38 P.M. EDT

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.  Good afternoon, everyone.

Q    Good afternoon.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.  A couple of things at the top, and then we’ll get started.

So, today, the first lady is traveling to Mexico City to lead the U.S. presidential delegation for the inauguration of Claudia Sheinbaum.  The visit will highlight the Biden-Harris administration’s commitment to strengthening the partnership between the United States and Mexico.

Our countries have a strong and productive partnership, and we look forward to building on the relationship under the new president of Mexico to advance our shared priorities.

As you heard from the president earlier today, we are focused on doing everything we can to deliver critical resources to communities impacted by Hurricane Helene.

To date, the president has approved requests for federal assistance for seven states, including three major disaster declaration requests from North Carolina and South Carolina, as well as Florida.

Over the last several days, we have read out consistent briefings that the president has received from his team, including FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell and his Homeland Security Adviser Liz Sherwood-Rand- — -Randall, who is here with us today, as you can see to my right.

The president also spoke with N- — North Carolina Governor Ray [Roy] Cooper and Georg- — Georgia Governor Brian Kemp, along with other state and local officials in the — in the impacted areas to offer further assistance as needed.

This afternoon, at 3:30, FEMA Administrator Criswell and Governor Cooper will hold a press conference on the latest operational updates out of North Carolina.

In the 4:00 p.m. hour, Criswell and Governor Cooper will brief President Biden, and then he will have an Oval sp- — spray to read out additional updates to the pool.

And later this afternoon, the vice president will receive an in-person briefing at FEMA later — later today, as you all know.

As the president said earlier today, the na- — the nation has your back, and the Biden-Harris administration will be with you as long as it takes.

With that, it’s my pleasure to welcome back L.S.R., as we call her here. 

DR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL:  Thanks, Karine.

I’m going to move that a little bit, Karine.  

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Why don’t I do this? 

DR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL:  This is so (inaudible).

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I know — I know you have a lot to share today, so let me move that out of your way.

DR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL:  Thank you.  I do.

Good afternoon, everyone.

Q    Good afternoon.

DR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL:  I’m here today to brief you on the federal response to Hurricane Helene.  But, first, I just want to take a moment to acknowledge the lives lost across the region impacted by the hurricane and those survivors whose lives will never be the same.

My heart goes out to those who’ve lost loved ones and those who are worrying about whether their loved ones are still alive.  And our administration and our nation is standing with the people impacted by this hurricane.

To the disaster survivors across the region, the Biden-Harris administration is committed to supporting you every step of the way as you begin your recovery and you start to heal.

For survivors in Florida, North Carolina, and South Carolina whose governors have requested major disaster declarations, the president approved them immediately over the weekend. 

And we urge those citizens who are seeking FEMA assistance to sign up for that assistance as quickly as possible.  You can do that either by calling 1-800-621-3362, registering on DisasterAssistance.gov, or by filling out an application on your mobile device through the FEMA app.

And that brings me to our response.

Under President Biden and Vice President Harris’ leadership, we are providing urgent and extensive federal support for the ongoing response and recovery efforts to Hurricane Helene.

Over the weekend, at the president’s direction, FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell traveled to Florida on Saturday, to Georgia on Sunday, and, today, she is in North Carolina accompanying Governor Cooper in surveying impacts to the affected communities in western North Carolina.

The president has asked Deanne Criswell to remain in Asheville, North Carolina, given how acute the situation is on the ground there, and he will receive an update from her this afternoon and from Governor Cooper, in addition to the press conference that the administrator and the governor will hold today.

Also, as the president said earlier today, he is committed to traveling to impacted arears — areas later this week, as soon as his presence will not disrupt vital emergency response operations.

So, I want to walk you through what happens as we’re facing a hurricane predicted w- — to have the kind of impacts that Helene has had.

First of all, what we do before a storm.  As Helene was developing in the Gulf, the president directed FEMA to pre-position specialized capabilities across the region, including deploying Incident Management Assistance Teams to Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina.  These teams support our state plan- — our state partners in planning, in logistics, and in conducting their emergency response operations. 

This included pre-positioning a number of search and rescue teams — federal search and rescue teams, in addition to the state and local teams, temporary power teams, generators, and health and medical assessment teams.

These efforts focused on the Big Bend area of Florida, saved lives in the state, and they prepared us to respond elsewhere in the region.

Now, if we know anything about storms — and we’ve learned a lot in our years in service together — it’s that Mother Nature has a mind of her own.  As good as our technologies are, as good as our National Hurricane Center is, it’s just a forecast.  And when a storm hits, we have to adapt and respond in real time, just as the storm has the effects in real time that it is having, and then there are knock-on effects of that storm, such as flooding.

As we evaluated impacts from the storm, we shifted into the post-landfall phase of our process, and we began to surge capacity to where it was needed the most.

As of today, we have more than 3,500 federal response personnel deployed and supporting response efforts across the region, including more than 1,000 personnel from FEMA. 

Search and rescue efforts by state, local, and federal partners are ongoing, and nearly 600 additional personnel will arrive in the region in the coming days, increasing the total number of urban search and rescue personnel to over 1,250.

And as search and rescue missions in other states wind down, these teams are focusing on the areas of greatest need, including North Carolina, where our federal teams continue to support state and local teams with rethcu- — rescues where the devastation is most acute.

Also at the par- — at the president’s direction, the Department of Defense has activated additional helicopters to aid in search and rescue operations and has provided dozens of high-water vehicles to get into areas that it’s difficult to access. 

The National Guard, in their state capacity, is also supporting these efforts.  National Guardsmen and women from eight additional states are supporting North Carolina under existing Emergency Mutual Assistance Compacts, known as EMACs, with more than 700 personnel, helicopters, a cargo plane, and rescue vehicles to help with road clearance, provision of commodities, transportation, and search and rescue. 

This is the best of America.  We have National Guard coming in as far as from Connecticut, Ohio, and New York, who are deploying to North Carolina to support their fellow citizens in need. 

In addition, about 200 medical responders are also stationed in Flora, Al- — Florida, Alabama, and North Carolina, along with medical equipment and supplies to ensure the continued health care delivery that is required following the landfall of Hurricane Helene.  And the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services declared a public health emergency for Florida, North Carolina, and Georgia, which gives health providers and suppliers greater flexibility in meeting emergency health needs of Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries.

In order for communities to begin functioning again, we all know it’s critical to have power restored, and I want to tell you about what we’re doing on this front, because that is truly the fundamental lifeline sector. 

As of this morning, about 2 million people are still without power across the impacted states, at least 50,000 personnel from 31 states and D.C. and Canada are responding to power outages throughout the region via established mutual assistance agreements between utilities and working around the clock throughout parts of Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina to restore power to those communities that can receive it, where the infrastructure can take power on the lines.

FEMA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers are also making available generators of many different sizes that are ready to be deployed upon the request of any state.  And as power is being restored throughout parts of Florida and Georgia, power crews are bo- — being moved into other states to assist with additional restoration efforts. 

We see power outage numbers improving where restoration teams are able to gain access to communities and the debris is cleared. 

Once we get power restored, we can then get a lot of other things working again.  Utilities; water utilities, in particular; communication systems; medical and health care facilities are those capabilities that depend, of course, on a source of power supply to function. 

We’re also very focused on restoring communications capabilities.  FEMA, the FCC, and private telecommunications providers are working together to help restore temporary communications as quickly as possible by establishing temporary cell sites and allowing for roaming where possible, where a resident can connect to any network available, even if they aren’t subscribed to that network.

Today, FEMA will install 30 Starlink receivers in western North Carolina to provide immediate connectivity for those in greatest need. 

We’re also very focused on how we reach survivors at their point of need.  This has been a lesson we have learned from the beginning of President Biden’s presidency — that those who most need the help have the hardest time accessing that help, and he has directed us to work to evolve FEMA practices so we can really get to those who need us the most.

In states that have requested and have received major disaster declarations, FEMA is expediting the delivery of its Serious Needs Assistance, which is an immediate $750 direct payment to eligible households to allow them to pay for essential items like food, baby formula, water, medications, and other emergency supplies. 

This is not the full extent of FEMA’s assistance to individuals, but it’s the first element of it that becomes immediately available with a major disaster declaration, and it gets people cash when they’re absolutely desperate for it. 

In addition, survivors who register for the FEMA Individual Assistance Program will be eligible to receive assistance to help repair their homes, cars, and other personal property in conjunction with their own insurance policies.

FEMA is working, as it always does, to open Disaster Recovery Centers in impacted communities.  What’s important about these centers is they aggregate federal support in one place.  It used to be the case that survivors had to go to multiple different departments and agencies to find out what kind of help they could get access to.  What we do is we put everyone together, either in a standing building that survived the natural disaster or in a trailer, if that’s necessary. 

For example, we’ve opened three Disaster Recovery Centers today in Manatee County, Sarasota County, and Hillsborough County, Florida.

If survivors cannot get to such a facility — and we think that will likely be the place in a place like Asheville and its surrounding areas — we send people door to door.  FEMA literally goes knocking with an iPad in hand so they can help people register for the assistance they need, because they may not have power, their cell phone may has — have run out, and they need someone to help them get registered quickly. 

In North Carolina, we’re focused right now on clearing roads and removing debris, restoring communications and power, and ensuring access to health care and the continued flow of commodities and food — commodities like food and water to where they’re most needed. 

Today, we’ve heard they’ve reopened 220 roads, which will help enable responders and critical commodities to begin moving via ground transportation.

While FEMA has been at the forefront of the response, and it’s very meaningful to have them on the ground, they serve as the coordinator of the orchestra of a wide-ranging federal response, and that’s something a lot of people don’t understand.

What FEMA does is it mission assigns — that’s the term of art, quote, “mission assigns” — roles and responsibilities across our government in the wake of a disaster.  And so, what they do is coordinate the identification of and delivery of those resources when they’re needed and where they’re needed. 
I want to go through some of what other departments and agencies are doing so you can hear the full scope of the federal response, which gives more clarity than just saying, “FEMA is doing this.” 

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers deployed power restoration teams, including in Buncombe County, North Carolina, where Asheville is — Asheville is located, for temporary emergency power, debris removal, and infrastructure assessment, including for dams throughout the region. 

The Department of Defense has mobilized 22 helicopters in support to response in western North Carolina.  Staged at Fort Liberty in North Carolina, there are multiple helicopters available to support air bridge operations to move personnel and necessary supplies and equipment into the disaster area.  

Four helicopters from DOD are actively supporting the urgent search and rescue operations that are ongoing in western North Carolina.  The other 18 are helping to move response personnel and deliver critical commodities and support into remote and isolated communities that are not accessible right — by road right now.

DOD has also made available, as I mentioned, 30 high-water vehicles available for search and rescue and has set up five Incident Support Bases across the region to continue providing support to those who need it in the surrounding areas. 

The U.S. Coast Guard has thousands of personnel working on response efforts and is conducting post-storm assessments to support the rapid reopening of impacted ports in Florida. 

The U.S. Department of Energy has responders deployed across the region, primarily in the State Emergency Operations Centers. 

While I noted that power restoration numbers are trending in the right direction, it’s important to remember that these will be complex, multiday efforts in many locations due to the extent of damage and the ongoing access issues. 

Utilities are facing widespread flooding and debris that is impeding access to damaged infrastructure, and one of the things we’ve learned in prior incidents like this is it’s really important to set public expectations about when they can anticipate that power will return so that they take the necessary steps to be safe and to secure additional support — for example, moving into a shelter — if power isn’t going to come on for some time where they live.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Farm Service Agency, a very important player in this space in — in rural areas, has deployed personnel to the impacted region to extend much-needed emergency credit to farmers and agriculture producers who lost crops and livestock across all the impacted states, but in particular, in the Big Bend region of Florida and in southern Georgia.

The Environmental Protection Agency has personnel on the ground who are offering technical assistance and guidance on water systems, which have been significantly damaged in a number of locations, on debris management, and on maintaining critical public health and environmental protections as storm impacts are assessed.

The U.S. Small Business Administration has also deployed more than 50 personnel to support survivors and small businesses as they recover from the hurricane. 

So, that’s a sense for you of the range of capabilities that surge when we say we’re doing everything we can to help impacted communities, and more will follow as we know more about the impacts.  We honestly don’t know the full extent of the damage; it probably will take several more days as communities begin to be opened up by the debris clearance on the roads and we can get in and really understand what’s happened to them. 

Unfortunately, we know that the first information we receive is often wrong in the wake of a disaster, and that the early days are brutally hard for the people who are in the most heavily impacted communities.  Since 2021, we have seen this play out across the nation, from Florida to California to Maui, from Kentucky to New York.

As the president has directed, we will do everything we can, first, to save lives, alleviate suffering, and help communities to recover and eventually rebuild.  And we will focus especially on survivors who have the hardest time accessing the help we can provide, as I noted, because as Americans, we are all in this together. 

Thank you for giving me a chance to lay that down for you, and I’m glad to take a few questions.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.  And L.S.R. has to go see the POTUS pretty soon.

Go ahead.  Go ahead, Jeff.

Q    Thanks very much.  Liz, a couple different topics.  One, you talked about people’s inability to communicate because of lack of power, et cetera.  Can you give us any sense of how — you know, whether you’re working with mobile phone companies or the private sector at all to help boost the ability to communicate? 

And secondly, do you have any sense — do you have any sense now of where the death toll is going and what the cost of rebuilding will be?

DR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL:  So, on the effort to get communications restored, we work with — I, not personally — but FEMA works with — and — with the FCC and with private-sector companies.  All of the major providers participate in this.  And as you heard me say, if you’re not — let’s imagine — a customer of AT&T, but Verizon is able to get some coverage in your region, you’ll get free roaming in order to get access. 

We’re also moving in Starlink receivers, as I said, because we need more capability where we think it will be a while before any of those cell towers that we would normally be dependent upon will be working again. 

So, we have a multipronged effort when we need to get communications capabilities and involving a variety of technologies.  Some of them are more novel solutions.  Some of them are more traditional.  

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead.

DR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL:  On —

Q    Hold on.  I have a —

DR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL:  I’ll just say, on the death count you asked about. 

Q    And —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Oh, sorry.

DR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL:  So, we really —

Q    — and cost.

DR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL:  — we — the current data we have is that it looks like there could be as many as 600 lost lives, but we don’t have any confirmation of that.  We know there are 600 who are either lost or unaccounted for.  And so, that work is ongoing. 

I’ll caution you, because we’ve seen this before, those numbers vary widely.  There’s a lot of reporting that doesn’t add up about the numbers.  And so, while we may see the numbers go up as we get to more locations that have not yet been fully developed, in terms of disaster immediate emergency response operations, we may see more people who unfortunately perished, but we may also not see the numbers skyrocket as people have predicted they might.  So, I would just urge you to wait until we have the facts, and we’ll report them to you as we have them.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Zeke. 

Q    Thanks, Liz.  You mentioned that the run-up to the storm, the — the focus of the preparations was on the Big Bend area of Florida and then it moved as the storm moved inland.  Were you surprised by the impacts on the flooding side?  Was there something wrong in the forecast that you should have pre-positioned assets differently to prepare for this sort of situation? 

You know, I know that there’ll be time for an after-action report later, but are you now at the point where you — where now you’re kicking yourself that you didn’t do something, you know, Thursday or Friday?

DR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL:  So, we can never know exactly where a storm will go.  Of course, we will do, with our colleagues who do the weather predictions, an analysis of what we knew and what we didn’t know and how that evolved.  We were very concerned about a major hit on a city like Tallahassee, which could have catastrophic impacts. 

When the storms make landfall, as you know, they’re — they’re at their highest velocity.  The force of a — of a hurricane when it makes land is very powerful.  It usually reduces in strength as it moves overland.  So, that initial landfall place in the Big Bend was a major concern for us.

But we were also worried about the storm moving into other areas and having significant wind effects and flooding effects, and that’s what we briefed to the president, as we saw the storm moving in our direction — in the direction of the Southeastern United States, and we kept him apprised as we saw the evolution moving north through a variety of states. 

We can’t know everything in advance.  And what — one of the reasons we surge capabilities into the region is then to be able to get them closer.  They can’t be in the spot the hurricane is going to hit in advance.  They have to be in a location in which they wouldn’t be affected and then move in.  So having the resources in the Southeast already was very beneficial for all the states in the region.

Q    And you mentioned the importance of setting expectations right.  So, for the folks who are the affected areas who are able to consume this now — hopefully, to the extent that they can — what — how long should they be expecting to wait now to access, you know, their base needs — you know, power, water, food, shelter — until the federal government can provide that for them?

DR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL:  Well, we are moving now to get food and water, medical supplies, and other essential survival needs into the most devastated areas in North Carolina.  That’s what I described about using DOD helicopters, for example, to move into areas which are not accessible by ground. 

I was referencing the point that I think — we all experience this: When the power goes out, you want to know how fast it’s going to come back on.  In a situation like this with this much devastation, it could be a long time.  So, you can’t just wait it out.  You may need — and this is really for people listening, you may need to make alternative arrangements to get to a shelter where you can be safe and get access to electricity to power your phone; where you could get pharmaceuticals if you need them, if you lost everything; where you can begin to work toward the rebuilding of the basics of your life while your community is — is addressing the consequences of these devastating storms.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I have to wrap it up, sadly.  Go ahead.

Q    Yeah.  Thank you, Liz, for providing all this information and reminding us that the numbers could change.  I just want to fact-check two things with you —

DR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL:  Yeah.

Q    — if I could, given that you oversee homeland security broadly.  First of all, did the president speak with Georgia Governor Kemp yesterday?

DR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL:  Yes, yes.

Q    Have they spoken again today?

DR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL:  President Kemp has said so in public.  He spoke —

Q    Governor.  Governor Kemp.

DR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL:  I’m sorry, Governor Kemp has said so yesterday.  Thank you for correcting me. 

The president spoke to Governor Kemp yesterday.  Governor Kemp has stated today that he spoke to the president and appreciated the offer of all the help.  The president has offered, “Anything you need.”  So, if the governor would like to speak to the president again, of course the president will take his call.  If the governor wants to submit a major da- — disaster declaration, we’ll move that very quickly through our system.

And we’re working very closely with every state in the impacted region.  And we extend a hand.  We work with the state emergency operations managers, the whole team in place, in every location.  And that’s work that we’ve been doing not just in the wake of a hurricane, but we do it all the time to build those relationships, strengthen our capabilities, plan for and prepare for disasters. 

Q    And given that homeland security is your portfolio and the Secret Service falls under homeland security, let me ask you one other sort of fact-check here.  Donald Trump alleges on social media, quote, “The Democrats are interfering with my Campaign by not giving us the proper number of people within Secret Service that are necessary for Security… They’re using them for themselves, even though they don’t need them.”  Is that true?

DR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL:  The president has directed the Secret Service to provide every necessary resource and capability that is required to ensure the safety of the former president of the United States.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.  April, you have the last one.

DR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL:  Thank you.  I have to go.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Oh, sorry.

DR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL:  Okay, one more.  April.  Okay.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, April.  Go ahead.  Quickly.

Q    Two questions.

DR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL:  I’ve got one minute exactly. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah, because she has to go to see POTUS.

Q    Okay.  Two questions, and you can answer them fast if you can. 

In the short term — you talk about the immediate short term, but what about the long term with this devastation?  Number one, housing for those who do not have shelter.  What are you thinking?  I mean, there have been lessons learned since Katrina as to how — how to house people.

DR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL:  We work — we work on immediate sheltering capabilities with the Red Cross and others.  We provide funding for people to get access to hotels and to — and potentially to move into longer-term accommodations if they need them.  That’s part of the FEMA process. 

Q    And what about insurance?  Because that has been a big thing when these kind of situations happen.

DR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL:  If — if people have insurance, that’s, of course, very important for rebuilding.  If they do not have insurance, they have access to federal assistance. 

But it’s a long road to recovery for people because there’s so much work to be done.  We have to acknowledge that. 

I just want to clarify one thing.  When I said there could be up to 600 people lost, my point was there are 600 people unaccounted for.  That’s the number we’re tracking right now and that we can essentially validate from multiple sources, but we don’t know.  And as the president said this morning, we’re very hopeful that some of those people just don’t have cell phones working and actually are alive. 

We experienced that in Maui, when the numbers were extremely high in the beginning and they came way down.  Ultimately, tragically, 101 people lost their lives, but it was not in the thousands, as we were initially concerned it might be. 

Thank you all.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Thank you so much, Liz.

Q    Thank you.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.

DR. SHERWOOD-RANDALL:  Thanks, Karine.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  No problem.  Thank you.

Sorry, she didn’t have a lot of time. 

Q    Well, she spent 14 minutes reading her statement.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Well, it was 14 minutes of laying down for the American people — not just for all of you — of how this works.  We have people who are indeed suffering and waiting and wanting to hear not just from the local government and the state government but also from the federal government: What are we doing — right? — what are we doing to help them and how we’re working together.

And I think what you just heard from Liz is how we’re working in tandem together with local, state, and federal government to help the people in North Carolina, Georgia, and Florida.  And I think that matters.  I think that matters.  And I think it’s important from them — for them to hear from the people who are actually doing the work. 

And she gave a laydown, and I’m sure — I know I did — I learned how this all works and how the communication works amongst — amongst all of us.  And what is available, also, is incredibly important. 

I do want to read a quote, because this is really important to Ed’s question.  Governor Kemp — this is what Liz was saying — said in his press conference earlier today: “So, I just spoke to” — yesterday — “I just spoke to the president.  He just called me.  He just called me yesterday afternoon.”  So, he said this this morning.  “I missed him and called him right back.  And he just said, ‘Hey, what do you need?’  And I told him, ‘You know, we got what we need.  We’ll work through the federal process.’  He offered and if there’s other things we need just to call him directly, which I appreciate that.”  That was a quote directly from Governor Kemp. 

So, this is to continue the fact-checking that Ed asked us to do. 

All right.  Go ahead, Zeke.

Q    Thanks, Karine.  Turning overseas.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    What is the level of knowledge that the U.S. has about Israel’s intentions on its nor- — northern border?  Has the U.S. been briefed on specific operational plans to launch some sort of ground incursion into Lebanon?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, I’m not going to get into private diplomatic conversations from here.  Certainly would refer to the IDF to speak to their own military operations and their plans, as we normally do.  But we do understand that the strategic purpose of this is to make sure that Hezbollah cannot maintain the capacity to attack Israeli communities from the immediate opposite side of the border.  And so, that is our understanding.  But I’m not going to go into specifics of — of our diplomatic conversations here.

Q    And is that a — a goal that the president and this administration is supportive of? 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Look, what we will say and what I will say to you — and we say this all the time; this is nothing new — that Israel has a right to defend itself against Hezbollah, against Iran-backed groups.  We’re talking about Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis.  And so, we are in constant discussion with the Israelis on the best way to move forward.  And we would certainly refer you to any, as I said moments ago, seconds ago — to the Israelis on their own ground operation. 

Of course — of course we want to see a ceasefire.  That — that would give us the space, as we have been saying, of diplomacy and enable citizens — right? — to go back to their homes on both sides.  And, ultimately, a diplomatic resolution is what we want to see and what we want to make sure is — is — that — that is in place, and we’re going to certainly continue to have those conversations with Israelis and others on how to make that happen. 

Q    And then, just briefly, the president this morning said he was anticipating needing a supplemental for disaster relief.  (Inaudible.)  When will he send that to the Hill?  And does he have a dollar figure in mind yet?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  And so, look, you know that we provided a robust emergency supplemental to — to — for the CR — right? — for the — for the CR that — that didn’t go through, that didn’t make it.  And so, we’re going to continue to have those conversation.  We are disappointed that that didn’t go through.  We’re going to continue to have those conversation.  As the president said, we’re in constant communications with members — members in Congress, and we want to make sure that they move quickly on this — they move quickly on this. 

I don’t have details or specifics, but we did — we did provide a robust — a robust request on more additional funding for these types of emergencies to continue that, and it didn’t go through.  And we were certainly disappointed to see that.

Go ahead.  Right behind Zeke.

Q    Yeah, if he does decide to ask for a supplemental, will he have to call Congress back, or is there another way to do it?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  He was — the was the president was asked about that and —

Q    Yeah, but (inaudible) —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  He just said it’s something that certainly he — he is considering.  I just don’t have anything.  I’m not going to get too much into hypotheticals.

Q    And — and given —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    — the urgency of this, when would we expect to know if he was going to ask everyone, how much it is, and if he’s calling them back? 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, I don’t have anything to add on — on if he’s going to call them back, how much it is, which is very similar to the question that I got from Zeke. 

We did provide a robust supplemental component to — to get more funding in the CR.  It didn’t make it through.  It did not — was not included.  But what we’re doing right now, and I think it’s important — and you heard that from Liz, you’ve heard that from the administrator — let’s not forget the FEMA administrator was here in this room on Thursday because we wanted to make sure that people understood what was happening and what was coming. 

But we’re going to do everything that we can to make sure that they — Georgia, North Carolina, Florida, the impacted areas — have the — have the resources that they need to deal with the devastation and the aftermath of this.

Go ahead.

Q    Karine, the president said this morning that, quote, “I’m comfortable with them stopping,” with regards to the Israeli potential incursion into Lebanon.  What did he mean by that?  And does that mean he’s uncomfortable with them continuing?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  No, I answered that question, which is we believe that Israel has the right to defend itself against Hezbollah and Iran-backed groups.  We have said that.  We’ve also have said that Israel is in a — in a tough neighborhood.  You’ve heard us say that.  They really are.  And so, we believe they have the right to defend itself.

What we also want to see is a diplomatic resolution here.  We do want to see a ceasefire.  Ultimately, that’s what we need to see in order to get to a place where we can get to a ceasefire — right? — where we — where we can see citizens going back to their homes on both sides. 

So, that still remains to be true.  And — but do we want to see — ultimately, want to see — get to a place where we get to a diplomatic resolution?  Yes, that’s what we want to see.  For sure.

Q    So, he’s uncomfortable with them continuing?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  No.  What I — we have said is — consistently — Israel has the right to defend itself against Hezbollah.  We are not shedding tears over a terrorist that was killed.  That terrorist has American blood on their hands.  And so, we’re certainly not going to shed a tear over that. 

We have been very clear Israel has right to defend itself.  We’ve been very clear that the security of Israel — when it comes to its security, our support is ironclad.  That has not changed.  That has not changed. 

Q    And, Karine, switching —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    — to the hurricane.  Our reporting teams on the ground say that there are many residents there who are frustrated that more aid has not been distributed, and some of them haven’t seen the federal government th- — there for days.  What would you say to those folks?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Well, I will say is: Certainly, our hearts go out to them.  Obviously, this is a tough, difficult time.  And what I will also say is we have their back, and we can understand that.  We can understand how things are incredibly confusing right now, incredibly difficult right now.  Some people don’t even know if their loved ones are alive or not. 

And so, what I can say and what the president has said and I think what Liz has iterated as well is that we want to make sure that they have — the folks who are in the impacted areas have everything that they need, the resources. 

We have the FEMA administrator, who’s on the ground today.  She’s going to be holding a press conference with the North governor — North Carolina, pardon me, governor in about 30 minutes or so and going to talk about what they see and what the federal government, what FEMA is going to continue to do, working with the state and local governments as well. 

We are on the ground.  We are on the ground. 

And as you know, there was a reason why the F- — the FEMA administrator was here on Thursday to lay out what we were doing ahead of time, how we were pre-positioned on the ground, and warning people — and warning people, because we understood that that is also part of our job.  But, you know, we’re going to do everything that we can.  We’re going to do everything that we can. 

Q    Following up on a previous question — 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.  

Q    — quickly.  You — you said — you mentioned pre-positioning.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    And she did mention that assets and resources were pre-positioned in Big Bend.  I know that question was asked before, but bluntly, should more resources have been pre-positioned in and around North Carolina?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, I th- — I think Liz kind of talked about that — about when she was asked a question on our prediction of the storm and how bad it was.  And so, certainly I’ll — I’ll let the experts speak to this.  But again, pre-positioned — we had generators, food, water, along with re- — search and rescue and power restoration. 

And right now, we have U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.  They’re moving generators into — into impacted areas. 

We have — 3,600 personnel from across the federal workforce are deployed in support ca- — supporting Hurricane Helene.  This includes 24 federal urban research [search] and rescue task force, over 1,300 personnel working to rescue people who may be s- — who may be stranded.  To date, they have rescued about and supported over 1,400 people across the impacted areas.  These are — if you think about the f- — the — the federal employees who are part of these agencies — right? — FEMA and others — this is what they do.  This is what they do.  This is what they’re trained to do.  This is what they’re ready to do. 

And it doesn’t matter where — which state it is, right?  It doesn’t matter if it’s a red state or a blue state.  This is their job: to get food there, to get generators there, to save some lives, to rescue people. 

And so, we are very proud of the work that they’ve done, and we understand that people are very much suffering on the — on the ground and trying to figure out what is going on. 

And we have our folks there, and we’re going to do the best that we can. 

Go ahead, Peter.

Q    Thank you, Karine.  Thirteen thousand people who have been convicted of murder crossed the border illegally and are living among us.  So, how much danger are U.S. communities in right now —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So —

Q    — because of this?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  — I’m assuming you’re talking about the ICE data?

Q    Yes.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, just a couple of things, and I think it’s important to — to correct the record here. 

First of all, the false — the — the false representation of the data ICE shared — so, that was what we are seeing: false representation.  I got to call that out.  We got to call that out.  And it’s been fact-checked by some of your colleagues here, by multiple — multiple — multiple outlets.  That has been debunked on what has been falsely misrepresenta- — or mis- — misrepresented here.  So, we have to call that out. 

And so, look, this is —

Q    Can you clarify what the misrepresentation is?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  The numbers that is being put out about how many people are out is been falsely rep- — represented here.  If you look at the total returns and removal of the past year, that has been higher than every year under the previous administrations since — since 2010.  If you look at it.

And if we’re going to report something — a data that’s out there — we got to do it in a way that is not — not confusing the American people and certainly not lying.  And so, there has been — this has been fact-checked — been fact-checked. 

And so, this is — the way that is being fals- — falsely represented here is just not okay.  And though — got to be really clear about that.

Q    On Helene.  People in western North Carolina were drowning in their houses this weekend.  Others were losing everything.  President Biden was at his beach house, and Vice President Harris was hosting political fundraisers on the West Coast.  Is there a reason that they could not be here? 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  The president did exactly what a president in this moment needs to do, which is directing his team to take action.  One of the reasons that the FEMA administrator was here in this room on Thursday is the president wanted to make sure that we were sending a message out to folks who were going to be impacted by the hurricane and also wanted her to share how we were pre-positioning on the ground. 

Remember, these are folks who do this type of stuff.  When you think about FEMA, you think about the Red Cross, you think about the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, this is what they do.  This is what they do. 

And so, the president was on the phone — he said this when he was asked a question by one of your colleagues — for more than two hours yesterday with governors and local elected officials making sure that they have what they — they needed. 

You heard me talk about Governor Kemp and what he said to the president himself.  He said this and shared this in a press conference — that the president has provided and said, “What else do you need?”  And he actually said to the president, “We have what we need.”  So — and that’s a — as you know, a Republican governor. 

And look — and I talked about how the vice president also did her calls.  She’s going to be going to the FEMA — FEMA agency in a — in — the center — the center to — to get her briefing later this afternoon.  The president is continuing — continuing to have these conversations with folks on the ground, elected officials on the ground, to make sure that they have what they need and directing his team —

Q    And —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  — to keep pushing.

Q    — one more.  How worried are folks at the White House that a port strike that could make things like fruits and vegetables more expensive could make it a lot harder for Vice President Harris to win the election?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m not going to talk about an election from here.  That’s not what we’re going to do.  That is — when it comes to making sure that workers are — are paid and wages and the economy is working and that we’re lowering costs for the American people, that is just the right thing to do.  And that’s what this president focuses on every day, day in and day out: How do we have an economy that works for all?

When it comes to this particular question that you’re asking me, we’ve said this many times, nothing has changed.  We support collective bartering [bargaining].  It is the best way for American workers and employers to come to a fair agreement.  We encourage all parties to come to the bargaining table and negotiate in good faith. 

Senior officials from the White House, Labor Department, and Transportation Department are in touch with the parties to urge them to return to the table and negotiate in good faith towards the — an agreement that benefits all sides, and do it fairly and quickly.  And this is something that we have said, and we’re going to continue to push forward on. 

Q    Is the vice president involved in these negotiations?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  What I can say — I just named the secretaries that are involved — Secretary Pete Buttigieg, Secretary Ju- — Julie Su, and the director of National Economic Council, Lael Brainard. 

What I can say is the president and the vice president are being regularly updated about the situation.  And I know there’s a question about the Taft-Hartley.  We — we never — we have never invoked the Taft-Hartley to break a strike and are not considering to doing so now.  But this is a president that has been called a “pro-union president” by labor — by the labor unions, because of how much he believes that the union built the middle class. 

And so, that’s what you’re going to continue to see from this president.  He’ll stay regularly updated. 

Q    Okay.  Thanks. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Selina.

Q    Thanks, Karine.  Former President Donald Trump is in Georgia in a region that’s been hard hit.  Now, given all the security that’s needed to accommodate him, is his visit putting a strain on resources there or impacting relief efforts?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Here’s what I can say, and you’ve heard this from this president earlier today in his remarks, where he said he will visit the impacted communities this week and is taking caution — he is taking caution to avoid using critical resources that is needed right now on the road that — on the ground that people need.  And so, that should be everyone’s top consideration right now.  That’s what we should be doing.  That’s what we should be focusing.  And I’ll leave it there.

Q    So, were there any requests for Trump to delay his visit?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — I’m not getting into any more than what I just stated. 

The president has been really clear about how he sees his presence on the ground.  As you know, when the president travel, it’s a big footprint.  In this particular moment, he wants to make sure that he’s not taking away resou- — resources.  He wants to make sure that it is not taking away from the emergency resources that are on the ground.  And, as I just stated, he believes everybody should adhere — adhere to that. 

Q    And in terms of the dockworkers that are set to go on strike, at what point would the president be willing to intervene?  How long would he allow that to go on and at what cost to the American economy?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m not going to get into hypotheticals.  I’m not.  Not from here.

Q    Would the president consider walking the picket line?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m not going to get into hypotheticals.

We believe that collective bargaining is i- — is important here.  We’ve always said that.  We believe that both sides should come to the table in good faith and get to an agreement, a fair agreement.

Q    Has there been any progress in those conversations?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — I just don’t have anything else to share here.

Go ahead, Jeff.  Yeah.

Q    On a separate top- —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.

Q    — a different topic.  The incoming prime minister of Japan has said — he’s called out or proposed the idea of a “Asia NATO.”  I’m wondering if that’s something that the president would consider.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I haven’t spoken to the president about that.  As you know, there’s one NATO.  The NATO has grow- — grown by two countries, which is because of the president’s leadership. 

Let’s not forget, when Putin invaded Ukraine, he thought that NATO was going to be weaker, and that did not happen.  The president certainly was able to make NATO stronger because of his leadership.  And that’s going to be what we’re going to focus on.

Q    I think he is suggesting a separate alliance that would involve Asia countries. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  No — no, I hear — I heard your —

Q    He also said the idea of putting Japanese troops on Guam.  I don’t know if that’s something the president would consider.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I just — not something that I’ve spoken directly to the president about. 

What I can say is what the president has done with the current NATO and making it stronger.  And it has been important, if you think about Ukraine, if you think about what Ukraine has been trying to do over the almost three years, which is, certainly, fight for their sovereignty and fight for their democracy, which is something that we’re going to continue to support, Ukraine and those — those NATO — NATO countries as well, which is much stronger — stronger than Putin ever thought they would be in this time.

Go ahead.

Q    Thank you, Karine.  First on the Middle East.  Prime Minister Netanyahu is expected to convene his War Cabinet this evening to chart next steps.  What has President Biden communicated that the U.S. would hope they decide
to do?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Look, I’m not going to comment or get into hypotheticals about decisions that Israeli government are making or IDF is making.  Certainly — certainly would let them speak for themselves. 

We have been very clear: Israel has the right to defend itself, especially against these Iran-backed groups, including Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis.  We will continue to have those direct conversations with them.  But IDF, Israel government can certainly speak to that.

And, also, have conversations — continue our diplomatic conversations on the right — on the right way forward — or the path forward.  I just don’t have anything else to share.

Q    A lot of those diplomatic conversations happened over the weekend as Israel was conducting these raids in Lebanon.  Is the outcome one that those diplomatic conversations were — were discussing?  Were U.S. officials offering their support for the
way that Israel proceeded?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  What I can say is that — I’m not going to speak — again, not going to speak to private diplomatic conversation.  What I said moments ago, which is we understand the strategic purpose of this is to make sure that Hezbollah cannot maintain the capacity to attack Israeli communities from the immediate opposite side of the border.  That’s what we understand.

I’m just not going to get into — get into specifics or into diplo- — diplomatic conversations from here.

Q    It’s now been five days, though, since the U.S. and Western allies publicized the discussions over this 21-day ceasefire proposal.  Is there still any hope that that
gets put together?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  As you know, this is a president that’s hopeful and optimistic, and you hear him say that —

Q    But realistically, given the conversations that are happening. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — I — well, you — you asked me if that is hopeful, right?  So, look, we believe the way to get to a ceasefire is to have this diplomatic resolution, to get us some space to have a dipl- — diplomatic solution.  That’s ultimately the way to get there.  

And so, we nee- — we understand that we need a ceasefire in Lebanon to provide that — that space for diplomacy.  That’s what we’re going to continue to have discussions — those discussions continue with Israel.  So, that is what we’re going to focus on. 

And what we want to see is a de-escalation.  That’s what we’ve been saying.  We want to see a de-escalation.

Go ahead.

Q    Thank you, Karine.  You mentioned that the vice president is going to be coming back and having a briefing at FEMA later today about Helene —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah, 4- — about 4 o’clock, I think.  Yeah.

Q    Could you give us a sense for what she has been doing so far in response to this hurricane?  Is she in briefings with the president?  Is she getting briefed separately?  And what is her role going to be going forward?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  What I can say is that she has — certainly has been kept briefed on the situation in the — certainly, the affected areas, the aftermath.  She’s going to get a briefing directly at FE- — at FEMA — at the FEMA center when she gets back. 

She — she didn’t continue with some of her campaign activities today because she wanted to make sure to get back and — and go to the FEMA center.  Anything else — and I know she’s had conversations with elected officials on the ground in those impacted areas.  I would have to refer you to her team to get more specifics on — on what else.

Q    And then a question about one of the policies that the vice president rolled out on Friday about immigration.  She said that she would go further than what the president has done with executive action to limit asylum access at the border. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    Do you have any response to that?  Is that the position of the White House that the administration should be going further than what you’ve done so far?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, I think, look, when we — when it comes to — I got to be careful — campaign policy announced.  So, going to certainly let the campaign speak specifically about what they’re announcing and what they’re looking to do on their side of — their side of things. 

But we’ve always said, and we’ve al- — whether it’s the economy, whether it’s the border that, you know, the vice president was going to build upon what we’ve been able to do.  That is — you know, the — the good work that we’ve been able to do together, whether it’s the economy, health care, getting some of these historic pieces of legislation passed that’s going to help Americans for generations to come.

We also understand and see and what she’s been able to do is build on the success.  And so, I think that’s what you’re seeing from the vice president.  And the pr- — this is a vice president that has been a critical partner to this — to this president over the last three and a half years.  And so, we — you know, we look forward to see what she’s going to be doing down the road.

Go ahead, April.

Q    Thank you, Karine.

Q    Karine, hi.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I did not ca- — I’ll call you afterwards.

Go ahead, April.

Q    The issue of Angola.  Why Angola for President Biden now, specifically, as other presidents have gone to other countries, and Angola is, like, something totally new since the Clinton administration for a U.S. president?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, a couple of things.  So, he’s going to be holding a bilateral and multilateral meetings to discuss increased collaboration of shared pa- — priorities, including a signature project of G7 Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment, PGI, Africa’s first transcontinental open-access rail network that starts — that starts in Lobito and ultimately will connect the Atlantic Ocean to the Indian Ocean.  I think that’s a pretty important reason why to go to Angola. 

This will be the first visit of a president to — to Angola.  That’s also, I think, important to note as well.  And so, we’re going to celebrate the evolution of the U.S.-Angola relationship, underscore the United States’ continued commitment to African partners, and demonstrate how those type of collaborative partnerships can solve shared challenges that both countries have.

Q    So, anything on oil, by any chance, since Angola is oil rich?  And also — and also —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    — what about the considerations about some of the other countries, like Nigeria or South Africa?  Those have been — Ghana, Uganda —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    — those have been some places that presidents — Rwanda — some —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  No, I hear you.

Q    — of the presidents — yeah.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, he’s going to be abroad from the 10th to the 15th of October.  We’re going to go to Berlin, Germany, and then we’re going to stop over at Angola.  I just laid out the PGI, the important connection there that Angola has to an initiative that the president created.  And I think that is — right there, that — that connection with the Atlantic Ocean to the India O- — the Indian Ocean, that Angola is going to play a big role is — is important.  It’s going to make a difference in that region.  And this is also, again, part of the president’s initiative that he created.

And no other president has been there.  No other president has been to Angola. 

Q    I know.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, I think that’s important to note as well. 

Q    Does this have something to do with the grain situation that was held up because of the Russia-Ukraine war, trying to help get grains to African nations?  Because President Zelenskyy did express that to —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    — I understand, the president of the United States, Joe Biden, as well as Greg Meeks, who sits on Foreign Affairs Committee in the House.  Is this some of that too?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  What I will say is the president has said that he was going to go to the continent.  He has said that he was going to do that.  He wanted to keep his promise. 

Angola makes a lot of sense, especially for an initiative like PGI, an initiative that the president started.  There’s a connection there.  There’s a thruway that makes a lot of sense.  No other president has visited the country.  And so, it made sense for the president to go there, because there are important initiatives not just to the co- — African continent but also for us here and other of our partners and allies.  And so, it made the most sense to make that — to make that trip. 

Q    Thank you.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  And you’ll see us next month doing that.  

Go ahead. 

Q    Thank you.  So, the president didn’t seem comfortable this morning with a ground operation in Lebanon.  He said he was “comfortable with them stopping.”  Now it seems imminent.  Did the president take any action to try to prevent a ground operation in Lebanon?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, say that one — say that one more time.

Q    So, this morning, President Biden said —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    — that he was comfortable with them stopping, about Israel.  And so, did he take any action to try to prevent such an operation in Lebanon?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, I’m not going to get into diplomatic conversations from here.  What I’ve been saying multiple times is Israel has the right to defend itself against Hezbollah, against Iran-backed groups like Hezbollah, like Hamas, and also the Houthis.  They are in a — in a difficult neighborhood — right? — if — to say the least.  And they have to have the ability to defend themselves. 

And so, that’s what we support.  That’s what we believe.  That’s what we have said.  We’re going to have conversations with the Israeli government about the best way forward, the best way to move forward.  But I’m not going to get into diplomatic conversations.

But I have been very clear: We believe that Israel has the right to defend itself against Hezbollah.

Q    Lebanon is very small, so when Israel, for instance, attacked Beirut — south Beirut, many people who have no link with Hezbollah are being hit.  It will be the same if they do a ground operation in Lebanon.  It won’t be only the Hezbollah who’s going to be targeted.  So, does the White House still support this ground operation in Lebanon?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, are you talking — so, say that one more time.

Q    Does — you — you say that, basically, the goal is to target Hezbollah, but if there is a ground operation it’s going to —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m not — I’m not speaking for the goals of the IDF or the Israeli government.  What we have said is: Israel has the right to defend itself against Hezbollah, against Iran-backed group.  We’ve been very clear about that. 

I’m not going to stand here and speak to Israel’s operations.  That is not something that I can do.  It’s something that I would have to refer you to IDF, and that’s what we’ve been very clear about.

Go ahead.  Go ahead, Anita.

Q    Thank you so much, Karine.  During this — these frantic diplomatic discussions over the situation in the Middle East, did the president communicate any sort of consequences for this continued behavior, in addition to his wish for a ceasefire?  Did he, for example, say that maybe certain weapons would no longer be provided to Israel or teased to that in his discussions?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Our policy has not changed.  It just hasn’t.  It — it has not changed.  And, again, Israel has a right to defend itself — we’ve been very clear — against Iran-backed groups like Hezbollah, like Hamas, the Houthis. 

I’m not going to get into diplomatic conversation, but our policy has not changed.

Q    Okay.  On Taiwan, yesterday, the president announced the largest-ever military drawdown for Taiwan.  What — what is kind of the — what was the purpose of this?  What was his thinking?  And is this intended to — I mean, what was the message he was sending with that decision?  And is it meant to kind of hold Taiwan over in case there is, for example, a change of leadership in the United States?  Or, you know, what — what’s the point of this? 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, our overreaching goal remains the same — right? — and we have said that — maintain peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait.  That is our goal, and we’ve always been very clear about that, and that’s what we want to see.  So —

Q    I guess I’m asking specifically about the timing of this.  This comes at the end of his presidency, and this is the largest-ever military drawdown.  What — what does that communicate?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, I think, if you think about the drawdown, it is pretty much consistent with our longstanding One China policy.  So, want to make that clear.  It has not changed, and it remains the guide by the Taiwan Relations Act, Three Joint Communiqués, and Six Assurances.  Again, our overreaching goal is to continue to maintain the peace and stability across — across the Taiwan Strait, and that is something that we have been focused on over the last three and a half years, and we’re continuing to do this.

And so — but the administration use of the PDA for Taiwan is one — one example of our continued commitment to help Taiwan maintain a sufficient self- — self-defense capability.  And so, that’s what is — what we’ve been continuing and trying to do.  And so, that’s how I would look at the Taiwan PDA.

Q    (Inaudible)?  Have they communicated how they feel about this?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I would — I would refer you to them.

Q    Thanks.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead.

Q    I know that the president said that he would not — he would not intervene in the dockworkers strike, and he cited his concern that he doesn’t believe in Taft-Hartley.  But we have seen him intervene in — in other ways in previous situations like this.  With when — with the rails situation, he asked Congress to intervene and stop that potential strike.  When he said no yesterday, was he also saying that asking Congress to intervene and stop a potential strike was off the table?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I mean, look, Congress does what Congress is going to do regardless of what the president says. 

What I will say is the message of the president has been very clear.  Our message has been very clear.  We support collective bargaining.  That’s what we’ve been clear about. 

I’ve mentioned Secretary Buttigieg, [Acting] Secretary Lu [Su].  We have our NAC — NEC director who has been in touch with — with both parties.  And what we have been encouraging to do — and this is something that we’ve been pretty consistent — what I’m saying here we’ve said before, which is we believe both parties should — should come to the table in good faith, and so — to come to a fair agreement.  This is something that we’ve also been consistent about. 

Look, we’re going to continue to send that message and — and urge them to come to a fair agreement. 

Q    But is he prepared to ask Congress to intervene?  Or is that —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m — I’m just —

Q    — off the table?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m not going to going to into hypotheticals from here.

What we — we’ve been — we have made our message very clear — very clear: We col- — we support collective bargaining.  We believe both sides should come together in a — to get to a fair agreement in good faith — in good faith, and we have been consistent throughout this administration about that. 

Q    I want to ask you about the immigration — the border restrictions that this administration extended today as well. 

The immigration advocacy organizations have come out.  Tahirih Justice said this was death a thousand cuts for migrants.  You know, I’ve heard criticism as well from immigration advocates saying that this is ignoring the asylum statute.  So, I guess just a response to those comments. 

But then secondly, just the timing for this.  I mean, the administration clearly is benefiting from this executive action and obviously likes it if it’s extending it, so why not do it sooner?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  But I don’t th- — I know you follow this very closely.  You know that we’ve taken multiple executive actions throughout the last three and a half years.  You know that we’ve tried to do this in a legislative fashion — right? — to make this — to get it to a — a policy, a legislation that actually — we do it in a bipartisan way that actually deals with a broken immigration system.  And we have been stopped over and over again by Republicans. 

Q    Sure.  And it was clear that that Senate bill was going to get stopped earlier this year —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    — you know, January and March.  This extension we have not seen until now, and then we didn’t see the executive action until —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  June.

Q    — just a couple months ago, right?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Well, June.  No, you’re right.

Q    In the summer.  In the summer.  So, now —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Wait —

Q    — with this extension, this is going to carry this out beyond the election.  So, if the administration stance is that this should continue for the months ahead, basically, effectively, curtailing asylum in ways we have not seen, why not take this action sooner?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    And then just also a response to the criticism, too.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, a couple of things.  We have tried to do this in a way where there was legislative action, right?  To do this in a way — by having bipartisan conversation, working with senators, and doing this in a way that will benefit Americans, and do it in a way, obviously, that we — we put it into law.  And we’re trying to begin the process of fixing a broken immigrat- — that’s the way the president actually wants to do it.  He did.  That’s the way he wants to do it.  And we took time to do that, and we believe it was going to move forward. 

This is Senate.  We’re working with Republican senators here to get that done.  And they voted against — to your point, against their own bill twice — twice, because of the former president saying, “This was going to” — I get part of your com- — question to me — “it was going to help Joe Biden.  It’s going to help Democrats.”  That’s what the former president said.

When it comes to this — to this announcement that you just — that we just had about the final rule.  It was a two-month process.  Let’s not forget when the president made the announcement in June, DHS and DOJ had a two-month process — right? — to get — to get feedback, to get responses on — on the rule.  And now we have — now we have a — now we secured that final rule.  And so, that’s the action that you saw from DOJ and DHS. 

But we actually want to do this a different way.  We do.  We want to do it in a bipartisan legislative way. 

You know this president.  He believes reaching across the aisle is an important thing to do.  We — we’ve been able to get bipartisan legislation done.  They got in the way. 

They negotiated with us — meaning “they,” the senators — Republican senators negotiated with us.  We came up with a bipartisan solution.  If the president had signed — was able to sign that solution that — pardon me, that legislation — it would have been the toughest and fairest — fairest immigration law that we have seen in some time, and it would have started the process of fixing a broken immigration system that has been broken for decades — for decades.

Does the — that’s the p- — that is the way the president actually wants to do this.  And, as you know, majority of Americans want us to fix the border.  They do.  And we tried.  And this is the path that we’re — we went down because Republicans in Congress didn’t want to work with us. 

Go ahead, Karen.

Q    Student loan borrowers have had a grace period over the past year where they weren’t going to face delinquency if they didn’t pay their loans.  But tomorrow is October 1st, so that ends tomorrow.  Is the administration expecting or concerned about a potential wave of delinquencies for borrowers who haven’t been paying their loans over the last year?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, as you know, this has been — when it comes to student loan and giving borrowers a little bit of breathing room, this is something that the president had been wanting to do for sa- — some time.  We were blocked.  The president took additional actions, took historic action to provide that student loan relief and to support borrowers facing financial hardship.

In the wake of a one-in-a-century pandemic, the Department of Education paused loan payments as the economy recovered.  And so, as you just stated, it has expired.  It’s been 12 months. 

And so, for those who — to your question, for those who still facing challenges returning to repayment, the department has implemented an aggressive strategy to — to support borrowers, including creating the Fresh Start program that allowed borrowers in default to become current on their payments, launching an information campaign to engage borrowers at a risk — a high risk of delinquency, and helping borrowers enroll in IDR pr- — plans and the lowest monthly payments as well. 

So, there’s plans out there.  There’s ways to support some of these borrowers who — who feel like they could be delinquent here.  And so, we certainly want to help them get to a point where they can start repaying their loans.  And so, the Department of Education has certainly made that a priority as well. 

All right.  I know we have to wrap it up.  Go ahead.

Q    One — one last try on — on Lebanon. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    Just to be clear, you know, on the one hand, the president is calling for a ceasefire.  On the other hand, you’re saying that Israel has a right to defend itself by targeting Hezbollah.  So, how does it work?  Sa- — who do you negotiate a ceasefire with when, at the same time, the Israelis have just informed the United States that they are indeed launching limited ground operations?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, a couple of things.  And both things can be true.  And this is what’s happening right now in the region.  And I’ve said this multiple time: Israel is living and is — is in a really tough neighborhood, and they have to be able to defend themselves against Hezbollah, against the Houthis, against Hamas.  And that is the reality.  That is the reality that they are living in. 

And that’s what we have been very clear about, making sure that our secur- — that we — support for Israel’s security is ironclad.  And that’s what you’ll continue to see from this administration. 

At the same time, we do want to de-escalate.  At the same time, we want to see that.  And ultimately, we believe in — a way to get to a ceasefire, to de-escalate is to create a space — is to get to a ceasefire so we can create a space for dim- — diplomatic conversations.  And, in this case, that’s what you’re seeing. 

We’re — and we’re still talking to Israel.  We’re still having those conversations.  That has not stopped.  And so, that’s what you’re going to continue to hear from us. 

All right.  I think I have to wrap it up.  Go ahead.

Q    This is a light — more light question.  But tomorrow is Jimmy Carter’s 100th birthday.  I think the president sent around a note on the weekend, but should we expect anything in terms of a phone call or anything?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Stay tuned.  Stay tuned.  I’m not going to get ahead of the president.

All right, everybody.  I’ll see you tomorrow.  Thank you.

3:45 P.M. EDT

The post Press Briefing by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and Homeland Security Adviser Dr. Elizabeth Sherwood-Randall appeared first on The White House.

Via Teleconference

4:14 P.M. EDT

MODERATOR:  Hey, everyone.  Thanks for joining.  Kirby has a few words here at the top, and then we’ll get started with Q&A.

MR. KIRBY:  Hey, everybody.  Good afternoon.  I know many of you are interested in a readout of the bilat with President Zelenskyy, and we’ll get all of that, but I just want to just kind of put a pin in sort of where we are here on Thursday afternoon.

Really, the meeting today is the culmination of, really, a full week for the President on the foreign policy front — as you all know, hosting the leaders of the Indo-Pacific Quad in Wilmington, in his hometown, to really talk about pressing issues, not just on the security land front, but economic, diplomatic, certainly with respect to development opportunities, and climate change all across the Indo-Pacific. 

It was a really successful set of discussions, of course ending with all four gathering together to launch a global — or an international effort to get after the cancer challenge.  So, terrific few days, couple of days there. 

And then he went right to the U.N. General Assembly.  You all saw his remarks, talking about the inflection point that that we are in again and how institutions like the United Nations can work together to really tackle transnational challenges. 

He also talked about the acute nature of some of the conflicts that the United States and so many of our partners are dealing with now.  Sudan, of course — trying to get both sides to the table to do what’s right for the Sudanese people and stop the violence, and the fact that there are other countries around the world that can also be helpful in leveraging that sort of an outcome. 

Obviously, what’s going on in the Middle East.  And you saw yesterday some intense diplomacy by our team to get multiple nations to come together and call for a 21-day ceasefire to try to bring the fighting between Israel and Lebanon to a halt so that diplomacy has a little bit of breathing space to actually work. 

And then, of course, Ukraine.  He had a chance to meet with President Zelenskyy yesterday in a short pull-aside and then had a more substantive discussion today.  You saw all the announcements and the commitments that the President made to President Zelenskyy.  A real surge is the way I would describe this, in terms of security assistance and support to Ukraine as they try to continue to reclaim territory and to succeed on the battlefield here in the coming months. 

And the big thing about this — I mean, the biggest thing about that surge was drawing down the remaining funds that we have available for presidential drawdown authority, and then tasking DOD to then allocate that money over time so that all the way to the end of his term we will be spending everything we can to continue to support Ukraine.  And there were some other additional capabilities announced, as I think you all saw.

Really good couple of days with President Zelenskyy here.  He had a chance to present the broad contours of his victory plan to President Biden and to our national security team.  And the President directed our team to work with his team over the next couple of weeks to dig into it a little bit more.  And both presidents are planning to meet in Germany, when we head over there on the 12th of October.  They’ll meet to kind of further flesh it out and see what, together, we can do to help President Zelenskyy really achieve this just and lasting peace that he’s trying to achieve. 

So, again, I know there’s a lot of focus on the bilat today, and rightly so.  He is meeting now with the Vice President, as you and I are talking, and I’m sure we’ll get you a readout of that discussion when it’s over.  But it comes at the end of truly a full week of intense foreign diplomacy, a focus for the President, and real, tangible deliverables in just about every single venue, including on fentanyl, that are designed to make people’s lives better and designed, as the President said in his speech on Tuesday, to help us deal with this critical inflection point that we’re in. 

So, anyway, I’ll stop there.

MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Our first question will go to Steve with Reuters. 

Q    Could you just describe the broad contours of the —

MODERATOR:  Steve, you should be able to unmute yourself. 

We hear you now.

Q    Can you hear me?

MODERATOR:  Yep.

MR. KIRBY:  Got you, bud.

Q    I was just going to see if John could give us the broad contours of the Zelenskyy victory plan.  And is it something that sounds doable to you?

MR. KIRBY:  Hey, Steve.  I think I’m going to let President Zelenskyy outline his plan.  It’s his plan, and I don’t believe they have talked publicly about it too much in detail, so I think it would be inappropriate for me to do that. 

I would just say, you know, broadly speaking, it contains a series of initiatives and steps and objectives that President Zelenskyy believes will be important, not only for helping him end the war that he’s in now, but prevent another one, and to be able to deter and defeat any future Russian aggression once the war is over. 

And if you go back and you look at the President’s opening comments in the Oval, I mean, those were sort of the two prongs that the President also talked about as well.  We got to — our immediate focus has got to be on what Ukraine needs now.  And, of course, his package of announcements today and deliverables I think get at that to a fare-thee-well.  But also, what we need to do to work for Ukraine’s long-term future and long-term security, and that would include, of course, you know, an eventual path to NATO, once they have worked through reforms that they have to make and once they have been able to put the war in the rearview mirror.  But also looking after their long-term security needs.  You know, we announced a bilateral security agreement with Ukraine, and they’ve secured several others with other countries to make sure that they have the capabilities over the long term. 

I know that’s a long-winded answer, and I’m not trying to filibuster, but I do think it’s better if President Zelenskyy outlines his victory plan. 

And as for your second — the second question you asked, you know, “Is it achievable,” well, that’s — you know, that’s what the two teams are going to be discussing here in coming days and weeks to see — to really kind of pick it apart and see where we can go together.

Q    And if I could just add quickly, John: What happens with this effort now to secure a 21-day ceasefire in Lebanon?

MR. KIRBY:  We’re having active discussions, as you might imagine, with our Israeli counterparts in particular about this.  Last night, it was, I think, a very strident call by, you know, a dozen or so nations to try to seek a 21-day ceasefire, a temporary ceasefire that is designed, as I said, to give diplomacy some time and some space, a little bit of breathing room here to work, because we still believe that that’s the best solution here. 

Where it goes from here is: Brett is still up in New York City, and he’s still having conversations with his counterparts, his Israeli counterparts, to see what the right next step is and if, how, and when that ceasefire can get moving.

I would just add one more thing, because I understand — I mean, you didn’t ask it this way, but I’m sure somebody will.  You know, you’ve seen President — sorry, Prime Minister Netanyahu’s comments, and we’ve seen them as well.  I would just make a couple of points here. 

Number one, we still believe an all-out war is not the best way to get people back in their homes.  If that’s the goal, an all-out war we don’t believe is the right way to do that. 

Number two, there was a lot of care and effort put into that statement.  As you can see from it, it wasn’t just the United States; several other nations joined us.  That took diplomacy as well.  That took some elbow grease to work that statement with so many other countries, including talking to our interlocutors in Lebanon and in Israel.  And we wouldn’t have made that statement, we wouldn’t have worked on that if we didn’t have reason to believe that the conversations that we were having with the Israelis in particular were supportive of the goal there. 

And the last thing I’ll say, and I kind of already said it, is: The conversations continue.  The discussions are ongoing.  Even as you and I are talking, again, Brett McGurk, Amos, they’re still up there seeing what they can do to get this moving forward. 

So, again, seen his comments.  Somebody is going to ask me about it; I know that.  All I can tell you is those conversations with our Israeli friends happened yesterday, before the statement went out, and they’re happening today. 

Q    Thank you. 

MR. KIRBY:  Yes, sir.

MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Our next question will go to Andrea Mitchell.

Q    Hi.  Thank you very much.  Thanks, Hannah.  Thanks, John.  So, you’re right, I do want to ask you about the 21 days, because there’s such a fundamental disagreement.  The Prime Minister reasserted his disagreement when he landed here in the U.S. just a couple of hours ago and said that they were going to use all their force and achieve their objectives. 

So do you have a better understanding of what their objectives are militarily, beyond getting people back in their homes?  Because you have clearly made the point, as the Secretary made this morning, that to create hostilities in the area is not going to help get people back in their homes.  Is it to abide by the U.N. resolution?  Is it to create a buffer zone?  How far to push them back?  What is your goal?  And what is your best understanding with all these conversations of what their goal is?

MR. KIRBY:  Well, I mean, I would point you to what they’ve been saying themselves.  I mean, Prime Minister Netanyahu himself said that one of his principal objectives is getting people back home.  And there’s a lot of — there’s a lot of public opinion in Israel about that exact issue, about the desire to go back home, up in the north.  And —

Q    No, I meant the military objective.  What does he —

MR. KIRBY:  I know that, but —

Q    What does he think can — okay.

MR. KIRBY:  I know that, Andrea.  But he himself said that that was his objective: to get people back home, to stabilize the situation so that people would feel comfortable doing that. 

Now, he has also said, and we have no reason to doubt, that he wants to continue to eliminate the very legitimate, lethal threats that Hezbollah poses to Israel.  I mean, just yesterday they launched a ballistic missile at Tel Aviv. 

So, he and his cabinet and the Israeli people have every right to want to thwart that threat, that challenge to their peace and security, their lives and their livelihoods.  So I would suspect that from a military perspective, that’s also weighing into their calculation. 

But, you know, I can’t answer the question any better than I did with Steve.  Seen his comments, heard them, but all I can tell you is that we wouldn’t have worked on that statement the way we did, we wouldn’t have issued it when and how we did if it wasn’t supported by the conversations that we were having with top Israeli officials yesterday, and those conversations continue today. 

Q    Thank you.

MR. KIRBY:  Yes, ma’am. 

MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Our next question will go to Alex Marquardt.  One second.  Where did you go, Alex? 

Okay, we see — oh, he is back.

Q    Hi, you got me? 

MODERATOR:  Yes. 

Q    Thanks, guys.  John, just want to ask you a little bit more on that.  So we heard from Karine earlier that this was indeed coordinated with the Israeli side.  And last night, your colleagues said pretty definitive things like “this is an important breakthrough,” “when the governments agree.”  So it sounds like there was an expectation that this would happen, and then we see Netanyahu come out and say, “We continue to hit Hezbollah with all our might.”  That doesn’t sound like a reversal or a dismissal to you from the Israeli side?

MR. KIRBY:  I think you ought to ask that question to Prime Minister Netanyahu.  What I can tell you is: The discussions we had last night we had every reason to believe were sincere.  And I will tell you, I’ve communicated with Brett this morning, and he’s having those discussions today, and he feels, again, that the Israeli side are willing to have those talks.  So that’s where we are. 

Q    But do you think there’s a difference in — you both agree that it’ll take a diplomatic solution to get people back into their homes, but do you think there’s a disagreement about how to get there, in that they believe it’s military pressure and you guys are arguing, no, it’ll take a pause?

MR. KIRBY:  Yeah, I’m not going to get into our back-and-forth here in a public setting, Alex, and I’m certainly not going to speak for what they believe or don’t believe. 

I think I’ve kind of dealt with the issue of the discussions we had yesterday and the ones we’re having today.

MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Our next question will go to Haley with Scripps. 

Q    Hey.  Thanks for doing this.  You know, given the strong rejection from Netanyahu on this temporary ceasefire and the indications that one of the hopes was that diplomatic space to continue the efforts for a ceasefire in Gaza, I’m curious how the recent language from the Israelis is impacting those efforts and if there has been any further movement in the past few days on that first ceasefire and hostage release.  Thanks.

MR. KIRBY:  I wish I could tell you that we had some kind of breakthrough to speak to.  We don’t, with respect to the ceasefire in Gaza.  But I also would add that we are still very much interested in trying to see if it can’t be moved forward.  And nothing has slackened about our desire to see if there is room for another go at this. 

But the team is still focused on it.  We still want to see it put in place.  And nobody has turned the page on it and said, “Well, that’s it.  We’re done.  We’re not interested in trying to find a ceasefire that can get the hostages home.” 

So, our team here at the National Security Council, and I’m sure the State Department as well, is still trying to work this over to see if there’s a path forward.

MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Our next question will go to Zeke with AP.

Q    Hey, John.  I just want to take one more stab at this.  What changed between last night, when the senior administration officials who briefed were calling it a breakthrough, and this morning?  Were you and was the President surprised or upset by the Prime Minister’s comments this morning, rejecting that deal?  Or was that expected?  Thank you.

MR. KIRBY:  I would say a couple of things.  It’s not clear to us that, from a practical perspective, that there isn’t cause for us to continue to have these conversations with the Israelis.

If something has changed, you’d have to talk to Prime Minister Netanyahu about what that something is.  What I can tell you is we’re still talking to the Israelis today, as we were yesterday.  And I’ll leave it at that.

And I’m not going to characterize the President’s reaction one way or the other.  His main goal is to make sure that we find a diplomatic path here to deescalate along that Blue Line and that we avoid an all-out war and escalation, not only there but elsewhere in the region.  And almost everything he’s been doing since the 7th of October has been designed to achieve that outcome. 

And so, that’s where his focus is, on trying to prevent this thing from escalating more than it already has.  And his tasking to the team in recent days is to keep working at that goal, keep trying to see what we can do to give diplomacy a fighting chance, and that’s what he really wants.

MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Our next question will go to Nick with PBS.

Q    Hey, John.  One last attempt at the same topic, but also trying to move it forward.  Do you believe that Netanyahu has backtracked from anything he said before last night?  Or do you believe that — and/or do you believe that he’s balancing competing interests?  You mentioned there’s a lot of public opinion in Israel.  Both the right and some on the left actually criticized the announcement on the call for a ceasefire deal. 

And again, trying to push this forward, is there a message that you would like to hear from Netanyahu tomorrow, during the UNGA speech, that may indicate to the U.S., to the world, frankly, to Hezbollah itself, to Nasrallah that would provide some kind of (inaudible) moving forward?  Thanks.

MR. KIRBY:  Yeah, look, I appreciate the seventh or eighth attempt here.  I can’t speak for Prime Minister Netanyahu.  I can’t answer the question why he said what he said.  And I certainly can’t begin to speculate about what considerations went into that statement, whether they were political or operational or otherwise.  Those are questions that he needs to be asked and should be given the opportunity to answer. 

What I can tell you is: That statement we worked on last night wasn’t just drawn up in a vacuum.  It was done after careful consultation, not only with the countries that signed on to it, but Israel itself.  And we had every reason to believe that in the drafting of it and in the delivery of it, that the Israelis were fully informed and fully aware of every word in it.  And we wouldn’t have done it, as I said, if we didn’t believe that it would be received with the seriousness with which it was composed. 

And the discussions that we have had, or that we had yesterday with our Israeli counterparts, are happening still today.  So, what prompted the Prime Minister’s comments?  Only he can say.  What prompted our desire to get that statement written and out the door was an earnest desire to see diplomacy having a chance here to deescalate.

Q    And the question about the UNGA speech and message that you want to hear from Netanyahu tomorrow?

MR. KIRBY:  Look, we’re not in the habit of providing speechwriting advice to foreign leaders.  The Prime Minister will speak for himself, and he’ll speak for the Israeli people in the way he sees fit, the same way that President Biden did on Tuesday. 

So, we’ll obviously be listening to hear what he has to say, of course, with great interest, as you will.  We know that the Prime Minister knows that the people of Israel have no stronger supporter than Joe Biden, not only as President of the United States, but over the course of a long career. 

And even though he and Prime Minister Netanyahu don’t see eye-to-eye on every issue, and that is clear, they absolutely share one overarching goal, and that is the preservation and the safety and security of the State of Israel.  That will never change.  We may disagree at times on how to achieve that goal, but on the things — well, a lot of things matter, but on that very big thing that matters, they certainly see eye-to-eye.

MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Our next question will go to Michael with the New York Times.

Q    Hey, John.  I will avoid becoming the ninth effort to — person to press you on (inaudible), though I think you’re still (inaudible) basic question, which is: What did Netanyahu tell the United States last night?  And did he mislead you guys?

But let’s go to an easier question on Ukraine, which is: You know, is the President going — is there anybody in the United States government and the national security team that thinks that — or that doesn’t think that Ukraine and Zelenskyy will ultimately have to come to some sort of acceptance of some sort of territorial, you know, giveaway to resolve this war? 

And is the President comfortable leaving office in a few months, you know, kind of knowing that war is going to continue on in this stalemate that won’t — you know, that doesn’t have a real path towards resolution, in part because Zelenskyy doesn’t want to confront that possibility?

MR. KIRBY:  Of course the President would like to see this war ended, Michael.  I mean, he’d like to see it ended today, and we all know that it could if Putin got the hell out of Ukraine.  But of course, that doesn’t appear to be in the offing. 

So, President Biden would very much like to see the war ended as soon as possible, given the unlikelihood of that eventuality.  And that’s why we’re doing everything we can to make sure they can prevail on the battlefield so that if and when President Zelenskyy decides he wants to enter into some sort of negotiated settlement, that he can do so from a position of strength. 

And, you know, to your first question, which I may be butchering it back to you, so if I don’t get it right, you tell me if I’m wrong.  But the way I interpreted it was: Does anybody think here at the NSC that there’s no other way for this to end without him trading territory?  Is that kind of where you were — is that what you meant?

Q    Yeah, essentially.  Right.  I mean, essentially, in the question —

MR. KIRBY:  Yeah, look — I mean, that’s going to be up to him.  And I would tell you we’re not sitting around with maps of Ukraine and markers and coming up with, you know, alternative scenarios here, or, “Gee, maybe we could convince Zelenskyy to trade this for that.”  We’re not involved in that kind of a game here.  We are — when we’re sitting there looking at the map of Ukraine, it’s about trying to understand the battlefield as it is now and trying to get ahead of where it’s going to go, and making sure that Ukraine has what it needs to be successful on that battlefield. 

But as I said many, many times, if and when and how this war ends, it’s got to be in a way that President Zelenskyy and the Ukrainian people can accept.  He gets to decide the conditions.  He gets to decide the circumstances.  And if there’s trade space, he gets to decide what that trade space is.  He’s not getting direction from the United States and the administration in one way or another when it comes to that. 

And I would just tell you that — I can’t speak for the innermost thoughts of every single policy analyst here at the National Security Council, but I can tell you that Jake is not putting them to task, getting them to think through what a negotiation could look like in terms of geography.  That’s just not where our heads are.  Everybody here that’s working this problem set is really trying to do the two things that the President said very clearly in his pool spray. 

And those two items, you know, I do want to draw you back to them as much as I can, because it wasn’t by accident that he listed two priorities: one, that they got what they need now and in the months ahead, and that every dollar we can spend before the end of his term, by God, we’re going to spend it.  And number two: that we are setting, as best we can, all the conditions for the future long-term security of Ukraine so that they can not only deter any future Russian aggression once the war ends, but defeat it, if they have to face it.  And that, of course, means obviously working with them on the reforms to eventually see a path to NATO, but also, more organically, make sure that they have a robust defense industrial base with the ability to manufacture and to procure the kinds of defense articles that they’ll need to defend themselves over the long term.

Q    That’s great.  Let me just follow up one really quick way.  I guess what I’m trying to get at with the question of territory is that there are places in the world where the U.S. does press — I mean, Israel is a perfect example.  The U.S. has been long on record pressing for a two-state solution that would ultimately require both sides to compromise on territory in the interest of long-term security. 

And I guess the question is: After two years of war that has largely stalemated, why isn’t the U.S. — I mean, obviously it’ll be up to Ukraine to make the final decision, but why isn’t the U.S. pressing for some sort of consideration that would bring the war to an end?

MR. KIRBY:  Because we believe, as we’ve said from the outset — we believe that, unlike the two-state solution, Mike, which is not — in my view, not an appropriate analogy, this was a sovereign nation with internationally recognized boundaries that was invaded by its neighbor aggressively, and remains invaded by its neighbor.  That is a vastly different scenario. 

And from the beginning, from the moment he stepped off and marched on to Kyiv, we were saying we want to see those internationally recognized boundaries fully respected and restored.  That is Ukraine, all of Ukraine, including Crimea.  It belongs to Ukraine.  We want to see that outcome. 

So I think quick — honestly, we have been very clear about geography, and that hasn’t changed.  Now, if there’s some trade space to be had there, that’s got to be up to President Zelenskyy.  But as far as President Biden and the United States is concerned, Ukraine is Ukraine.  All of Ukraine.  And the internationally recognized borders need to be respected by everybody, most especially Russia. 

Q    Thanks.  Appreciate it. 

MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Our next question will go to Barak with Axios.

Q    Hey, John.  Just a very short clarification.  I just want to see that I understand.  You said that you would not have published the statement about the ceasefire if you did not understand from the Israelis that they’re on board.  Did I understand this correctly?  Is this what you said?

MR. KIRBY:  I didn’t say it in exactly those words, but I’m not going to disagree with your assessment of it. 

Q    Thank you.

MODERATOR:  Awesome.  Thank you, everyone.  That’s all the time we have for today.  As always, if we weren’t able to get to you, send a note to the distro, and we’ll try to get back to you as soon as we can.  Thank you. 

4:46 P.M. EDT

The post On-the-Record Press Gaggle by White House National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby appeared first on The White House.

James S.  Brady Press Briefing Room

12:45 P.M. EDT

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Hi, everybody. 

Q    Hi.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Good afternoon.  Sorry.  Somebody — we’ve been gone too long.  Somebody has been messing with this stuff.

Okay.  So, the president has been briefed on Hurricane Helene, and at his direction, administration officials are in contact with their local and state counterparts to ensure that they have everything they need. 

This week, the president approved emergency disaster declaration request from the governors of Florida, North Carolina, and Georgia, when unlocked additional federal resources to — which unlock additional federal resources to help these states respond to the storm.

And the entire Biden-Harris administration stands ready to provide further assistance to impacted states as needed. 

We continue to urge residents, especially those who have been instructed to evacuate, to heed the warnings of local officials. 

With that, I have — I have here to my right, the FEMA administrator, Criswell.  Come on up. 

Deanne, thank you so much for — for being here. 

ADMINISTRATOR CRISWELL:  Yeah.  Thank you, Karine.  Good afternoon, everybody. 

As you heard, I did just finish briefing President Biden on the impacts that we are expecting to see from Hurricane Helene.  And as I told him, we have been preparing for this storm for a number of days, and we began moving resources into Florida on Monday. 

I just want everybody to know that this is going to be a multi-state event with the potential for significant impacts from Florida all the way to Tennessee, and the president wants to make sure that everyone is paying attention to the potential life-threatening impacts that this storm may bring.  And he has directed me to travel there tomorrow to assess the impacts. 

The entire state of Florida is under some type of warning right now, whether that’s a hurricane warning or a tropical storm warning, and we expect life-threatening flash flooding in the state’s north as the storm continues to move north. 

And so, I need everybody to pay attention to their local officials.  They are going to have the best information on the specific risks where you are at.  We’re already seeing impacts in Florida, and the forecast indicates that we could see up to 20 feet of storm surge. 

So, just think back two years ago to Hurricane Ian.  The peak storm surge from that was 14 feet, and we saw the amount of destruction and 150 people lost their lives, the majority of them from drowning.  So, please take this threat from storm surge seriously. 

Residents that are in these areas, they can still take action.  They can take action now to move out of harm’s way.  And remember that you may only need to go 10 or 15 miles inland to get away from the threat of the storm surge itself, because water is the number one reason that we see people lose their lives in these storms.  So, please don’t underestimate what the impacts could possibly be. 

So, at the president’s direction, we have over 1,100 personnel so far across the federal government supporting the preparedness efforts for this storm.  We also have an additional 700 personnel from FEMA that are already in these states supporting other disasters that we can quickly pivot to support any of the response needs as needed. 

Some of the resources that we have already deployed include eight search and rescue teams across Florida and Georgia, as well as resources from the Coast Guard, the Department of Defense to immediately support any lifesaving operations as needed. 

Now, the Army Corps of Engineer has power restoration teams and debris specialists who are going to be able to help restore power and support debris removal operations as soon as it is safe to do so. 

We have health and medical task forces from Health and Human Services to evaluate the impacts to medical facilities. 

We have food, water, generators, and tarps that are deployed to staging locations across the region, and so they are easily accessible and movable post-storm. 

And the Red Cross is actively standing up shelters in areas that are expected to see and feel the impacts from Helene. 

My regional administrator is currently embedded in the Florida Emergency Operations Center, as well as Incident Management Assistance Teams in Florida, Georgia, and Alabama, and we have one currently moving to North Carolina today so we can ensure seamless communications between the federal government and the needs of the states.

I’m very grateful, as you heard, President Biden quickly approved prelandfall declarations for Florida, Georgia, and North Carolina, and this allows us to immediately provide any of that lifesaving support in the coming days. 

And I’m grateful for the rest of the federal family that is there on the ground, working with us side by side, as we pr- — prepare to support the American people for what is to come over the next several days.

I just want everybody to know that the Biden-Harris administration — we are ready for this event.  We have aggressively predeployed resources.  We are postured for whatever response might be needed. 

And so, let me just say one more time before I take any questions: Take this storm seriously.  People in Hurricane Helene’s path, you need to listen to your local officials.  If they tell you to evacuate, please do so.  And if they tell you to shelter in place, then that’s what you should do.  They’re going to give you the best information that you can do for your specific situation.  Those decisions can save lives.

And with that, Karine, I’ll take questions.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  (Inaudible.)

Q    Thanks, Karine.  Thanks, Deanne.  So, this is likely to be the 21st billion-dollar weather or climate disaster this year.  So, does FEMA have the resources to keep on responding to disaster after disaster like this?

ADMINISTRATOR CRISWELL:  So, we have absolutely enough resources to continue to support the lifesaving response that we need to for this event.  I think everybody is aware that we went into Immediate Needs Funding as our Disaster Relief Fund, the — the funding was running low.  But the reason we do that is to make sure we have enough money for an event just like this.

And so, I want everybody to know that we have exactly what we need, and there are no limitations to our ability to support the response for this disaster.

As we continue to go through the recovery, though, for all of these disasters, that also takes personnel, and we’re going to continue to work through with our states about what they need and how we can best adjudicate those resources.  But we are seeing an increase, and we’re seeing a strain on our staff, with more of them deployed for longer periods of time, helping to support these communities recover.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Trevor.

Q    And just also related to the — the money here.  Some pretty substantial losses projected in terms of the crop insurance, in terms of the flood insurance.  Is there — and there’s no new money in the CR as far as this is concerned.  Is there any expectation that you’re going to have to go back with a supplemental —

ADMINISTRATOR CRISWELL:  So, we —

Q    — request?

ADMINISTRATOR CRISWELL:  Yeah.  So, we did put a supplemental request in with the CR.  It does not give us a supplemental at this time, but it gives us the ability to spend the money that was put forth in the president’s budget.  But we’re already, through INF, $9 billion — close to $9 billion in projects that we have put on hold that we can’t reimburse communities for.

Once we lift INF and once the CR goes into effect, we’ll be able to pay those, but without a supplemental, we’ll — we will be back in INF probably in the January time frame.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Weijia.

Q    Thanks, Karine.  Can you talk more about how widespread you think prolonged power outages will be and what those power restoration teams are doing to prepare?  Is there anything they can do proactively, you know, before the storm?

ADMINISTRATOR CRISWELL:  So, Florida has a really robust plan, and they have really aggressive targets to try to get the majority of people — I forget what the exact percentage is; I think it was 85 or 90 percent within 48 hours — back up.  And they have several thousand resources that have been prepositioned to come in and support Florida Power & Light or the other utilities to help them get the power back on.

We expect widespread power outages from this.  When we think about Tallahassee, it’s got a lot of tree canopy, so those trees are going to come down and impact those power lines, and the debris and the ability to detangle the debris from the power lines is what could take a long time.

The power restoration teams, they do a couple of things from the Army Corps.  One, they can help us put generators in on critical facilities to help make sure that those facilities have power, but they can also make assessments on how to prioritize some of the work so we know where we need to put our efforts to help the — the private-sector pr- — utility companies get the power restored as quickly as possible.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, Colleen.

Q    Could you talk a little bit about how the response has changed based on the severity of the storms?  I think we’re seeing an increasing — storms with increasing severity.  So, how does that change the response for you?  I mean, I know it’s more manpower, but what — what else?  How else does it change?

ADMINISTRATOR CRISWELL:  I think the biggest thing is that we want to get things in place early.  This is why we’ve been moving resources into the area since Monday and having — we know there’s a large population that’s really vulnerable in Florida, and so that’s why we have so many search and rescue teams that are able to come in and augment the really im- — impressive amount of teams that Florida already has within the state, right?  So, this is on top of what they already have. 

And so, for us, it’s making sure that we are sending more than we think that we’ll need.  And if I don’t need them, I can send them home.  What I don’t want to do is be short.  I want to make sure that I have enough that can support whatever the states might request.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead, M.J.

Q    You said that you are headed down there tomorrow.  Did you discuss with the president whether it might be possible for him to make the trip down in the coming days? 

And secondly, is there a single piece of advice or warning that you wish, in these kinds of situations, people would heed more seriously that you might want to emphasize in this setting?

ADMINISTRATOR CRISWELL:  Yeah.  So, the purpose of my visit is to assess the impacts, and I’ll be briefing him on what those impacts are.  I’ll leave it to Karine to talk with him about what, you know, actions he might take. 

But I think the — the message is: Take this seriously.  I mean, we look at the cone, and the cone is the wind, but the water is what kills people.  And so, we need to really look at where this storm surge is going to be in Florida. 

But Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, and those Appalachians, they’re going to have up to 20 inches of rain in an area that can have significant flash flooding.  And that is really life-threatening, and it comes so much faster than what we see from a storm surge, right?  They’re going to have less warning once the rain starts there, so they need to know what they’re going to do now, put those plans — plans in place today for where they’re going to go, how they’re going to contact their family and their friends, what they’re going to need to take with them — like medicine or power devices for medical reasons. 

Ha- — it’s not too late.  They should be able to put those plans together today so they can take the actions that their local officials tell them to do.

Q    Thanks.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.  Go ahead, in the back.

Q    Thank you.  You keep talking about the need to follow evacuation orders if local officials give them.  We know from past storms that people don’t always heed that not because they don’t want to but because they can’t afford to leave the area, don’t have anywhere to go, don’t have family members to help them.  Is FEMA doing anything to work on that particular issue, given what you’re talking about with water and the danger that can come from that if people stay in place?

ADMINISTRATOR CRISWELL:  Yeah.  So, part of the prelandfall emergency declaration is specifically to reimburse states and local jurisdictions for any of the costs that they incur to do sheltering and evacuation because we want them to have the resources to put in place whatever measures that they need. 

I think the important thing on the evacuation to remember is, if you’re told to evacuate, especially from the storm surge area, it doesn’t mean you have to go to a whole other state.  And I think we — we often think of those pictures of contraflow lines and — and backed-up traffic, but you really sometimes only need to go a few miles to get out of harm’s way. 

And so, the local officials should be able to tell you where there’s local evacuation centers that you can go to until the threat of the storm has passed.  And then when we get to the point where if they are displaced, then we have the long-term sheltering concerns that we’ll have to work with.  But the initial sheltering concern is just getting out of this storm’s path for right now, then we can work on what those long-term needs are. 

And that’s why the prelandfall declaration is so incredibly important — that the president approved — is to make sure that those states have the resources to stand up those shelters and to help people get to safety. 

Q    And do you feel that the state is ready to stand up those shelters?  I mean, you’re talking about how you’re going to reimburse them, but is Florida ready to do that?

ADMINISTRATOR CRISWELL:  Florida has stood up many shelters, and the American Red Cross is also there supporting that.  I just need people to evacuate and go to them. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.  We’re going to wrap it up. 

Go ahead, Jon.

Q    Thanks, Karine.  What resources are available, not only to families but also to small business, in the aftermath of this storm making landfall — resources coming not only from FEMA but also from the SBA?

ADMINISTRATOR CRISWELL:  Yeah.  There’s a number of programs that are available.  For FEMA, we specifically made some changes into our disaster declaration — the Stafford Act — recently, which allows people that work from home to actually get compensated for some of their business losses if they work from home, like if they had a computer or other equipment that they needed to do their personal — if they’re a photographer and they lost their cameras.  So, we just made that change recently, in March, to be able to compensate small-business owners that work from home. 

SBA can speak specifically about their programs, but they’ve also made some really amazing changes this year, which increases the dollar amount that people can borrow from the SBA.  It extends the time where they’re going to delay the interest until they have to pay it — or to start to repay that loan.  And it’s a tremendous resource to really help small businesses get back on their feet. 

Q    And how do you decide where to position yourself tomorrow with the storm making landfall?

ADMINISTRATOR CRISWELL:  So, we’re looking at where we think the biggest impact is going to be, and right now, it looks like it’s a dead-on hit to Tallahassee.  And so, we’ll fly as close to Tallahassee as we can get, and then I’ll meet up with the governor and his team so I can see what the impacts are, hear what the — the team is thinking.  And then we will assess, right? 

I’ve got staff on the ground that will have the intel as to where the hardest-hit areas are.  And then, typically, we like to either get an aerial view, so I can fly over and see what some of those damages are, or on the ground, if need be. 

But I’m also prepared to move up to Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, as we start to see what those impacts are and assess that. 

And because me being on the ground helps me validate some of the damages more quickly, so we can get major declarations in place faster. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.  Last question.  Go ahead.

Q    Thank you.  At the start of this year, you wrote out reforms to cut some of the red tape for the individual assistance program.  Now that so many people are in the path of this storm, can you give an update on how quickly you expect survivors to be able to tap into that, given those changes that were put in effect more than six months ago at this point?

ADMINISTRATOR CRISWELL:  Yeah.  We’ve seen some really tremendous, positive impact from the changes that we have made.  In fact, one of the changes we made was we decoupled the requirement to apply for an SBA loan in order to be eligible for our programs, and it’s really saving people several days in the process.  And we’re getting a large number of people that wouldn’t have come back to us, which is great. 

We’re also seeing people get funding quicker, right?  We have Serious Needs Assistance that can get them a very small amount of money to help with some of their immediate costs but, also, the Individual and Households Program that can help them with if they’re underinsured. 

And so, it really all depends on what their specific need is.  The money that they will see the fastest typically is that initial $750.  Any damages to their home, we still have to assess and see what those damages are and then can make that determination. 

But we have teams that go right out in the field.  They can register them in the field.  And that really helps to speed up the process. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Okay.  All right.  Thank you so much, Administrator. 

ADMINISTRATOR CRISWELL:  Thank you, Karine. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Appreciate it.  Thank you. 

Q    Thank you. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Thank you, thank you.

I just wanted to add, the president asked to have the administrator come to the podium today because of how serious we want to make sure that people out there are taking this.  They need to take this very seriously. 

And also, obviously, we wanted to lay out our federal response posture so that folks know that we are there for them, and we will obviously be there on the ground as the FEMA administrature — administrator just laid out. 

So, please, please take this very, very seriously and listen to your local officials.  Just want to reiterate that once more.

I have one more thing.  It’s a busy day here at the White House.  One of the other things that we’re going to be doing: As you all know, today, the president and the vice president are announcing new actions to redu- — to reduce gun violence and save lives.

From the American Rescue Plan to the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act to issuing more executive actions to reduce gun violence than any other administration, the president and the vice president have continued to use every tool available to protect people from epidemic — from the epidemic of gun violence. 

Homicide rates are down 17 percent compared to the same — this — the same time last year, and the number of mass shootings this year is 20 percent lower.  But more must be done. 

So, President Biden is going to sign an executive order to accelerate progress on two key priorities, combating emerging — emerging firearms threats and impr- — improving school-based active shooter drills.  

Additionally, federal departments and agency will be announcing a range of additional actions to reduce gun violence, from promoting safe gun storage and red flag laws to improving the background check system. 

The Biden-Harris administration will continue to do everything it can to put an end to this senseless, senseless violence, while calling on Congress to fulfill their duty and pass commonsense gun safety legislation.

With that, Colleen.

Q    Thanks, Karine.  Democratic Mayor of New York City Eric Adams has been charged with bribery, wire fraud, and seeking campaign funds from a foreign government.  Does the president believe he should resign? 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m not going to comment on any ongo- — on this ongoing — particular ongoing matter.  I’m going to let the DOJ speak to this. 

Q    Okay.  And then two other quick things.  Does the president hope that Vice President Kamala Harris, should she be elected president — will she continue the Office of Gun Violence Prevention?  Is he hoping —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Look, I’m not going to speak for the vice president or get ahead of — of ourselves here. 

But what I will say is, as you know, the vice president has been a leader on this issue — she leads the Office of — of Gun Violence — and has taken this seriously, not just as a vice president but throughout her career, and has been, obviously, a key partner in all of the — all of the actions that this president has done and has taken.

So, I could assur- — I — I think it’s safe to say that she will continue to lead on making sure that we deal with this epidemic.  Gun violence is an epidemic.  We need to continue to protect our communities, protect our schools. 

And so, I could assure you that she’s going to continue to stay laser-focused on this issue.

Q    Okay.  One other quick thing.  As you know, Ukraine wants to fire long-range weapons into Russia, and some Republicans today backed the idea.  I wondered why the White House doesn’t share that same assessment.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So — so, I think we can expect that one of the conversations that the two leaders will have would be on this topic.  And so, you know, there will be also a broader discussion on the significant amount of military aid we are providing Ukraine.  You saw our announcements this morning. 

Although I’m not expecting there be any new announcements on this particular action or a decision coming out of this meeting.  I expect the leaders will discuss the weapons system the president announced, as I just stated. 

And I do want to take a little bit of a step back here.  I want to remind everyone watching the briefing how the United States, how this president has mobilized a massive — a massive amount of military equipment and capability to help Ukraine really fight back, push back against Mr. Putin and his aggression.

It’s been almost three years — almost three years, and this president has been there day one.  He has been able to bring more than 50 nations together to support Ukraine in their fight for their democracy.  And so, that’s what you can expect.

And the president is very proud of the impact of that support, what it’s had, and is proud of that coalition. 

And so — and certainly, you’ll see more of that in Germany.  As we announced, the president is going to be going to Germany. 

And so, I will leave it there and not go any further.

Go ahead, Selina.

Q    Thanks, Karine.  Mayor Eric Adams suggests that he’s being targeted by the Biden administration over his criticism of the migrant crisis.  Now, this is the kind of accusation that’s similar to what we’ve heard from former President Donald Trump.  So, what is the president’s reaction to that kind of language being used from a Democrat?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Look, we have been always very clear.  The president was clear, even when he was running in 2020, that he was going to make sure that DOJ is independent, and the DOJ is handling this case independently.  I’m not going to go beyond that.

Q    And Adams was also at a reception last night with the president at the Met.  Did they talk?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I can confirm to you that the president did not see the mayor and they did not speak.

Go ahead, M.J.

Q    You just mentioned that, obviously, you expect the two leaders today to discuss the issue of the use of long-range missiles into Russia.  Do you know if the president has any openness to changing his policy stance on that?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — look, I said it’s going to be one of a range of topics that they’re going to discuss.

And let’s not forget, the president and — both presidents saw each other recently, just yesterday.  They’ve had multiple bilateral engagements.  This is a continuation of that — a continuation of the — the support that you have seen from the United States and, obviously, what the president has been able to do in the past two-plus years in bringing nations together to continue to give support to — to Ukraine.

What I said is I could expect this con- — this to come up as a topic, but I wouldn’t expect any new announcements.  I’m just not going to go beyond that.  You all will see the president momentarily and President Zelenskyy in a — in — in there — in this pool spray, as you know, in the Oval.  And so, you’ll have an opportunity to hear directly from both of them.

I just don’t have anything beyond — there’s no announcement that I would expect coming out of this —

Q    Okay.  And just —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  — new announcement.

Q    Just separately on this Lebanon ceasefire proposal that was released last night.  I’m sure you saw the prime minister’s office said, “The news about a ceasefire is incorrect.”  What is the disconnect here?  You know, we had senior U.S. officials saying last night — suggesting really strongly that they expected the two sides to agree to this proposal.  And here we are, however many hours later, and the prime minister’s office is saying no.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, a couple of things.  As you mentioned, the joint statement last night, you saw that.  We and our allies, partners don’t believe in an all-out war.  That’s not the answer here.  That’s not what we want to see.

And that is something that we’ve been pretty consistent about throughout the past several months.  Our joint statement was a clear call — it was a call for a temporary ceasefire to open up space — open up space for diplomacy to achieve a deal that allows civilians on both sides of the border to return to their homes safely and securely.  And I would add that the statement was indeed coordinated with the Israeli side. 

There are now discussions ongoing today in New York.  Our teams are continuing to have discussions, and so you’ll probably hear more later — later in the day.  But those discussions are ongoing.

Q    If it was coordinated with the Israeli side and the expectation last night, as it was shared by senior U.S. officials, was that the two sides would agree to this imminently, why are we hearing from the prime minister’s —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I would —

Q    — office today —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I would have to refer you to the prime minister’s office. 

I — I’m just laying out the facts and what we know and what we want to avoid.  We do not believe an all-out war is the answer, and we’ve been very clear about that.  The president has been very clear about that. 

I just laid out the facts and what we’re trying to do.  This is a clear call for a temporary ceasefire.  We want to provide space.  We talk about how di- — diplomacy is — is the way to move forward.  That’s what the president believes. 

I laid out that — that the statement was indeed coordinated with the Israeli side. 

I can’t speak for them.  They will have to speak for themselves. 

I — I’m just laying out what we know, how this came together, and what we — what our end goal is — right? — is that — is what we want to see. 

Q    Do you still expect an agreement to come out imminently? 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  As I — as I just mentioned, we have our teams who are in New York right now.  They’re currently having those discussions, currently negotiating or discussing this further in New York.  And so, I’m — I’m sure that we will have more to share later in the day. 

Go ahead, Francesca.

Q    Thanks, Karine.  The president never had a direct conversation with the Israeli prime minister about this.  Do you expect that he’ll call him today or that he’ll speak with him tomorrow about this?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  As you know, they have spoken many, many times — probably more than a dozen times, easily — in this past several months, almost a year now, since October 7th.  They have decades-long relationship, and so they know each other very well.  And when they have discussions, they are very honest and — and frank. 

I don’t have a conversation to read out, a call to preview at this time. 

As I stated — and I’ve said this before; we have said this before — our teams talk pretty regularly, practically on a daily basis.  And so, that certainly continues as we’re talking about this — this ceasefire, the statement that you saw from the G7 plus our key Middle East partners overnight. 

Q    So, essentially, he di- — he did not feel that he needed to talk directly with the prime minister because his team was talking to —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I mean, their teams talk regularly, as — as they’re doing right now in New York today.  And so, that is something that will continue to — continue to be the case.  But they have spoken mu- — multiple times. 

As a conversation between the prime minister and the president, I just don’t have anything to preview at this time.

Q    And one quick question on Ukraine.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Sure.

Q    His approval today of the long-range bombs, should we take that as a sign that he is more open to allowing Ukraine to strike deeper into —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — I —

Q    — Russian territory?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Look, our policy has not changed.  They’re going to talk on a range of issues today. 

What we can say and what we can commit to is that we will continue to support Ukraine as they — as they continue their fight against Mr. Putin’s aggression into Ukraine.  And so, that is our commitment.  That’s what the president is focused on.  I don’t have anything else to add.

Go ahead.

Q    Karine, on the — the long-range missile issue.  Is — does the White House have a reaction to Putin’s comments that that would invite a nuclear response on —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Here’s what —

Q    — on the United States?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Look, we have — we say this all the time: Mr. Putin can end this war today.  He can.  He started this war.  He started this war.  Not the Ukrainians — he started this war.  It could end today.  It could end today if he decides to stop the aggression that he started into Ukraine. 

And so, we have been very clear about that, and we’ll continue to do so. 

Q    And there’s been no change on the administration’s policy on NATO membership for Ukraine since the — the NATO Summit?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I don’t have anything else to share be- — beyond what we’ve been pretty clear on as it relates to that. 

Q    And then one more is: Was there any reaction to former President Trump’s comments that Ukraine’s cities are gone, questioning giving more aid to the country while they refuse to make a deal, or this comment that he wants them to win, kind of suggesting that Demo- — he wa- — that he — they want —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Look —

Q    — Zelenskyy wants Democrats to win the election?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Look, I am not going to respond to everything that the former president says, especially since he’s a candidate in this election. 

The president has been very clear to his commitment — not just him but more than 50 nations that are supporting Ukraine in their efforts to fight for their democracy, to fight against Mr. Putin’s aggression. 

And let’s not forget, the president was able to make NATO stronger so that we can be able to continue to do the work that NATO is supposed to do.  And — and an example is what is happening in Ukraine.  And so, that is his focus.  That’s going to be continued. 

What he is going to — you’ll see this today in the bilat that he has with President Zelenskyy.  You saw that this week at the U.N. assembly, when he’s — he met with mult- — he saw multiple leaders, obviously.  He was with multiple leaders and had a couple of opportunities, as we read out to all of you, to — to meet with some of them. 

And so, this is what the president is going to co- — going to focus on, and that’s what we- — I’m going to speak to. 

Go ahead.

Q    Thank you, Karine.  On the Zelenskyy meeting, why is it that President Biden and Vice President Harris are holding these meetings separately?  Is the suggestion that one would say something different than the other and that there might be some dueling diplomacy there?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  There’s no dueling diplomacy.  It’s not unusual.  The vice president has met with President Zelenskyy separately many times.  Nothing new here. 

Q    Okay.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I wouldn’t read too much into it.

Q    And then critics have said that Zelenskyy’s trip to Pennsylvania was a political stunt.  Did the administration communicate at all with Ukraine on who would be attending that trip or make any effort to make it a bipartisan event?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, let me just lay this down, because I know that there’s been a lot of talk about this.  So, the Ukrainians asked to visit the facility which employs American workers, as you know, who are manufacturing critical supplies that the Ukrainian military is using every day on the front lines of freedom because of its centrality of the — of their — to their country’s continued existence. 

This came from Ukrainian, not us.  This is something that they wanted to do.

After they made that request, DOD did what it has done for years: figure out how to provide transportation for foreign leaders traveling on U.S. soil, which is common, which happens when they come to the U.S.  And the whole world knows this is someone Putin wants dead.  He’s made very clear when it comes to President Zelenskyy. 

Also, just two months ago, President Zelenskyy traveled to Utah and held an event with the Republican governor, a very similar event, and Republican officials were there at that event in Utah.  And there wasn’t a single demand — not one, not one single demand — for an investigation when that occurred a couple months ago in Utah. 

So, this was business as usual for a Ukrainian request during wartime — during wartime.  And so, I — I would encourage — we would encourage the House Republicans to drop this, these kind of — this is a political stunt.  They need to drop this.  And — and anything else, any — I think I gave a lot here, a lot of layou- — good layout of how this all occurred, but anything else specific I would for- — I would certainly refer you to DOD.

Q    Just clarifying, though, that the administration didn’t — or the campaign, I guess, didn’t play a role in determining the guest list, because they’re — they’re claiming that having no Republicans there in a battleground state made it effectively a campaign event.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — this is something that Ukrainians asked for.  They did this a couple months ago in Utah — in Utah with a Republican governor, and Republican elected officials were there as well.  We didn’t hear any type of investigation request when we went to a Republican state.  We didn’t.

Q    On the gun event today.  What kind of gun does the vice president have, and when did she buy it?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  That’s something for her office to speak to. 

Q    The reason I’m asking is because you have this event today, but the VP, as district attorney, sponsored Proposition H in 2005.  It would have banned handguns within San Francisco city limits and required that residents turn in the handguns that they already owned by a certain deadline or face mandatory jail time.  But she’s out on the campaign trail now saying that she’s a proud gun owner and is not going to take away your guns.  So, can the White House get us an answer on that?  Because she hasn’t and her — her campaign officials also haven’t answered that question, even on television. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Look, a couple of things here.  When it comes to the VP and — and owning a gun, she can speak for herself.  The campaign could speak for that.  Her office can speak for that.  I’m not — that — that’s for — for them to speak to. 

It is not in co- — there is no conflict here when we’re saying that we want to see responsible gun ownership.  That’s what we want to see: responsible gun ownership.  I think that is what’s important here. 

At the end of the day, gun violence is an epidemic in our — in our country.  Think about our schul- — schools, our grocery stores.  It’s an epidemic. 

We have done the work.  We have seen violent crimes go down because of the work that this president and this vice president has done.  There is an office to prevent gun violence, and that is something that she leads. 

But we’re not — we’re asking for responsible gun ownership.  That’s what we want to see.  That’s what’s impartant — important here. 

And if people don’t — don’t want to — don’t understand that, I don’t know how to further even explain that to them. 

Our kids, our schools — there’s an epidemic here.  There’s an epidemic.  There are drills happening in our schools right now — that’s something that the president is going to speak to — that is traumatizing some of our kids because of this epidemic. 

And so, that should be the focus: How do we make sure that we end this epidemic?  We want to see responsible gun ownership.  That’s what we want to see. 

Q    I think the question is not about responsible gun ownership, though.  It’s about, you know, her past position, saying that — supporting a measure that would have required that non-law enforcement or military residents of a city turn in their handguns, so no gun ownership or face possible mandatory jail time, versus what she’s saying now.  And then also not answering the question of her gun ownership.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Again, that’s something that she’s going to have to speak to.  What I can speak at this moment in this time, what we’ve been trying to do for the last three and a half years is making sure that we are dealing with an epidemic that is existing in our communities, that we see in our schools, that we see in — in grocery stores. 

It is an epidemic here, and what we’re trying to do is prevent gun violence.  And we have seen that go down — we have — because of this work, because of the executive actions, because of a bipartisan legislation that was able to be done under this administration to deal with gun violence, something that we hadn’t seen in 30 years. 

So, there is some bipartisan support here to deal with a responsible way of having gun ownership.  We need to do more here.  We need to do more.

Go ahead.

Q    Thank you, Karine.  Back on the long-range missiles into Russia.  Our latest reporting is that President Biden has not changed his position on this in part because the Pentagon has assessed it would do very little to change the trajectory of the war.  So, does the president plan to be blunt with Zelenskyy about that assessment today and to give him a yes-or-no answer at least as far as it stands today? 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, again, I’m not expecting any new announcements.  That is something that I’m going to be clear about.  What our focus here is is that we are focused on ensuring — ensuring that Ukraine has what it needs to prevail in this war.  That is the president’s focus. 

That’s what they’re going to continue to discuss about.  That’s what they’re going to — the president is going to continue to support Ukraine on — not just us, the 50-plus countries that the president was able to get together to support Ukraine, making NATO stronger. 

I’m not going to get into any reporting about this.  I’ve been very clear.  And you’re going to see both presidents momentarily in the — in the bilat.  You’ll hear directly from the president.  And so, I’ll just leave it there.

Q    Okay.  And then, following up again on the ceasefire deal in Lebanon.  You said that the statement was coordinated with Israel.  Are you saying that the U.S. has any reason to believe that, despite what we are seeing and despite the public comments, Israel agrees with the U.S.? 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  What I am saying is that they’re g- — discussions continue in New York.  I laid out the facts as they were — as they are and wanted to be very clear about that. 

Let me just — really just read out a couple of things from the joint statement that you all saw from the G7, plus key partners — Middle East ca- — partners:

“The situation between Lebanon and Israel since October 8th, 2023 is intolerable and presents an unacceptable risk of a border — of a broader regional escalation. This is in nobody’s interest, neither of the people of Israel nor of the people of Lebanon. 

It is time to conclude a diplomatic settlement that enables civilians on both sides of the border to return to their homes in safety. 

Diplomacy however cannot succeed amid an escalation of this conflict.” 

So, we want to see a ceasefire — a 20-day ceasefire.  Those discussions continue.  It was something that we laid out, right?  It was a — a plan that we laid out.  And so, we want to certainly see that move forward and those discussions continue in New York with our teams.

Q    And you’ve made that abundantly clear, but I guess my question is, Israel is not on the list of countries that came up with the proposal or has agreed to it.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah, you’re right.  It was a G7 —

Q    So —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  — G7, plus the key Middle East partners that — that put — put forward this — this joint statement last night. 

Q    So, why do you have any reason to believe that they’re going to agree to this?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  As I stated, and you put — pointed this out when you asked me your question: Israel was aware of this statement.  And now — what I can tell you right now, we are having continued discussions.  That is happening with our teams in New York. 

And I’m not going to get into private diplomatic engagement, but I can assure you, these conversations are continuing. 

Q    Thank you, Karine. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead.

Q    Just a quick follow-up on that statement that you read.  It refers to the situation as a “situation,” “a conflict,” and an “escalation.”  Do we agree at the White House that what we’re witnessing between Israel and Lebanon right now is, in fact, war?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m not going to get into semantics from here.  What we know and what we are seeing is that this cannot continue, and we want this to end.  Right?  We want a peaceful solution here. 

I’m no- — I’m just not going to get into semantics from here.

Q    I guess I asked because we’ve heard the president say, as he said multiple times this week, that he wants to avoid a full-scale war —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    — an all-out war.  He said it remains a “possibility.”  That’s why they’re pursuing this diplomatic solution. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    But, I guess, just for our understanding of what — what that — what an all-out war looks like, versus what we’re witnessing now. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I mean, look, I’m not going to get into — here’s — here’s what we want to see.  We want to see a 21-day ceasefire to give us the space to have that conversation so that we can have a negotiation to end this.  That’s what we want to see. 

And so, we believe this gives us an opportunity to do this by calling for a 21 ceasefire — 21-day ceasefire, to be more clear. 

And so, it’s important.  It is intolerable what’s happening.  It cannot continue.  For both sides, it cannot continue.  And so, we’re going to do everything in our power.  The president has been very clear to get to that point. 

I think it was important.  It was important to see a joint statement from the G7 and key Middle East partners.  I think it was important to see that.  It is — you see — you see countries coming together and seeing what’s happening.  The tensions need to stop.  We need to get to a ceasefire. 

And so, that is what we’re trying to get to here.  We’re going to continue to have this discussion on getting to that 21-day ceasefire.  That’s continuing in New York.  As you know, UNGA continues — right? — even though we’re back here.  And so, our teams are there.  They’re having those discussion.  They’re doing these diplomatic conversation. 

You hear us talk about it all the time: Dipl- — diplomatic resolution is key, and that’s what we’re trying to get to.  And that’s what I think you can see, the type of movement that you have seen from this president — right? — when he was at UNGA, having conversations with other leaders.  And now we’ve come to a place where we have put this forward, and this is what we believe.  We see this 21-day ceasefire — it gives us the space — it gives us the space to have that conversation. 

Q    Thank you.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Go ahead.

Q    Thank you, Karine.  I’m going to have another go at the ceasefire. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Sure.

Q    So, the White House said that you don’t want to see a wider war, and you wanted to see this 21-day ceasefire.  But yesterday, a senior administration official described this proposal as a “breakthrough.”  So —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  A — a “breakthrough”?

Q    Yeah.  So, what makes you believe that (inaudible) is listening to you when they did not listen to you over maybe 10 months and the White House failed to secure a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas?  The — the party changes.  Now it’s Israel and Hezbollah, as opposed to Israel and Hamas.  So, where do you get this optimism?  When the president always say we are two days away from securing the ceasefire, we’re three days away — until now, you’re unable to secure a ceasefire and release U.S. hostages.  So, where is this optimism coming that both Hezbollah and Israel can listen to the White House? 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, here’s the thing.  As I stated, our teams have been in discussion.  The president certainly has been engaging our teams, in particular, with Israel and Lebanon throughout this week.  And based on those conversations — right? — we have had with Israel and Lebanon, and we have had with our partners as well, we felt comfortable in releasing this statement because of those ongoing dialogue, that diplomatic conversation — resolution that we’re trying to get to calling for a ceasefire.

And it is up to the parties to respond.  I mean, it is.  It is up to the parties to respond. 

But we felt comfortable in releasing that statement last night because we have been having those discussions with Lebanon and Israel.

And — but to your point, it is up to the parties to respond.

Now we put out the statement — the joint statement last night.  Conversations continue, discussions continue in New York, and so we’re going to continue to move that way.  But we have to do something, right?  We have to continue to act.  And diplomacy is the way to deal with what we have been seeing. 

Q    I understand.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Right.

Q    But does the White House have leverage over either party so we don’t go to a wider war? 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  We’re trying to prevent a wider war.  That is what we’ve been working towards for some time, and we have had these discussions with both Israel, with Lebanon, with our — our partners, and we felt comfortable enough to release this statement.  We believe that diplomatic resolution is key here, and we — we can’t stop.  We got to continue to try, right?

But it is up to our partners to respond.  It truly is. 

But just because we released the statement, it doesn’t stop there.  It doesn’t.  So, we’re going to have diplomatic discussions as it’s happening in New York.  It doesn’t stop from last night — releasing this joint statement.  And we’ll see where we get.  We’ll see where we get to.

Q    One — one last question.

Q    Karine —

Q    The number would be in — the people who are being killed in Lebanon is over 600 now, 2,000 wounded.  Do you believe that these are legitimate target, including that the — the number of the dead also are women and children?  And do you believe that Israel still operate within international law?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Here’s what I can say.  We want to see the tensions end.  We want to see a ceasefire.  That is what we’re — it is — it is not — it’s — what we’re seeing right now — and this is in our statement — it is intolerable, what’s going on right now.  It cannot continue, and it’s not good for either side.  It is just not.  This is why we’re trying to get to a diplomatic solution here. 

And you mentioned children and women.  Nobody wants to see that.  We don’t want to see that.  And so, we’re trying to get to a diplomatic solution.  That’s why we called for — you know, we laid out a path, a call for a 21-day ceasefire, and that’s why we’re continuing to have these diplomatic solutions — right? — diplomatic conversations. 

We have to do this.  We have to.  That is the way out of this.

And I know we have to wrap pretty soon.  Go ahead, Gerren.

Q    Thanks, Karine.  In response to a criminal complaint filed against Donald Trump and J.D. Vance, Congressman Clay Higgins of Louisiana, in a social media post, described Haitians as, quote, “gangsters” and Haiti as, quote, the “nastiest country in the western hemisphere.”  He has since deleted that post.  CBC Chairman Steven Horsford tried to censure him in the House yesterday.  It was blocked by Republicans.  But what is the White House’s reaction to Higgins’ post and the failed effort to hold him accountable?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I — look, I’m not going to speak to House actions and how they go about their business.  That is for them to decide how they’re going to deal with individual congressional members. 

What I will say more broadly — and we have been very clear from here, the president has been clear, the vice president has been clear — I think what we are seeing right now, what we have heard from national leaders about what is going on in Springfield, Ohio — the baseless, baseless lies and conspiracy theories — it’s dangerous and it is false.  And to go after immigrants in that way who have — who are — who are there legally, helping a community economically, who are welcomed in that community, and saying these baseless lies is dangerous. 

And so, what this president and this vice president believes is that we cannot pull apart our communities.  They want to bring together our communities.  That is what you have been seeing over the last three and a half years. 

And conspiracy theories like this are harmful.  And we have seen this already, how dangerous this is, how dangerous this is to go after, in this particulars instance, Haitian migrants who were welcomed in that community.  And it has not just been denounced from us — denounced from the governor of Ohio, denounced by the police department — local police department, the city manager of Springfield.  I mean, on and on, by Republicans, who have denounced this. 

And so, it’s unfortunate that we have national leaders who are playing political stunts and political games.  And so, that is what we’re going to continue to speak to.  We are about bringing our communities together, not tearing them apart. 

Q    Just one more question.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Sure.

Q    Death row inmate Marcellus Williams was executed in Missouri on Tuesday, despite concerns about evidence and jury selection process in his 1998 case.  Despite the St. Louis County prosecutor and the victim’s family requesting that he live, Missouri’s governor, attorney general, and the Supreme Court ultimately failed to intervene. 

Considering this and the president’s stance against the death penalty, what does he personally think of Williams’ execution?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, obviously, I can’t speak to this case spe- — specifically.  I can’t do that from here. 

But the president has long talked about his serious concerns about the death penalty as currently implemented and whether it is consistent with the values fundamental to our sense of justice and fairness.  He supports the at- — the attorney general’s decision to issue a moratorium on federal executions while the Department of Justice conducts a comprehensive review of policies and procedures governing the federal death penalty. 

And so, I’ll leave it there. 

I know I got to go.  Go ahead.  Go ahead.

Q    Thank you, Karine.  Just to follow up again on the Lebanon.  Is the administration meeting at all with Prime Minister Netanyahu while he’s in the U.S.?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I don’t have any meetings to preview.

What I can tell you, as I’ve said multiple times, our teams in New York are meeting.  And so, I will just leave it there.  And — and they’re in regular conversation as it re- — as it relates to the Israeli government.  Our teams here are in regular conversations on a daily — practically daily basis.  And so, the teams are in New York having — having meetings about this particular ceasefire call that we put forward. 

Q    And you mentioned that the efforts doesn’t stop with the announcement last night. 

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Say that one more time.

Q    You mentioned that the diplomatic efforts —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  No, it hasn’t.

Q    — has not stopped.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I mean, it’s happening right now in New York.

Q    Right.

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yes.

Q    My question is: In order to make it different than, you know, the announcement that obviously President Biden was comfortable in announcing a few months ago on the Gaza ceasefire — in order to make that different than the announcement he made last night with other leaders, would he consider conditioning aid to Israel?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I don’t have anything else to — to lay out beyond the statement that you saw from not just us, the G- — the G7 leaders and also key Middle East partners as well.  Don’t have anything beyond that. 

That has that — we have not changed, obviously, our position on that.  We want to have a diplomatic resolution.  That is what we have been saying for some time now, and this is one of the ways that we want to go — move forward on this.

Q    Just very briefly also on —

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.

Q    — on Afghanistan.  The Taliban have formally sought to join the upcoming BRICS Summit.  What is the administration’s stance on the Taliban’s bid to join BRICS?  And how do you assess the geopolitical implications of Taliban’s growing ties with China and Russia?

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, we’ll let the Taliban speak for themselves here.  But we have been very clear that we judge the Taliban by what they do, not by what they say.  We’ve been very consistent about that. 

The Taliban want international legitimacy, to be removed from sanction lists, and foreign financing to restart the Afghan economy.  These aspirations require the Taliban to live up to their commitments.  At minimum, Afghanistan cannot strengthen its economy unless women are able to participate in all aspect of society without limitations. 

So, we will continue to engage with the Taliban on matters of our interest, for example, on respect for the rights of women and girls and the return of wrongfully detained U.S. citizens.  And that’s how we’re going to move forward with them. 

All right.  We got to go?

AIDE:  Yeah.  

MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.  Thanks, guys. 

Q    Thank you, Karine.

1:37 P.M. EDT

The post Press Briefing by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell appeared first on The White House.

Via Teleconference

9:33 P.M. EDT

MODERATOR:  Good evening, everyone.  Thanks so much for joining, especially on such short notice.  As a reminder, this call is on background, attributable to senior administration officials.  The contents of this call are embargoed until the completion of the call.

For your awareness, not for your reporting, on the call today we have [senior administration official] and [senior administration official]. 

We have limited time, so I’ll turn it over to [senior administration officials] for a few words at the top and then take as many questions as we can.

[Senior administration officials], I’ll turn it over to you.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Thank you, Eduardo.  Thanks, all, for joining.  And again, I know it’s a late evening and short notice, so appreciate it. 

Over the last 48 hours or so, the President and senior advisors have been engaging with the parties in the conflict along the Israel-Lebanon Blue Line and with partners around the world — both partners in the Gulf and the Middle East, as well as with partners in Europe and Asia — to reach a consensus for a call for a ceasefire that you have seen that we are issuing tonight. 

The ceasefire will be for 21 days, along the Blue Line.  During those 21 days, the parties — we will negotiate towards a potential resolution of the conflict that has been ongoing since Hezbollah launched the attack on October 8th, and to reach a comprehensive agreement along the Blue Line that allows for residents to return to their homes in both Lebanon and Israel. 

This has been an all-out effort by the administration to reach this moment.  We are grateful to both the Israelis and Lebanese government in working tirelessly to get to this moment. 

This is a call for a ceasefire in Lebanon.  During those 21 days, while we’re negotiating in Lebanon and Israel, we will also work with our partners on seeing what we have done over the last several months consistently.  And I’ll let [senior administration official] talk about the negotiations in Gaza. 

But the 21-day ceasefire, I want to stress, is for a ceasefire in Lebanon and across the Blue Line only.  The discussions towards a potential full agreement along the Blue Line will be accompanied also by negotiations in Gaza. 

And I’ll turn it over to [senior administration official] for comment on that. 

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Yeah, thank you.  Just briefly to reemphasize, I think this is a very important statement joined by — together with the G7 and together with three of our very close Arab partners with important interests in Lebanon.

As you will see, there is a reference in the joint statement to U.N. Security Council Resolution 2735, which relates to Gaza.  That resolution, just for awareness and reminder, is the three-phase hostage deal that the President laid out in May.  That is what that Security Council resolution emphasized. 

And of course we recognize, and the statement says explicitly, that opening up diplomatic space for these 21 days to pursue the agreement in Lebanon, of course we hope that it might also open up diplomatic space as well to galvanize efforts on the very important primary effort we have to bring the hostages home. 

So that references the three-phase deal that we’ve been working on.  But this is an important breakthrough on the Lebanon side, given all that has gone on there, particularly over the last few weeks.  But, you know, we will try to use the space that it provides wisely on all fronts.

MODERATOR:  Thanks.  With that, we have time for a couple of questions.  First up, we’ll go to Zeke Miller. 

Q    Thanks so much.  You just called this a breakthrough.  What assurances do you have from the Israelis and from the Lebanese government and Hezbollah that they will actually accept this temporary ceasefire and that you can actually get a sustainable period of calm, that you can have that diplomatic space that you say you need?  I mean, are you prematurely declaring victory here?  Thank you.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Well, the parties are going to respond for themselves to the call, but I can share that we have had this conversation with the parties and felt this was the right moment to issue the call based on our discussions.  They are familiar with the text.  And again, we’ll let them speak to their actions of accepting the deal in the coming hours.

MODERATOR:  Next up, we’ll go to the line of MJ Lee.

Q    Hi.  Can you talk to us a little bit about why 21 days?  And also, when you were saying before, “We will negotiate towards” a comprehensive agreement, do you expect that the U.S. will be —

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Can you speak up a little bit?  It’s hard to hear you — if you don’t mind. 

Q    Yeah.  When you say “We will negotiate towards” a comprehensive agreement, do you expect that the U.S. is going to be as heavily engaged as you all have been for the duration of those three weeks as you have been in the last couple of days?

And my first question was if you could explain how you got to 21 days for the duration of this recommended ceasefire.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Sure.  We — 21 days, really, is we were looking for a period of time that would be a sustained space that was long enough to allow for negotiations in a realistic basis to be able to reach a complicated agreement during that period of time.  So that’s why 21 days.  There’s no real magic formula to it.  It was something that we felt was long enough to sustain it and one that the parties could agree to. 

Second, on the negotiations: Look, over the last several months, since October 8th, we have been engaging consistently with the parties in Lebanon and in Israel to see what we can do to articulate an outline, an agreement that would enable returning to calm and security along that line.  And it was always going to have to be more than just a ceasefire, because it would be unacceptable for Israeli residents to return to their homes in the north if there weren’t security arrangements on the Lebanese side that prevented Hezbollah from sitting on the border and ensuring that they were secure from a October 7th-like attack in the future. 

So, we have had those discussions for quite some time.  We expect to build on those — on the premise of the conversation we’ve had over the last few months, and to turn that into a comprehensive agreement. 

Again, that is the space that we’re creating with this ceasefire.  And then, no guarantees, but we’re hopeful that this will give us the time necessary to achieve it. 

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  I’ll just emphasize: The objective is an agreement, along the lines that we’ve been working on, that would give citizens and civilians the confidence, the security arrangements to return to their homes.  That’s an objective we very much share with the Israelis.  We want to see civilians return on both sides of the border.  And the objective is to conclude that agreement within this 21-day period.

MODERATOR:  We have time for two more questions.  Next up, we’ll go to Alex Ward.

Q    Yeah, very quickly, are you now (inaudible) that Israel’s strategy of escalate to deescalate worked because it led to this moment?  And I’ll leave it that.  Thanks.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Look, we have been clear for a long time that we want to identify moments of opportunity to be able to reach a resolution here.  We have consistently said that, ultimately, a solution to bringing the residents home safely and having the security for a long period of time would only be achievable through a diplomatic solution. 

We believe, regardless of what has happened on the battlefield over the last several days, weeks, the moment we feel is now to achieve that diplomatic resolution to get there.  Military means on their own will not be able to achieve that.  That has been our publicly stated policy, and I think both sides agree with that notion, which is why we are, today, at the moment that we’re in.

MODERATOR:  Our last question will go to David Sanger.

Q    Thanks very much.  I’m trying to understand who you think is going to agree to the 21-day ceasefire.  Do we believe the Hezbollah leadership and Nasrallah is behind this?  Or do we believe, in the end, that he would not sign up for it?  And who would then — what are you hearing from the Israeli government specifically on this? 

What I’m trying to get at is how strongly we should all suggest in our stories that this is going to come to pass and why you think, if it does, it builds you some momentum for Gaza.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  So, I’ll let [senior administration official] answer the last piece on Gaza. 

But, look, we negotiate consistently.  We negotiate and we deal with the sovereign state of Lebanon, with its leadership.  We have been doing that for months.  For the last 48 hours, we have been doing that non-stop, all day and night. 

They are responsible in speaking for the state of Lebanon and for everything that happens on that side of the border.  Who they negotiate with and deal with as far as the non-state actors in Lebanon, that is — I think they’re aware of the responsibility that they have to speak on behalf of the country, for the state. 

So I think you know how this works.  So our expectation is when the government of Lebanon and when the government of Israel both accept this, this will carry and — to be implemented as a ceasefire on both sides of the Blue Line for the period of the 21 days. 

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  I’ll just say, David, on — again, this is a deal about Lebanon, so how could it poss- — might it impact the hostage talks?  I don’t want to speculate too much.  I will say a couple things. 

I mean, Sinwar, we know he’s a decision-maker for Hamas.  Obviously, we’ve seen throughout the hostage talks, everything has to go into him.  He also wants a regional war.  That’s something he has basically said in a statement two weeks ago, praising the Houthi ballistic missile attack.  He talked about a long-term war of attrition.  I think he’s been hoping that there’d be a broader, kind of regional conflict and all these other groups would join in.  And frankly, we’ve done an awful lot — an awful lot over the last 11 months to ensure that actually does not happen.  We’ve done that through military means, through diplomatic means, through back-channels and everything else. 

And I think buying some time and space in Lebanon, and particularly if we can conclude this very important agreement — which would benefit the people on both sides of the border, and I think we have a lot of that worked out — it would buy us some time and space to try to pursue an arrangement in Gaza along the lines of the hostage deal we’ve been discussing. 

And if Sinwar understands there is not going to be a broader regional conflict, there really is a choice here: You do the deal, release the hostages, and you get an awful lot of calm in Gaza.  That deal is on the table.  It means that the war stops in Gaza.  It means massive humanitarian relief.  Everything we talked about, that’s very much on the table, kind of ready to go, if we can work out some of the arrangements on the release of hostages and exchange of prisoners. 

So, I mean, we’ll have to see.  But I think this does — it does shake things up, and we’ll try to use the time and space — and that’s why the statement talks about diplomatic space — wisely, again, focused primarily on Lebanon, but we’ll see if it opens up some possibilities on the Gaza side, because we do need to bring the hostages home, and we remain very focused on that. 

I’d say the President, throughout the week here in New York, was focused on this constantly in almost every conversation he had with world leaders.  We had a very important pull-aside this afternoon with President Macron of France, where the President — the two presidents and our teams were able to work out some of the arrangements that we were discussing here throughout the day. 

And of course, President Biden and President Macron issued a joint statement tonight, commensurate with the broader statement by the G7, UAE, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia. 

So, a lot going on.  Of course, the President remains deeply engaged in this as the days continue, including as we continue the week here in New York.  The President is back in Washington; we’re all here with Tony Blinken, the whole team, to continue to work.

MODERATOR:  Thanks, everyone.  That’s all the time we have for today.  We’re glad to take your follow-up questions as they come.

As a reminder, this call was on background, attributable to senior administration officials, and the embargo is now lifted.  Thanks so much for joining.

9:48 P.M. EDT

The post Background Press Call on the Situation on the Border Between Israel and Lebanon appeared first on The White House.

3:44 P.M. EDT
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Hey, guys.  Sorry —
 
Q    Hey!
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  — for the delay.  How’s everybody doing?
 
Q    How are you?
 
Q    Good.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  All right.  As you all know, we’re on our way to New York City and tomorrow President Biden will attend the 79th meeting of the U.N. General Assembly. 
 
When President Biden came to office nearly four years ago, he pledged to restore American leadership on the world stage. 
 
The president’s engagements at UNGA this week will reflect his vision for the world, where countries come together to solve big problems.  And it will be an opportunity for him to reaffirm how this approach has pro- — produced results for the American people and for the world. 
 
Tomorrow morning, the president will deliver an address to the U.N. General Assembly outlining his vision for how the world should come together to resolve these big problems and defend fundamental principles, such as the U.N. Charter. 
 
Throughout his engagements in New York, the president will rally global action to tackle the world’s most pressing challenges, including climate change; the opioid epidemic; mobilizing resources for developing countries; managing the risk and benefits of artificial intelligence; and helping end the brutal wars in Gaza, Ukraine, and Sudan; among many others — on the many other critical — critically important issues.
 
With that, Aamer?
 
Q    So, what — what kind of, sort of, I guess, work on the Hezbollah aspect of ending the war in the Middle East has been going on in addressing the speech? 
 
And then, I think, just also largely, 270 people, I think, at least, died today in Lebanon.  Huge swaths of the south are being told to move.  Is this an all-out war now?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, as it relates to just the escalation that we’re seeing currently in the Middle East, look, we’re concerned.  You heard that from the president yesterday when he talked to some of your colleagues when asked the question. 
 
The risk of escalation is real.  And so, we continue to believe a diplomatic resolution is both achievable and urgent.  Our commitment to Israel’s security is ironclad and unwavering against all Iran-backed threats, including Hezbollah. 
 
The conflict along the Blue Line between Israel and Hezbollah has gone on for long enough.  It’s in — it’s in — it’s in everyone’s interest to resolve it quickly and diplomatically, and that’s where we’ve been.  That’s what we continue to say.  We need to see a diplomatic resolution.  That’s what the president is going to continue to call for. 
 
That’s why we’ve been working around the clock on the ceasefire deal, the — that hostage deal — yes, get hostages home; yes, get that increase of — of aid into Gaza; and to stop the war. 
 
But we believe that by doing that, it would certainly help with the tensions in the region.  And so, a diplomatic resolution — that’s what we’re going to continue to work towards. 
 
Q    The address itself, are we going to see a huge sort of focus on the Blue Line?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  And so, look, I’m not going to get ahead of the president.  I kind of laid out a little bit of broad strokes of what the president is going to focus on, but I’m going to let him obviously speak to this. 
 
I talked about the importance of working together to end the wars that we’re seeing.  Right?  I talked about Gaza.  I talked about Ukraine and also Sudan. 
 
And so, obviously, the president will lay out his vision, his — his thinking, and I — it will be an important moment.  So, as I like to say: Stay tuned. 
 
Q    What — what will he say about Ukraine in terms of, you know, the — the increasing support for Ukraine?  You’ve got Zelenskyy coming, who’s going to present a peace plan.  The president is going to meet with him Thursday. 
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah.
 
Q    What will he — how — what — talk about that piece.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, as far as it relates to Thursday, the president certainly is looking forward to sitting down, having that bilat with President Zelenskyy when he comes to the White House.  I expect the leaders will discuss the state of the war and the latest development on the battlefield and the United States’ strong support for Ukraine and its defense against Russia aggression — Russian aggression. 
 
So, we have been particularly focused over the last two months on helping Ukraine strengthen their air defenses and protect its energy grid against Russian strikes.  The president is also looking forward to hearing from President Zelenskyy about the strategic planning for the months ahead. 
 
The president and the vice p- — and the vice president have been clear that their commitment to stand with Ukraine until it prevails in the war is unshakable.  And so, I expect you’ll hear more of that on Thursday. 
 
And so, I think that — that’ll certainly be the focus: our continued engagement, our continued support for Ukraine and their, kind of, thinking as well as it relates to the peace plan.
 
So, look, we’ve al- — we’ve been very clear when it comes to that particular issue.  We support Ukraine’s pursuit of a just, lasting, and c- — comprehensive peace to this war.  And the president is committed to providing the Ukrainian military with the equipment they need to strengthen their position. 
 
And so, we — you know, on that particular subject, though, the — we have not been fully briefed on that, and so — on President Zelenskyy’s victory plan, to be specific.  And so, I don’t want to get ahead of that. 
 
So, our understanding is President Ze- — Zelenskyy intends to share further details about the plan with us soon.  And so, we’re — we look forward to — to having those discussions. 
 
Q    And — and just one more thing.  This is his last time to — to appear before this — the body as president.  Is he going to have a lot of pull-asides with different world leaders?  What — what are you expecting there?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, look, you know, at these types of — of gatherings, summits, there tends to be some pull-asides.  So, we’ll certainly read that out if tho- — if they do happen.  You know, those kind of happen on the ground, spontaneously.  So, you know, we’ll see what happens. 
 
I would say NSC is going to be giving a — a backgrounder later — later this afternoon, I believe, around 5:30.  So, they’ll certainly share more of what you all can expect the president’s — kind of what the president is going to be doing, what we’re going to be doing more broadly for UNGA this week.  But —
 
Q    Given the rising tensions — or what’s going on in the Middle East, specifically Lebanon, I believe Prime Minister Netanyahu will be giving remarks at the U.N. as well.  Can we expect any sort of — maybe a phone call with President Biden, meeting, just given the — what’s going on in Lebanon?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, what I can say is that, as you know, the president and the — the prime minister have a long-standing — decades — long-standing relationship.  They are able to — because of that decades-long relationship, they’re able to have those really direct conversations.  And so, I — and they have spoken, gosh, more than a dozen times easily — and I might be undercounting that — over the past — almost a year now since — certainly, after what we saw happen on October 7th last year. 
 
I don’t have anything right now to share about any — any conversation, any calls.  But certainly, our team — our team here at the White House are in regular conversations, regular discussions on a daily basis — regular basis with the Israeli government. 
 
Q    President Trump earlier, like right before we took off, said that China is not living up to the Phase One agreement.  I was just wondering if the White House has any comment to —
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  I’m just not going to comment on —
 
Q    Okay.
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  — on what he’s saying as a candidate.
 
Q    On engagements, the Iranian delegation is in town.  Are there going to be any conversations between them and American officials and on what? 
 
And then, secondly, President Biden has supported U.N. Security Council enlargement to include two African countries but does not want to give them veto power.  And they’re asking: How is that fair?  Can I ask you to explain that?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  Well, you just said what the president has supported.  And so, I’ll just leave it there.  I talked at the top about his — the continuing support for the U.N., obviously, Security Council.  I — I’m not going to get ahead of that. 
 
I will say, though, as I stated, NSC is going to have — is going to be holding a press call later this afternoon.  They’ll certainly share more about your first part of your question.  I just don’t have anything to share as to any other engagements right now at this time, but NSC will certainly share more.
 
Q    And, Karine, more generally about this — UNGA.  A
lot — you know, part of the legacy of the — the president, in terms of foreign relations, would be at risk if Donald Trump is elected president.  And we hear concerns by foreign leaders about the election.  So, is the president going to address these concerns?  And what will he tell those foreign leaders who are worried about what happens in November?
 
MS. JEAN-PIERRE:  So, I’m — it’s a — this is a campaign-related question, so I’m not going to certainly dive into that.
 
But I will say — and obviously, the — each country can speak to — for themselves.  But as it relates to the president’s legacy, I mean, this is a president who has been able to accomplish — as we talk about, maybe, the last administration — right? — reaffirm American leadership at the U.N. and restore America’s standing on the world stage.  That’s the — something he’s been able to do for almost four years. 
 
And if you think about reinvigorating and strengthening NATO, that’s something that th- — this president did with his leadership.  Forge historic partnerships in Indo-Pacific.  Built a global coalition in support of Ukraine.  Invested at home to outcompete China.  And he looks forward to building on that progress this week.
 
And so, I’m just not going to dive in- — into the politics of November. 
 
3:53 P.M. EDT

The post Press Gaggle by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre En Route Queens, NY appeared first on The White House.

Via Teleconference

5:33 P.M. EDT

MODERATOR:  This is Michael Feldman with the NSC press team.  Just as a reminder for today’s call, it is on background and attributable to senior administration officials.  The call is also under embargo until 5:00 a.m. Eastern Standard Time tomorrow morning.

For awareness and not for attribution, on today’s call we have [senior administration official] and [senior administration official].  I will now turn the call over to [senior administration official] to give some opening remarks.  Over to you.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Excellent.  Thank you.  And good evening, everybody.  We’re very excited for the President’s trip to this year’s U.N. General Assembly, the last one of his presidency. 

So, at meetings at the U.N. this week, we’re going to get a lot of business done for the American people.  The President, the Secretary of State, other Cabinet officials, and even some members of Congress are here in New York to advocate for our country’s interests and values. 

At the General Assembly, the President will do what he has done throughout his presidency: rally global action to tackle some of our world’s biggest challenges.  So, for example, he’ll be talking this week about the climate crisis and the environment.  We’ll be talking about the need to strengthen our systems for providing humanitarian assistance; to end brutal wars in Gaza, Ukraine, and Sudan; and we’ll also be talking about the implications of new technologies such as artificial intelligence. 

When President Biden came to office nearly four years ago, he pledged to restore American leadership on the world stage.  And given that this is the President’s last General Assembly, it’s a chance for him to talk about how this approach has produced results, real achievements for the American people and for the world. 

The President’s engagements this week reflect his vision for a world where countries come together to solve big problems.  This stands in contrast to some of our competitors, who have a more cynical and transactional worldview, one where countries interpret their self-interest very narrowly and don’t work together for the common good. 

An overarching theme at this year’s General Assembly will be the need to reform and strengthen our global institutions, including the U.N., to make them more effective and inclusive.  And that’s been a big theme of the U.N. Secretary-General’s Summit for the Future, the marquee event at high-level week this year. 

Last week, President Biden released a video message ahead of the summit.  I encourage you all watch it.  You can find it on the Web.  In the video, the President spoke about using this moment to reaffirm our commitment to the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.  And he talked about pushing for a stronger, more effective United Nations and a reformed and expanded Security Council.  And he also talked about our efforts, investing billions in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals and building on the global consensus that we achieved last spring in the United Nations General Assembly on principles for the use of artificial intelligence. 

We’re going into a General Assembly this year with the world facing many steep challenges, problems so big no one country can solve them on their own, but that’s why the President feels so strongly the world needs strong and effective global institutions, including an adapted United Nations.  This is his vision of countries working together.  It has been a theme of his presidency and an important part of his legacy. 

Let me just briefly note the President’s key engagements, and then I’ll turn over to my colleague to discuss the major event that he’s hosting on the Global Coalition to Address Synthetic Drug Threats. 

On Tuesday morning, tomorrow, he will deliver and address to the U.N. General Assembly.  It will have many of the themes that I’ve mentioned here and talk about — again, some of the achievements of his approach to the United Nations and global cooperation. 

The President will also meet tomorrow with U.N. Secretary-General Guterres to talk about how the United States and the United Nations are working together to advance peace, safeguard human rights, and help countries develop. 

On Tuesday afternoon, the President will host a summit of the Global Coalition to Address Synthetic Drug Threats, and I’ll turn over to my colleague in a second to talk about that. 

The President is also giving a major address later that afternoon on the urgent need to combat climate change. 

On Wednesday, the President will meet with the President of Vietnam, To Lam.  The President of Vietnam just came into office four months ago, and this meeting will be an important opportunity for the two leaders to talk about our shared interest in stability and prosperity in Southeast Asia. 

The President will also attend, that afternoon, a meeting focused on Ukraine reconstruction with other world leaders. 

And then on Wednesday evening, at the Met, the President will host world leaders and senior U.N. officials for a reception. 

This is just a small slice of all the diplomacy and business that we’re doing here at the U.N. General Assembly.  There’ll be high-level meetings on the future of multilateral cooperation, sea level rise, antimicrobial resistance.  Really, every big, major challenge will be addressed here, and we’ll have senior U.S. representatives at all of these main events on issues such as the impact of emerging technology and specific meetings on global crises such as the difficult situation in Haiti, Sudan, Venezuela, Ukraine, Syria, and the Rohingya refugee crisis. 

Other U.S.-hosted and U.S.-attended side events will focus on climate; scaling clean energy for Africa; a major core group meeting of countries committed to LGBTQ rights that was attended by the First Lady; and partnering for a lead-free future. 

So, again, this is just a small slice of everything that is going on, plus the countless private sector and civil society events focusing on the great challenges of the 21st century. 

So, as I mentioned, we’re going to use this high-level week, the President’s last U.N. General Assembly, to get as much done for the American people in the coming days.

I’d like to now turn over to my colleague who will discuss the President’s summit on the Global Coalition to Address Synthetic Drug Threats.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Great.  Thanks so much, and thanks to all of you for joining this call. 

I wanted to share with you the exciting news that, on Tuesday, President Biden will, as [senior administration official] already said, host a summit of the Global Coalition to Address Synthetic Drug Threats.  This is a coalition that President Biden launched in June 2023 to mobilize international action to tackle the synthetic drug crisis. 

In just over one year, this global coalition has grown to include 158 countries and 15 international organizations working together to prevent the illicit manufacture and trafficking of synthetic drugs, to detect emerging drug threats, and to promote effective public health interventions. 

With the summit as a motivating force, we now have 11 core coalition countries that will be joining the President tomorrow, and they will be announcing new initiatives that will continue to advance the work of the coalition, including work to prevent, detect, and disrupt the supply chain of synthetic drugs. 

It’s important to emphasize that these international efforts complement intensive work that’s already been done and is being done domestically, including an increased focus on coordinated disruption of drug trafficking networks and concerted efforts to make the opioid overdose reversal medication, naloxone, widely available over the counter. 

These are just some of a wide array of actions that the Biden-Harris administration has taken to tackle the synthetic drug threats. 

And as a result of these efforts, we’re starting to see the largest drop in overdose deaths in recorded history.  When President Biden and Vice President Harris came into office, the number of drug overdose deaths was increasing by more than 30 percent year over year.  Now we have the latest provisional data released from the Centers for Disease Control, National Center for Health Statistics, showing an unprecedented decline in overdose deaths of roughly 10 percent from April 2023 to April 2024.

But there’s a lot more to be done, and the Global Coalition’s work recognizes that we need a global solution to a global problem. 

We are thrilled that we have so many countries coming together tomorrow to celebrate the work of the coalition, and we also will be announcing a new pledge that all of the core coalition members will be announcing — will be signing on to tomorrow, and we will be working over the coming months to ensure that all coalition members sign on to this pledge. 

And we truly think that this is a reflection of President Biden’s commitment to work both domestically and globally on the most important challenges that we face, recognizing that we need both domestic action and global action working together. 

And with that, I’ll turn it back to [senior administration official].

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Thanks, Michael.  I’ll turn it back to you. 

MODERATOR:  All right.  Thank you, [senior administration officials].  All right, with that, we will take some questions. 

The first question is going to go to Zeke Miller.  You should be able to unmute yourself. 

Q    Thanks so much for doing this.  You mentioned this is the President’s last U.N. of his presidency.  He’s going to deliver remarks to the General Assembly tomorrow.  Can you give us a preview, potentially, of what his message will be?  And will it be different from his prior remarks, in the sense — you know, obviously, world events have changed, but, you know, with an eye towards his legacy?  Or is there some message he’s trying to give on the world stage before he leaves office in January?  Thank you.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  You know, the themes I — thanks, Zeke.  The themes I previewed at the beginning will be really central to the President.  So, again, he came into office four years ago with a vision of America returning to the world stage, having a new way of interacting with other countries, bringing countries together to solve some of these big challenges.  This will be a good opportunity for him to look at the results that have been achieved. 

We live in a world with many problems, with many divisions, but we have a story to tell about what we’ve done to rally the world to defend Ukraine’s sovereignty, uphold principles of the U.N. Charter; what we’ve done to manage responsibly our competition with other countries including China; and also what we’re doing to deal with the ongoing and serious conflicts in our world in places like Gaza, where the President has worked tirelessly to get a hostage ceasefire deal, and conflicts like Sudan, where you have absolutely unprecedented displacement and a really serious crisis that we think needs to get more attention. 

So I think that will be the frame, and I’ll leave the details for the President’s speech tomorrow.

MODERATOR:  Great.  Thank you very much.  Our next question is going to go to Asma Khalid.  You should be able to unmute yourself.

Q    Yes.  Hi.  Thanks for doing this.  Similarly, sort of on the speech, could I get a sort of broad, I guess, framework or tone that you all are thinking about?  I know you say that the President came into office talking about building international coalitions, wanting to rebuild the United States stature on the world, but this is a really different moment than when the President even gave the speech last year, before October 7th.  He is now leaving office, and there are multiple sort of intractable problems right now in the world.  And can you just kind of give us any sense of tone in how the President is thinking about that and the very limited time he has left to solve them?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Thanks, Asma.  Look, I think it’s a good question.  The world has changed.  The world has gotten more difficult in many ways, as you noted. 

But, you know, as I said, the President came into office with a vision of how countries need to work together, how they need to work through institutions, how they need to partner to solve big global challenges.  And the fact that we do have these challenges, the fact that we do have Gaza, the fact that we do have Ukraine and Sudan, still serious issues in our world, just underscores the need for that kind of cooperation.  And I think you’ll hear that in his speech. 

Yes, he’ll talk about the significant accomplishments, achievements of his approach, but also talk about how we need the spirit, we need to continue working together to solve these big challenges, whether it is the wars you mentioned or other challenges such as the climate crisis or managing the implications of some of the new technologies. 

So I think this will be an important moment to say: Where do we go and what are the principles in which we’re going to solve these problems?  Thanks.

MODERATOR:  Thank you very much.  Our next question is going to go to Paris Huang.  You should be able to unmute yourself. 

Q    All right.  Hi.  Thank you, Michael.  Thank you, [senior administration official].  Two-parts question.  So, kind of follow up on the questions from Zeke and Asma.  So, of course, we know China and Russia have been heavily influencing the U.N. for years.  You know, we see all those voting records.  And President Biden have been doing a lot of reform during the four years.  Does he believe that those changes will sustain after he leaves the White House?

And second question: In last year’s UNGA remarks, President Biden talked about the peace and stability of Taiwan Strait, which was the first time a U.S. president actually talked about Taiwan at the UNGA.  So, will he include Taiwan again in his remarks this year?  Thank you.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Thanks.  And I appreciate the question.  I think it’s a good question in terms of, you know, have we left the United Nations as an institution better off.  I think we do have results, and the President will talk about that.  You know, it’s a time of great divisions, and the U.N. has already been — has always been a reflection of the world as it is. 

That said, when you look at what we’ve done, including through the United Nations, to, for example, rally the world to defend the U.N. Charter after the Ukrainian invasion, we secured a U.N. General Assembly resolution in which 141 countries stood up and said, “We condemn this, and we stand in favor of the U.N. Charter.”

You’ve also seen a more progressive and forward-leaning position on institutional reform.  For example, two years ago, the President announced a shift and a more forward-leaning position in reforming and expanding the United Nations Security Council.  And that’s definitely a piece of this well as well. 

I won’t get into the details on, you know, specifically what he’ll mention on individual issues, but I will say that an important part of the President’s legacy has been thinking about how we responsibly manage our competition with China, and that includes many facets, economic security, and those will be addressed in the speech.

MODERATOR:  Thank you very much.  Our next question is going to go to Sheryl Gay Stolberg.  You should be able to unmute yourself, Sheryl.

Q    Hi.  Thank you for doing this call.  You know, this is not a political speech, but it does occur in the context of an election in which one of the candidates has an isolationist vision that is far apart, diametrically opposed to that of the President.  And I’m wondering, to what extent can the President use this speech to ensure that his own vision of global alliances survives?  Is he concerned that that vision will unravel?

And will this speech be in any way directed to the American people, as much as to world leaders, as a reminder of the importance of America’s place in the world?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Look, as you said, this is not a political speech, but the President, again, he has a vision.  He came into a vision — into office.  That vision has produced results.  And there are many opponents and critics of that vision, not just internationally but at home.  It has been the President’s view that he needs to explain why this vision of working together with countries to solve these big challenges actually produces results, and that’s actually how we’re going to be measured. 

And when I say “produces results,” that means internationally, in terms of ending war, in terms of tackling challenges like sustainable development, the debt crisis, climate, but it also means that he needs to explain how his vision has produced results for the American people.  And that’s where I think there’s a very strong record, and some of it is very, very tangible. 

For example, the summit on the coalition on synthetic drugs, that is him bringing together countries, all of whom share a challenge — dealing with synthetic drugs — but convening them here, talking about deliverables, talking about how we’re going to work together.  And this is something that directly affects the situation of the American public, as my colleague briefed earlier, in terms of the overall record on issues like fentanyl. 

So I think he’ll lay that out tomorrow, and I think it will stand as representing that vision and what it’s achieved.

MODERATOR:  Thank you very much.  We will go to Danny Kemp.  You should be able to unmute yourself.

Q    Thanks very much for doing this.  I just wanted to ask about the current situation in the Middle East.  I mean, you know, the speech tomorrow is really going to be a bit overshadowed by the events in Lebanon, where we’ve seen nearly 500 people killed in the space of a day.  How’s he going to address that?  And more particularly, how will the President be seeking to — will he be talking to other leaders about that?  What’s he actually going to be doing at the UNGA more generally to try and get this thing sorted out?  Thanks.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  This is one of the advantages of the U.N. General Assembly: You literally have the whole world here.  So when you do have crises of the day, they’ll be addressed.  And I have no doubt that the situation in the Middle East will be an important theme in a lot of the meetings, not just that the President has, but other senior U.S. officials who will be convening to talk about various aspects of the crisis and what we can do to stabilize the situation. 

He will address the Middle East, especially this very, very difficult year that we have all gone through.  And again, I think it’s an opportunity to talk about what we have achieved and what we still need to do, given a situation that is just heartbreaking where hostages have not been returned, the humanitarian situation in Gaza, and, as you know, just such a sensitive issue, such a delicate and dangerous situation between Israel and Lebanon right now.

Thanks.

MODERATOR:  Thank you very much.  And unfortunately, that is all the time we have today.  Thank you all for joining this call.  Thank you to our speakers.  And feel free to follow up with our team at the NSC press team with any questions. 

And again, this call is under embargo until 5:00 a.m. tomorrow.  Thank you all again, and hope you have a great rest of your evening.

5:53 P.M. EDT

The post Background Press Call on President Biden’s Engagements at UNGA appeared first on The White House.

Via Teleconference

9:47 A.M. EDT

MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ:  Hi.  Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining today’s press call to preview President Biden’s speech at the Bloomberg Global Business Forum tomorrow and on the pre- — and on the Biden-Harris administration’s historic efforts to combat climate change.

As a reminder, this call will be on the record and embargoed until today at 1:00 p.m. Eastern.

The call will begin with on-the-record remarks from Senior Adviser to the President and White House Director of Communications Ben LaBolt, White House National Climate Adviser Ali Zaidi, and Senior Adviser to the President for International Climate Policy John Podesta.

Afterwards, we will have an — a question-and-answer period.

With that, I will turn it over to Ben.

MR. LABOLT:  Thanks, Angelo, and good morning, everybody.

President Biden is fresh off his Quad Summit, where he showcased his continued leadership on the world stage by bringing our allies together to cooperate on — on major cross-border issues.  He just delivered a major speech last Thursday on the economic progress we’ve seen under — under this administration.  And later today, he’s heading to New York to the U.N. General Assembly.

He’s got a busy schedule in New York, and you’ll see him lay out his vision for continued U.S. leadership on the world stage, including renewed cooperation to address shared global challenges such as confronting the climate crisis.

And as the president continues to sprint to the finish line, tomorrow, as part of Climate Week, he’ll deliver remarks highlighting his and Vice President Harris’ leadership to tackle the climate crisis.

His speech tomorrow at the Bloomberg Global Business Forum will showcase just how transformational this administration has been in helping to meet all of our climate, conservation, and clean energy goals — from reducing emissions and moving in the long term to a net-zero economy, to mobilizing private-sector investments in domestic manufacturing, to protecting our lands and waters, and so much more.

And of course, through each of those important goals, also making significant in pro- — progress along the way to lower families’ energy costs; create good-paying union job; and ultimately leave for our children and grandchildren a stronger, healthier planet.

Ali and John will share a bit more about the president’s domestic and international climate legacy in just a moment, but I want to take a moment to highlight how important the stakes are and why the president’s efforts have been essential in making sure we stay on track for our climate goals.

If, as the science demands, we are going to meet the president’s goal of achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by no later than 2050 and of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, then we’ve got to keep the pedal to the metal on our climate efforts.  We cannot afford to delay or to go back. 

We’re seeing the impacts the climate crisis is having on our communities every day.  Yet as cities are flooding or on fire or under extreme heat watches or trapped in a cloud of smog, many congressional Republicans continue to deny the very existence of climate change.

And it’s not just talk.  Congressional Republicans are taking action right now that would roll back investments in climate, clean energy, and public health.

In this session alone, congressional Republicans’ efforts to gut climate protections are being pushed through a variety of avenues, including appropriations bills, Congressional Review Act resolutions, and other legislative actions, which would have a devastating impact on families, the economy, and the environment. 

From undermining clean vehicle tax credits to attacking cost-saving efficiency standards, they continue to side with special interests to keep consumer energy prices high.

During this session, congressional Republicans have advanced legislation to repeal new programs from President Biden’s Investing in America agenda that are helping families save hundreds of dollars each year on energy costs, including attacking new rebate programs for energy-efficient home upgrades and programs that support residential solar projects in low-income communities.

After the president’s historic work to enhance public health protections and strengthen pollution standards, congressional Republicans are working to weaken those protections, which would harm their constituents’ lives and livelihoods.

They’ve introduced resolutions that would roll back the administration’s rules that protect communities from coal plants’ water pollution, air pollution, and waste disposal.  They’re working to overturn lifesaving rules under the Clean Air Act that reduce pollution from power plants, cars, trucks, and indus- — and industrial sources.  And they’re failing to protect the health of mine workers, including by trying to block new rules that protect coal and other miners from toxic exposures.

With more than 42 million acres already conserved, President Biden is on track to conserve more lands and waters than any modern president has in four years.  But congressional Republicans are attempting to roll back protections for our nation’s outdoor treasures and open up our lands and waters to increased irresponsible development.

They’re trying to eliminate presidential authority to establish national monuments altogether.  They’re also trying to dismantle President Biden’s America the Beautiful initiative, which is supporting locally led conservation efforts across the country, and to overturn the administration’s Public Lands Rule that will help conserve wildlife habitat, restore places impacted by wildfire and drought, expand outdoor recreation, and guide thoughtful and balanced development.

They’re supporting legislation and other appropriations vehicles that would undo protections for 13 million acres of special areas in the Western Arctic and dismantle efforts to protect the U.S. Arctic Ocean and Arctic National Wildlife Refuge from new oil and gas leasing.

The Biden-Harris administration successfully finalized the first updates in decades to hold oil and gas companies accountable and ensure they provide fair returns to taxpayers, but congressional Republicans are seeking to overturn these overdue reforms.

And just to put a finer point on it: Since President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act, congressional Republicans have voted more than 50 times to repeal all or parts of the largest and most impactful climate legislation in history.

Yet even though most Republicans are in lock- — lockstep in this approach, some are starting to change their tune.  Last month, 18 House Republicans sent a letter to Speaker Johnson asking him not to repeal the Inflation Reduction Act.

Perhaps it’s because President’s Biden’s policies are leading to more than 330,000 new clean energy jobs already created, more than half of which are in Republican-held districts.

It also might be because they’re starting to realize that jacking up families’ energy prices, weakening pollution protections, and slowing our clean energy transition are unpopular back home.

Whatever the reason, it’s obvious that the contrast between President Biden and Kamala Harris’ policies with those of congressional Republicans couldn’t be clearer.

This coming Climate Week and for every week thereafter, this president and his team will continue to work on behalf of the American people to protect our planet, lower energy costs, create good-paying jobs, and do what’s needed to ensure that our grandchildren can experience a planet with clean air and drinkable water.

And with that, I’ll turn it over to the president’s national climate adviser, Ali Zaidi.

MR. ZAIDI:  Thanks so much to everybody for joining.

We are five years into what the UNFCCC declared as the “decisive decade for climate action.”  Tomorrow, President Biden will deliver the decisive decade halftime report.  And what he will show is how the United States has changed the playbook fundamentally — not focused on the doom and gloom, focused instead on the massive economic opportunity, a chance to build U.S. manufacturing and infrastructure, and a chance to build the American middle class.

The president will talk about what we’re seeing on the scoreboard.  Since the start of the administration, 100 gigawatts of clean energy built in the United States — 25 million homes’ worth of power.  You see off our coast an offshore industry, where before there was none. 

In rural America, the largest investment in clean energy electrification since FDR — one in five rural Americans seeing the benefits of that clean energy. 

A nuclear industry revitalized — plants that were slated to be shut down put back into use; plants retired coming back to meet surging demand.

In transportation, electric vehicles now quadrupled in sales, chargers doubled on our roads and highways, the postal service going fully electric, and all of that being made in America — batteries being made in America; anodes, cathodes, the very critical minerals necessary for tackling climate change being sourced here in the United States of America.

And, of course, we’re seeing this translate into benefits for consumers.  The standards the president has finalized or more efficient appliances saving a trillion dollars for consumers over the next several decades.

And just last year, millions of Americans taking advantage of the Biden-Harris clean energy tax credits to retrofit their homes, put in upgrades that will save them money, lower utility bills and costs. 

He’s done all of this while protecting the environment.  As Ben noted, 42 million acres conserved by tackling the scrooge [scourge] of environmental injustice, meeting pollution where it is in fence-line communities, and delivering solutions that take effect right away.

He’s made sure that we are leaning into the manufacturing opportunity in all of this.  He’s going to talk about how we invented a lot of these technologies, but over the last several years, we’ve now started to actually make these technologies — $900 billion in manufacturing.

So, you see because of these historic efforts under President Biden, Vice President Harris, capital coming off the sidelines, jobs coming back, and America leading on climate.  And, you know, core to that — core to that is the president delivering on his fundamental conviction.

When he was running for office, the president often said, “When I see climate, I see jobs.”  Since the beginning of his administration, he’s made that a focal point in climate.  It’s what’s helped us put all these points on the board.  Even today, governors will come together to announce a goal to train another million folks into registered apprenticeships that deliver on the climate workforce that we need to build this clean energy future.

Tomorrow is an opportunity to deliver that decisive decade halftime report to show the progress we’ve made, the points we put on the board, and the path ahead.  And President Biden will do that eloquently and in a way, I think, that will hopefully activate and animate accelerated action not just here but around the world.

And for that, let me hand it over to my partner in all of this, the president’s international climate adviser, John Podesta.

MR. PODESTA:  Thanks, Ali.  And — and thanks to everyone for joining at the beginning of this action-packed Climate Week.  And if you’re actually in New York, the traffic-packed Climate Week.

Over the past four years, President Biden and Vice President Harris have pursued the most ambitious and successful climate agenda in history, both domestically and internationally.

We know that the climate crisis is a global problem and that no one country alone can solve it but that U.S. leadership on this issue is critical for bringing the world together.

That’s why President Biden rejoined the Paris Agreement on day — day one.  It’s why he set a bold goal to cut U.S. emissions by 50 to 52 percent below 2005 levels by 2030 and backed that goal up with action through the Inflation Reduction Act, the largest investment in climate and clean energy in the world, as Ali just went through.  And it’s why he convened three leaders summits on climate, ratified the Kigali Amendment to the Mo- — Montreal Protocol to phase down super-polluting hydrofluorocarbons.

Over the past four years, this resurgence of U.S. leadership on global climate action has yielded real results.

We’ve raised ambition from countries and companies around the world through the Global Methane Pledge to reduce global methane emissions 30 percent by 2030, with now 158 countries and the EU signing on.

At COP28 in Dubai in December 2023, the United States successfully galvanized the world to commit, for the first time, to transition away from unabated fossil fuels; to stop building new unabated coal capacity globally; to triple renewable energy globally by 2030, to double the level of efficiency by 2030, and to triple nuclear energy by 2050.

We’ve remained focused on climate finance, which is the biggest topic of discussion at this year’s COP29 in Azerbaijan.

President Biden pledged to work with Congress to quadruple U.S. international public climate finance to over $11 billion per year by 2024.  And we’re on track to deliver on that commitment.  That includes over $3 billion per year for adaptation under the president’s Emergency Plan for Adaptation and Resilience, or the so-called PREPARE program, which will help a half a billion people worldwide adapt to and manage climate impacts, including sea level rise, storms, droughts, and food insecurity. 

The next few months are crucial for our international climate agenda — from COP16 on biodiversity in Cali to the G20 in Rio to COP29 in Baku, and, of course, this week in New York.

This week and throughout this fall, we’ll continue to work with our allies and partners around the world to raise ambitions; unlock additional climate finance from the private sector, multilateral development banks, and public sources; accelerate the deployment of clean energy by driving innovation and lowering costs; reversing and finally ending deforestation; and help more vulnerable countries and communities adapt to a changing climate.

Here’s the bottom line: Thanks to President Biden and Vice President Harris, we’re on the right path here in the U.S. and around the world.  We have to accelerate our progress toward our collective climate goals, and I think the president will be calling on other leaders of the world, as he did over the weekend in the new announcements on clean cooling and the clean energy industrial fellowship we entered into with India, to get that job done.

Thank you.  And I’ll turn it back over to Angelo.

MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ:  Thanks, John.  And we will move to the question-and-answer portion.  Please use the “raise hand” function on Zoom, and we will call on you.  As you are called on, please identify yourself and your outlet.

Okay, we will begin with Lisa.  You should be unmuted now.

Q    Hi, everyone.  Thank you so much for doing this this morning.

John, you mentioned that the president will be calling on — on other leaders.  You know, this is a very international audience this week.  Already, countries have seen the United States leave and join and leave and join global efforts to fight climate change.  What will the president’s message be to world leaders who are worried about what a Trump administration would bring on climate and maybe don’t know whether the U.S. can be trusted to be a long-term partner?

I guess, related, do you expect President Biden to — to speak directly about former President Trump?

MR. PODESTA:  Lisa, you know, in my current role, I can’t talk about politics.  (Laughs.)  But I think it’s clear that the track record from the previous administration vers- — which pulled out of Paris, abandoned the — the partnership that we had around the globe, reversed a number of actions that President Obama had taken on climate change versus the record that we just laid out is clearly of concern and interest to people around the world.

All I can tell you is the president has demonstrated that you can produce strong economic growth, create good-paying jobs, reach all areas of the country in this — in this task of decarbonizing our economy. 

And that’s the message I think he’s sending to global re- — leaders: This is doable.  We can invest in the — these new technologies.  We can put people to work doing the work that needs to be done, and it’s going to be good for your publics.

So, I think that in — in his speech to — to UNGA, he will, I think, reflect on that record, and I’m sure the — the alternatives will be implicit.

MR. ZAIDI:  Look, what I’d add to that — this is Ali — is you’ve seen the politics of climate inaction deteriorate in Congress.  House Republicans have put up nearly 50 votes to roll back President Biden and Vice President Harris’ historic climate efforts.  They failed.  They failed even within their own caucus: Now a dozen and a half members calling on their own leadership to wrap up these efforts, to go in a U-turn direction, because they see the economic case for climate action.

Part of the reason the president has been successful — and as he speaks to this tomorrow, he will point out — is this new formula on climate action, which is focused on driving investment in U.S. manufacturing and U.S. infrastructure, and that has resulted in unprecedented and successful job creation all across the country in blue districts and in red.

So, the politics of inaction are deteriorating.  The case for a U-turn is weak and fragile and falling apart.  But the haste to go bold and accelerate climate action, we’re seeing the results from that; that’s strengthening.

And, you know, Lisa, you mentioned, there are a lot of leaders from around the world here in New York.  There are also a lot of leaders from industry and big investors here in New York, and they’re paying attention to one thing and one thing only, and that is: In the United States, the case for investing in clean energy has never been stronger.  The economics for climate action are irresistible here in the United States.  And that’s going to cascade around the world as we accelerate progress in this decisive decade.

MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ:  Thanks, Ali.  We will go to Kemi next.  You should be unmuted now.

Q    Hello.  Can you guys hear me?  Hello?

MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ:  Yes.

Q    Okay.  Thank you.  Sorry.  En route to New York. 

I wanted to ask if you can talk about the multilateral (inaudible) boosting climate financing for developing countries as well as how the U.S., the administration will work with China, the number one polluters in the world.  As — and your initiative also working with African nations. 

Thank you.

MR. PODESTA:  Well, thanks — thanks for the question.  I — at the bilateral level, I laid out a — at the front end of my remarks, the president’s commitment to increasing climate finance across the board and reach communities across the globe. 

We’ve succeeded in — in meeting the targets that the president did at — in his UNGA speech in 2021.  I want to underscore that.  That’s where he said we will quadruple our climate finance from the historically high level that President Obama produced.  It was actually substantially more than that if you compare it to the last years under President Trump.  And we’re on track to do that.

Where I’m engaged in events here to try to track additional private-sector investment into the adaptation space, noting — I noted the PREPARE program that the president has put forward, which is going to provide a — help and service to half a billion people across the globe. 

We’re engaged, I think, with the — the i- — the discussion right now to increase the national cumulative qualified goal that’s, as I noted, part of what’s most important on the agenda in Baku.  Those conversations are continuing, but we’ve seen a substantial increase in climate finance coming through the multilateral development banks and other sources. 

It’s going to take the effort of all of us to go from the billions of dollars of — hundreds of billions of dollars of public support that we’ve seen to, really, the trillion dollars of need that are necessary to build sustainable energy systems across the globe. 

And so, I think, again, in his conversations with — with global leaders, he hosted President Ruto of Kenya earlier this year, created a commitment to a bilateral partnership with the government of Kenya to build out supply chains there.  We’re working with India and Tanzania to do the same thing across new supply chains in Africa. 

So, I think the president is r- — is quite focused on this and will get a chance to speak to it both in the meetings that he’s holding on the side as well as in his main UNGA speech.

Q    Okay.  If I can just quickly follow up on that.  A lot of these developing countries are looking into carbon market.  What is your response?  What is your view regarding that? 

MR. PODESTA:  You know, earlier this summer, we issued a joint statement from the U.S. government on our views on the fact that those high-integrity carbon markets are a potentially strong source of finance for countries both to decarbonize the power sector.  Secretary Kerry did a tremendous work on creating a new instrument, if you will, in that space as well as in — in agriculture and forestry. 

But as we noted in that statement, there’s — there needs to be high integrity both on behalf of the sellers of carbon credits as well as on behalf of buyers in order to make these — these markets work and — and see those — that ability for carbon finance to flow through that channel.  Without that, I think the market and — and I think we saw this in the last couple of years — it begins to lose faith that those — that the emissions reductions are real.  In which case, I think people back off from making the commitments. 

So, I think it’s really critical to make sure that these markets are — have strong integrity, and we laid out the principles to make that happen. 

MR. ZAIDI:  I just want to add a little bit on how domestic action is, I think, enabling more ambition around the world.

First, there has been analysis, including from the Boston Consulting Group, on the impacts of the Inflation Reduction Act in terms of technology cost reduction that actually improve the odds of scale-up around the world — everything from battery technology to clean hydrogen production through electrolyzers. 

That technology is being de-risked as a result of the generational investment that President Biden has marshaled to take on the climate crisis here in the United States. 

That’s going to have very significant implications around the world.  One modeling projection done by the Rhodium Group shows that for every ton reduced here, we will see two or three reduced around the world, again, as the result of that technology de-risking. 

The second is the platform de-risking.  John talked about the voluntary carbon markets and the principles we laid out earlier this summer to help high-integrity scale-up of that platform. 

The investment the United States is making, for example, through the Department of Agriculture in measurement, monitoring, and verification regimes, or through the EPA and the Department of Energy in the utilization of satellite data to track methane leaks from industrial sources — those investments in satellite, in harnessing machine learning and artificial intelligence to take on climate change — those platform investments will de-risk those platforms for the rest of the world and I think help bring additional resources to the Global South. 

And then there’s the role of the capital markets more broadly.  In the United States, we are building muscle memory around new asset classes, and that’s going to accrue benefits to capital formation and project development all around the world. 

So, look, there is the — there is the effort, I think, underway by G20 countries.  The*28:59 — when the president was out at the last G20, he said, “I passed an Inflation Reduction Act.  You should copycat that.”  So, there are a lot of countries that are downloading the U.S. playlist on how to jam out on climate. 

But there’s a second piece of it, which is the actions we’re taking here in the United States are de-risking technologies, they’re de-risking platforms, and they’re building the muscle memory to accelerate capital formation project development around the world. 

Obviously, that all complements the very important development finance and multilateral work — work John talked about, but I do think this work domestically is going to echo around the world.

MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ:  Thanks, Ali. 

And our final question will come from Robin.  You should be unmuted now.

Q    Hi.  Can you hear me?

MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ:  Yes. 

Q    Thanks so much for taking my call.  I wondered if you could tell us — I know the president told his Cabinet to “sprint to the finish.”  I wonder if you can tell us what that’s going to mean on climate, if there’s anything else we can expect — big announcements on climate before the end of the term, and also how he’s thinking about climate when he’s approaching his legacy?

MR. ZAIDI:  Robin, I think the president is thinking about climate the same way he has been from day one.  When he thinks climate, he thinks jobs.  And I know that sounds simple, but I think that’s been the driver of the political economy and the investment case around the country, and that continues to be the case. 

You know, you’ll — you’ll see from the administration what you’ve seen from day one: a concerted focus on a sector-by-sector basis, each part of the economy.

In terms of developing new standards and rules that provide certainty to business and improve the investment climate around clean energy technologies, you will continue to see robust implementation from our agencies on the infrastructure law and the Inflation Reduction Act.  On the broader investment agenda, making sure that those investments are turning in to impacts on the ground.

And you’ll see us do the important work of blocking and tackling to make sure our projects are getting built.  Permitting, citing execution has been a focal point for the Biden-Harris administration from day one. 

You know, this Cabinet meeting, the president talked about sprinting through the finish line, making sure that we’re building an irreversible momentum behind climate action.  But I remember the last Cabinet meeting when he reminded the Cabinet that these laws, these standards, these investments were only as good as the impact they were making on the ground.  So, he continues to be relentlessly focused on implementation, on execution, on getting things built. 

And that goes to the point I made at the top.  This is no longer a theoretical playbook.  You could see it as points on the scoreboard today: A hundred gigawatts of clean energy built in the United States under the Biden-Harris administration.  That’s going to be our focus.  That’s where we continue to spend our time.

MR. FERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ:  Thanks, Ali. 

And that is all the time we have today.  Thank you, again, to our speakers and to all of you for joining.

As a reminder, this call and the materials you all received over email or will receive over email will be embargoed until 1:00 P.M. Eastern today.

Thanks again for joining us. 

10:20 A.M. EDT

The post White House Press Call by Senior Adviser to the President and Director of Communications Ben LaBolt, National Climate Adviser Ali Zaidi, and Senior Adviser to the President for International Climate Policy John Podesta Previewing Climate Week Speech appeared first on The White House.

8:50 A.M. EDT
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  Thank you, guys, for being here.  Today, we have the fourth Quad Leaders Summit, fourth in-person Quad Leaders Summit, and the first time that President Biden has actually hosted leaders in his hometown and, literally, at his home in Wilmington, Delaware. 
 
You guys have heard the President say many times that all politics is personal, all diplomacy is personal.  And developing personal relationships has been core to his approach to foreign policy as President.
 
So, opening his home to the leaders of India, Japan, and Australia is a way of him showing, not just saying, that these leaders matter to him, that the Quad matters to him as a significant foreign policy priority.  And institutionalizing and deepening and elevating the Quad has been one of the things that he’s going to be very proud of when he leaves office and passes the baton to the next President of the United States.
 
When President Biden came in, within the early months, he held a Quad — a virtual summit, and it was the first time the leaders of the Quad had actually met in any format.  And what the President wanted to do was not just have this be something where leaders convened occasionally, but actually a vehicle for driving deepening cooperation and integration across the region. 
 
And so, if you look at the last three and a half years, whether it’s on the response to COVID-19 or humanitarian response across the region, or issues like cyber and cyber capacity-building across the region, there’s a range of significant achievements the Quad has already had.  And today, the Quad leaders will announce a number of further steps forward. 
 
There’ll be the announcement of the Quad Cancer Moonshot, which we’re very excited about, with all four countries coming to the table with resources and capacities to help drive towards the cures to deadly cancers.  And there’ll be more to say on that later today.
 
There’s the expansion of the Indo-Pacific Maritime Domain Awareness Initiative, which is a mouthful, but is really about integrating new technologies and new capabilities, not just for Quad members, but for countries in Southeast Asia and the rest of the region, for them to understand their maritime domains so they can better manage and regulate them and ensure their security and also ensure that they are delivering economic benefits to the people of the relevant countries. 
 
There will be — we’ll have an announcement of the expansion of the Quad fellows, which will now not just be fellows from the four countries, but fellows from Southeast Asia as well.
 
We’ll announce the pre-positioning of relief supplies across the region and the ability for Quad countries to react more rapidly in the case of humanitarian crises and natural disasters.
 
And the Quad will announce its first-ever coast guard mission together as well, which will show the joint capabilities of the four countries in terms of their ability — in terms of their coast guards. 
 
So, there’s a number of other things that you’ll see in the fact sheet as well, but this just shows the breadth and range of ways in which the Quad is becoming a feature of the architecture of the Indo-Pacific.  And we hope and expect that that will deepen in the years ahead. 
 
And the reason I think we can have some confidence in that is there’s genuine bipartisan support for the Quad.  It’s something that really transcends party lines.  And, in fact, over the last 24 hours, we’ve had the announcement of a bipartisan, bicameral Quad Caucus, something I never quite thought I would see, but Republicans and Democrats in both the House and the Senate actually standing up a caucus to support this, this platform, because of the importance that Congress places on it and what it can deliver. 
 
The last thing I would say is that when you look at the Quad and AUKUS and the Camp David trilateral and our engagement with the Pacific Islands in ASEAN, one thing that has been a hallmark of the President’s foreign policy in the Indo-Pacific has been to move from the traditional hub-and-spoke model, rooted largely in bilateral alliances and bilateral partnerships, to a latticework approach with multiple institutions, overlapping partnerships, different configurations that all add up to genuinely new architecture for the Indo-Pacific, and the Quad is a critical part of that. 
 
And I think it leaves the United States in a stronger position, with a more dense and capable and dynamic set of partnerships, and with relationships not just between us and our partners, but among our partners, that allow us to deliver greater results and achieve more stability and security and drive towards the ultimate objective, which is a free and open Indo-Pacific. 
 
So let me stop there, and happy to take your questions. 
 
Q    Jake, just (inaudible), you didn’t mention China directly in the joint leaders’ statement.  What sort of language should we expect directed at the PRC?
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  The Quad isn’t really about any other country.  It’s not directed at another country.  It’s directed at problem solving and standing up for a set of common principles and a common vision for the region. 
 
So, I don’t think you should expect to see a focus on any particular country, including the PRC, in the Quad leaders’ statement.  That’s been the pattern since the beginning, because the nature and purpose of this institution is really about the kinds of things I just described.  It’s about delivering vaccines, delivering cyber capacity, delivering coast guard capacity, delivering humanitarian assistance, delivering science and technology progress.  So that’s what we’re going to continue to focus on, and that’s what you’ll see in the fact sheet — the joint leaders’ statement. 
 
Q    But, Jake, as you add more security features to this partnership, you know, is there a risk, a possibility that China, which has already expressed concerns about encirclement related to the Quad, begins to have objections to this cooperation?
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  Look, I’ll let the PRC speak for itself, and obviously it does speak for itself about a number of different initiatives the United States has taken in the Indo-Pacific.  We’re just going to prove year on year everything that I just said, which is really that the thrust and purpose of the institution writ large and the security features of it are about a positive agenda to enhance security, not just for Quad countries but for other regional partners. 
 
So, it’s hard for me to see how and why the PRC should object to the four countries, for example, doing a coast guard mission together, or doing cyber trainings for Southeast Asia together, or taking steps with respect to maritime domain awareness.  These do not, to me, indicate any form of aggression or assertive behavior.  They’re fundamentally constructive and positive, and that’s where we’re going to continue to position the Quad. 
 
Q    Can you speak a little bit to the President’s meeting with Prime Minister Modi and what, if anything, he’ll say about what he wants to do vis-à-vis China and Russia (inaudible)?
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  I won’t go too deep into the details of what he will say on those issues, which are obviously sensitive and will obviously be critical priorities in the bilateral meeting. 
 
I will just say this: that the United States has been clear about our view that Russia’s brutal war of aggression against Ukraine flouted every norm and principle of international law, that countries like India should step up and support the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity, and that every country everywhere should refrain from supplying inputs to Russia’s war machine for it to be able to continue to prosecute this brutal war.  So they will talk about that. 
 
The President will also hear from Prime Minister Modi about his trip to Ukraine, which was an important and indeed historic trip, and it will be the opportunity for the two of them to talk about their respective views of the way forward.
 
And then, with respect to China, you know, they will talk about how they see China’s actions in the region, where China is headed.  And that’s not just true in the security domain, but the economic and technology domain as well.  And we’ll work to try to coordinate approaches to the extent that that makes sense for both countries.
 
Q    In the past month or so, there’s been a lot of (inaudible) China (inaudible).  There’s been lots of (inaudible) still in the offing.  Can you speak to, like, how the President himself is reviewing the culmination, I guess, of the administration’s China strategy leading up to this?  And should we consider this Quad sort of part of that puzzle, (inaudible)?
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  I think you should consider this Quad and all of our other actions part of an effort to strengthen the capacity of the United States to defend our interests, support our allies and partners, advance problem solving on critical common challenges, and generally put ourself in a more robust, competitive position writ large.
 
But I don’t think you should see it again as being directed at China.  And I think this is American foreign policy, in a way at its historic best, which innovation partnerships designed to enhance stability, designed to deliver results, and connected to other partnerships that are going the same thing.
 
And I think, kind of, over-cranking the emphasis on any one country is missing what I think the central thrust and purpose of these kinds of institutions, including the Quad, are all about.
 
Q    You mentioned at the top the personal nature of this visit.  And the White House is using the terminology “personal meeting” rather than the usual “bilateral meeting.”  Can you give us a sense of how these meetings are different, what we might expect?  For example, Prime Minister Albanese yesterday, did he get a tour of the house?  See the Corvette?  Were there family members present?  Can you can you give us a flavor of that?
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  He did get a bit of a tour of the house.  I don’t think he saw the Corvette, though.  I can’t confirm that for sure, because the two of them sort of went off by themselves for a bit, and I haven’t had a chance to speak to the President about what exactly the Prime Minister saw. 
 
There weren’t other family members there.  It was really a sort of one-on-one opportunity for President Biden and the Prime Minister to sit and talk.  And then, a few of us joined them, obviously, for part of the meeting when it turned to substance. 
 
It was just — honestly, the vibe of it was sort of two guys, one at the other guy’s home, talking in broad strokes about where they see the state of the world, about — you know, swapping some stories from their respective political careers, you know, talking about the history of the U.S.-Australia alliance. 
 
It just kind of had a feeling like if you had someone come over for a cup of coffee or a meal.  You know, that kind of feeling was much more present than, like, a stiff bilateral.  And the President told everybody, “Take off your jackets.  Get comfortable,” which we all obliged. 
 
So, yeah, I’m very bad at answering questions like that, but that’s my best shot at it. 
 
Q    Well, if I may, on Sudan, a United Nations panel of experts has accused the United Arab Emirates of supplying arms to the RSF in breach of the weapons embargo on Darfur.  MBZ, I guess, is coming to the White House this week.  Will the President raise those allegations directly with the leader of the United Arab Emirates?
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  I’ll let the President talk to Sheikh Mohamed privately about Sudan.  I think it would be more effective to do that. 
 
What I will say is we are concerned about a number of countries and the steps they are taking to perpetuate rather than resolve the conflict.  And I will also say that Sudan will certainly be on the agenda, and the President will be as direct and candid with Sheikh Mohamed as he is with every leader.  And then, after the fact, we’ll share what we feel we can.
 
And the reason why I’m not, sort of, laying it out all in public right now is: Our ultimate objective is to get the entire conflict in Sudan on a different track than the tragic and horrific track it is on right now.  And I think that requires some intense but sensitive diplomatic conversations with a number of players.  That’s what the President is intending to do writ large.  And as I said, Sudan will certainly be part of the agenda with the UAE President on Monday.
 
Q    Jake, so (inaudible) President will Japan Prime Minister Kishida.  Do you expect him to talk about that deal between U.S. Steel and Japan Nippon Steel?  And does (inaudible) oppose that deal and try to stop it?
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  I cannot say yet whether that particular deal will come up in the conversation today.  There are obviously huge priorities in terms of current events and geopolitical trends and economic and technology cooperation.  So, I’m not sure that it will come up.  And the President has spoken to this issue before, but the matter really is, at the moment, in a official process while the transaction is studied by the relevant authorities and the relevant agencies, the U.S. government. 
 
And so, you know, the President will obviously allow that process to run its course because that’s what’s required under the law.  And then we will see what happens.
 
Q    Prime Minister Kishida will step down soon.  You going to talk about his contribution, achievement, but what do you expect from the new Japanese prime minister?
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  One thing that I do expect, whoever the new Japanese prime minister is, is continued investment in and support for the U.S.-Japan alliance as the cornerstone peace of security in the Indo-Pacific.  And I expect that because the overwhelming majority of the Japanese people support that and because this alliance is bigger than any one leader on either side, in Japan or the United States. 
 
So I have confidence that the strong bond and partnership between our two countries will continue no matter who takes the helm, although I will say Prime Minister Kishida should be saluted, and President Biden will salute him, as a very significant contributor to the high-water mark we’ve reached in the U.S.-Japan alliance at this point and in Japan’s global leadership role. 
 
So, it will obviously be different because Prime Minister Kishida is a unique individual, but one thing that we think will remain the same is the strong alliance between the United States and Japan.
 
Q    Just on the Nippon deal, very quickly: Some proponents of that deal are interpreting last week’s extension as a sign that the President is having second thoughts.  What would you say to them?
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  I can’t speak to that because I think nobody should overread what happened last week as a substantive expression of views, rather as a matter of process to ensure that the transaction gets the full review that’s appropriate in a case like this, as I said, from the relevant authorities and agencies.  And the President really does want to let that play out. 
 
Q    You mentioned that it’s not about one country, but of course, China comes to mind over time.  As just recently, they announced sanctions against American companies.  They’re selling weapons to Taiwan.  Taiwan is getting money from the United States to be able to defend themselves.  And the incidents in the past few weeks in (inaudible) has been escalating, not only with Taiwan with China, but also Philippines.
 
During this meeting, is that top of mind, or is this something that you want to address?  Because, I mean, you mentioned the coast guard event shouldn’t be questioned by the Chinese; it’s just an event that they’re going to do as a group.  But from their point of view, they’re talking about it and condemning these types of actions.  Should we worry about China moving forward or being more aggressive as the world is focused on Lebanon, the Middle East, Ukraine?
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  Well, first of all, it’s true that the front pages of newspapers are filled with stories about the Middle East rather than the Indo-Pacific right now.  But the United States of America is focused in both places.  And there’s probably no better proof point than the fact that we’re sitting here right now, on a Quad Summit day, meeting with leaders of the Indo-Pacific, even as we continue to closely monitor events in the Middle East.
 
So, if you look at the work that we have done over the last four years, the intense engagement with allies and partners, the work on — this latticework that I described, the efforts to strengthen our own industrial and innovation base, the measures we’ve taken to protect our sensitive technologies, we feel like we are in a very strong position to stand up for peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific.  And obviously, we are concerned about actions that China has taken, and we speak out about those actions quite directly and candidly. 
 
But we are also putting the United States and our allies and partners in a position to effectively defend our interests and to defend the rules of the road that have kept the peace in the Indo-Pacific for a long time.  We’re going to continue to do that. 
 
The other thing I would say is that each of the four members of the Quad has their own approach to the PRC.  There’s not going to be some “Quad approach” to the PRC.  But of course, in the course of the conversation today, the four leaders will have the opportunity to talk about all of the developments in the Indo-Pacific, and obviously the PRC is part of that. 
 
So, it will be one of the issues or one of the topics that come up among many.
 
Q    If I may, on Venezuela — because Venezuela is close to China right now, and it’s one of the allies, but also Russia and Iran.  So we know four Americans are detained in the past few days.  The situation is getting just harder and harder to get to an agreement.  We are expecting a meeting at the United Nations to talk about Venezuela, led by Uruguay and other countries.  Do you see any possibility of moving forward in this subject?  We understand the U.S. have supported the talks.  Is it a possibility to go back to Qatar?  Is Qatar in the table again?
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  We continue to talk to Qatar, who wants to play a constructive role in engaging the Maduro regime, the opposition, the United States, other players.  At the moment, there’s not much traction on talks, and what we’re instead continuing to see are negative steps by the Maduro regime in the aftermath of an election where we have been very clear our judgment is that Edmundo Gonzalez received the most votes. 
 
So, we’ll continue to work, particularly with countries in the region, to try to develop a common approach forward to support democracy and a democratic transition in Venezuela.  But I will say that at the moment there is not a substantial diplomatic opportunity to make progress, and we’re going to
have to keep looking for one.
 
Q    Jake, on the Middle East, the Lebanese are saying at least 31 were killed in that bombing of a building that apparently targeted at least one Hezbollah commander.  Has the U.S. figured out who exactly was targeted and killed?
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  The Israelis have announced, and I believe Hezbollah itself has confirmed, some of the people who were killed in that strike.  And I will let Israel and Hezbollah speak to it, because obviously we don’t have an independent capacity at this point to confirm.  But I believe a fair amount of that is out in the public domain at this point.
 
Q    If at least one of those was one of those responsible for organizing the barracks bombing back in the ‘80s, how significant would that be that he’s now dead?
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  That individual has American blood on his hands and has a Rewards for Justice price on his head.  And he is somebody who the United States promised long ago we would do everything we could to see brought to justice. 
 
And anytime a terrorist who has murdered Americans is brought to justice, we believe that that is a good outcome.  But again, I’m not in a position this morning, until I have the opportunity to talk again to my Israeli counterparts today, to formally confirm anything; just to say, you know, 1983 seems like a long time ago, but for a lot of families, a lot of people, it was — they’re still living with it every day.
 
Q    One other.  Paul Whelan and Evan Gershkovich have been in Washington in recent days, mostly to visit with lawmakers.  Is there any plan for them to meet with the President?
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  I guess not.  The President met with both of them, obviously, when they came back to the States.  So there wasn’t — we didn’t have a plan for them to sit down this past week or this coming week in Washington.  But, you know, I’m sure he would be happy to see them again at some point. 
 
Q    There’s a report that I got (inaudible) disagree with about U.S. officials conceding that there won’t be a deal during the President’s term.  What is your assessment of that?
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  I think that’s crazy.  I mean —
 
Q    So, it was correct that you’d (inaudible).  (Laughter.)  (Inaudible) disagree with it, that yes —
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  This is not me sitting here saying, “Hey, there will be a deal.”  One can’t know.  And I’ve — you’ve heard me repeatedly use this George Mitchell line of “700 days of failure, one day of success.”  But this is diplomacy.  Every day, you get up and you try to drive towards a deal that brings about a ceasefire, the return of hostages, surge of humanitarian assistance, and ultimately the end of the war.  We’re doing that today.  We’re going to do that tomorrow.  We’re going to do that every day. 
 
And I do still believe there is a path to get there.  It has been a winding path, a frustrating path, but we are still on that path, and we hope to reach the destination.  But we’re also mindful of the fact and very clear-eyed about the fact that there’s still obstacles in the way; we’re going to do our best to clear them.  And I can’t make any predictions about what’s going to happen, but what I can certainly say is we are not conceding that, period.
 
Q    But we’ve been waiting a while in terms of a new bridging proposal.  Is that right?  So when is — when do you expect to put that on the table?
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  I can’t tell you that because we’re not at a point right now where I can — where we’re prepared to put something on the table.  We’re continuing to work with Qatar and Egypt.  They’re talking to Hamas.  We’re talking to Israel.  The Qataris and Egyptians are talking to Israel.  And when we feel ready to take another step, we’ll take another step. 
 
Q    What’s the holdup?
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  Well, at the moment, we don’t feel like we’re in a position, if we put something down today, to get both sides to say yes to it.  Could that change over the course of the coming days?  It could.  You know — yeah, I’ll leave it at that for now.
 
Q    Jake, in terms of the events of last week in Lebanon, do you have any assessments what that has done to the operational capabilities of Hezbollah?  And what is your current level of concern that what you’ve been trying to prevent the last, you know, 11-plus months could start off as (inaudible)?
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  It stands to reason that Lebanese Hezbollah’s capabilities have taken a hit.  How significant a hit, how that translates to their ability to represent a threat to Israel, I think we still need some more assessment to reach more guidance on.
 
The risk of escalation is real; it has been since October 7th.  There are moments where it is more acute than others.  I think we are in one of those moments where it is more acute. 
 
But I would take a step back and make an observation that I don’t think gets sufficient attention in the reporting on this dynamic, which is that Hezbollah started this whole thing.  Hamas attacks on October 7th, this vicious massacre.  And then, as Nasrallah just said in his speech this week, the way he put it, Nasrallah opened the Northern Front. 
 
Israel didn’t start just randomly attacking into Lebanon.  Hezbollah and its allies in — its terrorist allies in Lebanon started attacking Israel.  And tens of thousands of Israeli citizens had to leave their homes.  That led to an exchange of fire, and then Lebanese citizens had to leave their homes.  And we’ve been in that dynamic ever since. 
 
So, that’s an important structural factor that I think, kind of, gets set aside in the commentary and the coverage of the current circumstance.
 
That being said, the United States’ position is we would like to see calm on the northern border and a durable solution that allows the people on both sides of that border to return to their homes.  We are driving at that.  Amos Hochstein was recently back in the region to work towards that.  I’ve spoken with my Israeli counterparts just in the last couple of days to see how we find a way forward on that. 
 
And so, while the risk of escalation is real, we actually believe there is also a distinct avenue to getting to a cessation of hostilities and a durable solution that makes people on both sides of the border feel secure, and we’re going to do everything that we can to bring that about. 
 
Q    And can I just (inaudible) — when you say the risk of escalation is real, are you saying the IDF flattening tower blocks in Beirut is not an escalation?
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  I think the question he was asking — the heart of his question was: could we get into a wider war that we have been trying to avoid for the last 11 months.  I think that’s what the question was.
 
Q    Then I’ll ask the question.
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  I was answering (inaudible).
 
Q    I’ll ask the question then: Was the IDF strike an escalation, in your view?
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  Look, when I talk about escalation, I mean where does this take us from the point of view of, “Are we going to end up in a wider war.”  We’re not there yet.  I hope we do not get there. 
 
When you pose a question, “Was this strike escalation?  Was that strike escalation?” the United States is not going to score-keep like that.  There’s a number of different ways to look at this strike.  The chief way I personally look at it goes back to the discussion we were having before, which is it was a strike against a senior terrorist who has both Israeli and American lives on his hands. 
 
So we could pick any moment, any set of rockets launched by Hezbollah, any set of strikes by Israel, and say, “Is this an escalation?  Is that an escalation?” and so forth.  I think it’s not a particularly useful exercise.  For us, the most useful exercise is to try to drive both parties to a place where we get an agreed and durable outcome that can end the cycle and keep us from ending up in the larger war that, as we were just talking about, we’ve worked so hard to (inaudible).
 
Q    Is there any announcement that we should expect next week about Haiti?  (Inaudible) report that says that even though we have now the Kenya team there and the security forces, 80 percent of Port-au-Prince is run by gangs.  Things are not getting better for the people.  Violence keep growing.  And of course, we don’t have elections or plan of a government soon. 
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  Look, things are not where we would like them to be in Haiti, but I think it is not correct to say that things have not gotten better from a low point when flights were shut down, the port was shut down, it looked like the entire government was going to be run out of the country.
 
We have improved the situation from that low point, but the progress we have made has been slower and more uneven than we’d like it to be.  Our goal is to continue to enhance the Multilateral Security Support Mission and ultimately work with the United Nations to make sure that it gets institutionalized. 
 
But I don’t know that we have any particular announcements next week.  Rather, our goal is to use the U.N. General Assembly to get more resources, more contributions, and a common vision around building step by step on what we’ve put in place so that we can improve the situation beyond where it is right now.
 
MODERATOR:  We have time for about two more questions.
 
Q    Just a follow-up.  And how can that happen?  I know Colombia wanted to help, but, like, it’s not an actual mission like (inaudible) it was the U.N. (inaudible) — is this a security group, and the U.S. is leading the efforts.  So how the countries will get involved, and how can they operate?  Like, Mexico cannot (inaudible) officers —
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  Well, a number of countries have pledged contributions, including police units, former police units.  And so, the first thing that can happen is we can turn those pledges into reality, and then we can work bilaterally with countries like Mexico and Colombia on their legal requirements to try to satisfy them so that they could, in fact, (inaudible).
 
Q    To put a pin, though, you know, the discussion about China, you know, before, in the lead-up to this, administration officials at the podium were telegraphing that there could be talk about aggressive PRC military action on fair trade practices, tensions over the Taiwan Strait.  You know, preview that there’s going to be discussion of North Korea.  I know you said that the Quad is not about one country, but to China and to many people, it looks like it’s focusing on China.  So I’m curious to what your response to me, to folks that say you’re trying to have it both ways on China. 
 
MR. SULLIVAN:  I guess what I would say, and I think I said this before, is the leaders are going to talk about all of the significant developments and dynamics in the Indo-Pacific.  Everything you just mentioned fits into that category.  So we don’t take issues off the table to discuss or speak about. 
 
But my point is that the purpose of the Quad is not to come together around China or any other country.  It’s to come together around how to construct a free and open Indo-Pacific.  And actions and policies that disrupt or undermine that are certainly not just of interest, but are going to be a matter of discussion for Quad members. 
 
But the way I square the circle is to say these issues are on the agenda because they relate to a free and open Indo-Pacific, but China is not the focus of the Quad, and the Quad is not about one country.  It is about a larger vision that we’re (inaudible).
 
MODERATOR:  All right, thanks, everyone.
 
9:26 A.M. EDT

The post On-the-Record Press Gaggle APNSA Jake Sullivan at the Quad Leaders Summit appeared first on The White House.