Transcript - Press Conference: Karine Jean-Pierre Holds a Press Briefing at The White House - June 23, 2022 | Factba.se

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:00:00 - 00:00:24 ()

Hi. Good afternoon, everybody. So today we have -- John Kirby has joined us. And he's going to talk -- talk to us a little bit, talk to you all a little bit about the trip, give a preview of the trip, G7 and NATO -- the President, as you all know, is leaving on Saturday for five days -- and give a little bit of an update on the PDA, right?

John Kirby

00:00:24 - 00:00:27 ()

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:00:27 - 00:00:28 ()

Our next security assistance to Ukraine.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:00:28 - 00:00:32 ()

Okay. All yours, Kirby.

John Kirby

00:00:32 - 00:00:49 ()

Thank you. Okay, just off the top here, I think today you saw that the United States announced another additional $450 million worth of security assistance to Ukraine as part of our commitment to help Ukraine defend its democracy in the face of unprovoked Russian aggression.

John Kirby

00:00:49 - 00:01:06 ()

This package contains weapons and equipment, including new High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems, tens of thousands of additional rounds of ammunition for the artillery systems that have already been provided as well, and patrol boats to help Ukraine defend its coast and its waterways.

John Kirby

00:01:06 - 00:01:25 ()

Now, this is the 13th time that President Biden has authorized a Presidential Drawdown package during this crisis, bringing the total amount of security assistance that we provided to Ukraine to approximately $6.1 billion just since February 24th; approximately $6.8 billion since the beginning of this administration.

John Kirby

00:01:25 - 00:01:34 ()

As President Biden told President Zelenskyy when they spoke last week, the United States will continue to bolster Ukraine's defenses and support its sovereignty and its territorial integrity.

John Kirby

00:01:34 - 00:01:44 ()

The bravery and determination of the Ukrainian armed forces, let alone their fellow citizens, continues to inspire the world. And we are committed to standing with them as they fight for their freedom.

John Kirby

00:01:44 - 00:02:05 ()

Now, this announcement comes just before the President's trip, leaving Saturday for Europe, at a watershed moment in transatlantic solidarity in the post-Cold War era, not just for European security, but for an alignment like we've never seen before in how we confront some of the biggest challenges of our time. And not all of those challenges are driven by borders.

John Kirby

00:02:05 - 00:02:28 ()

Throughout the G7 Summit in Germany and NATO Summit in Spain, you're going to see clearly how the President's day-one focus on revitalizing alliances and partnership -- partnerships has allowed us to seize this moment to benefit the American people, support Ukraine, and hold Russia accountable, all while staying focused on the other challenges that define the coming decades, and that includes the challenges posed by China.

John Kirby

00:02:28 - 00:02:36 ()

The President will be conducting in-person, face-to-face diplomacy with a diverse range of leaders and international organizations throughout this trip.

John Kirby

00:02:36 - 00:02:44 ()

He knows -- he knows better than most that there's no substitute for that kind of personal engagement. You don't surge trust, you got to build it.

John Kirby

00:02:44 - 00:02:54 ()

In Germany, the President will meet with Chancellor Scholz, who holds the G7 presidency, to continue close coordination on the G7 agenda and the core priorities we will advance together in the coming days.

John Kirby

00:02:54 - 00:03:06 ()

Some of these priorities include new commitments to further isolate Russia from the global economy, target the Russian defense supply chain, and continue cracking down on the evasion of these unprecedented sanctions.

John Kirby

00:03:06 - 00:03:17 ()

Because of our actions, Russia is struggling to make bond payments, edging closer to default. And our measures will only tighten the screws and restrict revenue Mr. Putin needs to fund this war.

John Kirby

00:03:17 - 00:03:22 ()

You will also see new commitments on managing the impact that Putin's war has already had on energy and food prices.

John Kirby

00:03:22 - 00:03:42 ()

All this is in keeping with the principles President Biden outlined before Russia's further invasion of Ukraine, and that is that we will work together to ensure Ukraine can defend itself on the battlefield and be in the strongest possible position at the negotiating table as we maximize the cost of Putin and his enablers and minimize the impact of his war on the U.S. and our allies.

John Kirby

00:03:42 - 00:03:48 ()

You also see the G7 come together on some of the key challenges posed by China, as I said.

John Kirby

00:03:48 - 00:04:06 ()

And last but not least, President Biden will formally launch the Global Infrastructure Partnership that G7 leaders agreed to explore last year to offer a positive alternative to infrastructure models that sell debt traps to low- and middle-income partner countries and advance U.S. economic competitiveness on our national security.

John Kirby

00:04:06 - 00:04:18 ()

These lines of effort at the G7 will build on the work we've done over the past year to drive the global economic recovery and serve as a leader in imposing significant and swift costs on Russia for its war.

John Kirby

00:04:18 - 00:04:27 ()

We've heard for years now people talking about how the G7 was becoming a spent force. But President Biden's leadership and this pivotal inflection point have buried that storyline.

John Kirby

00:04:27 - 00:04:33 ()

The G7 is among the most potent institutions in the world today, with like-minded democracies solving problems.

John Kirby

00:04:33 - 00:04:40 ()

Now, after the G7, the President will meet with President Sánchez and the King and Queen in Spain. Spain, as you know, is hosting the NATO Summit.

John Kirby

00:04:40 - 00:04:54 ()

At the NATO Summit, leaders will announce new force posture commitments to strengthen NATO's defense and deterrent posture. The U.S. will announce steps to strengthen European security, alongside expected major new contributions from Allies.

John Kirby

00:04:54 - 00:05:10 ()

And for the first time, the summit will include Indo-Pacific leaders from Australia, Japan, New Zealand, and the Republic of Korea, making clear that whether it's in Europe or the Indo-Pacific region, the United States and our Allies and partners will defend the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity.

John Kirby

00:05:10 - 00:05:25 ()

Now, finally, the trip will also serve as a clear contrast to some early predictions that never really played out. Instead of a shaken West, for instance, we are more resolved than ever to support Ukraine and are leading that effort head on at both the G7 and the NATO Summit.

John Kirby

00:05:25 - 00:05:42 ()

Instead of distracting us from the Indo-Pacific and China, the President's leadership with respect to supporting Ukraine has actually galvanized leaders in that region and effectively linked our efforts in Europe and in Asia. And those Asian countries that will be participating in the NATO Summit, I think, speak volumes about that fact.

John Kirby

00:05:42 - 00:05:55 ()

And on top of all that, we've strengthened our determination to advance a democratic vision that will define the coming decades in terms of building fair economy, shaping the rules of the road for tech, cyber, quantum, space, climate change, and a whole lot more.

John Kirby

00:05:55 - 00:06:04 ()

The President has never been more confident that this vision will win out over more autocratic and corrupt visions. And he's looking forward to this trip to advance all those elements.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:06:04 - 00:06:04 ()

All right, questions.

John Kirby

00:06:04 - 00:06:05 ()

With that, we'll take questions.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:06:05 - 00:06:06 ()

Go ahead, Steve.

Question

00:06:06 - 00:06:14 ()

John, NATO is expected to come out with a new strategic concept aimed at China. What is that? And why is it necessary?

John Kirby

00:06:14 - 00:06:28 ()

The strategic concept last was written in 2010. And, my goodness, a lot has changed in the world and on the security landscape since 2010. And, certainly, a lot has changed in the Alliance's focus.

John Kirby

00:06:28 - 00:06:40 ()

Back in 2010, you might recall, the NATO -- NATO was very deeply involved in the war in Afghanistan. And again, the security landscape has changed. And it's time now for a new strategic concept, 12 years later.

John Kirby

00:06:40 - 00:06:55 ()

And not only has the landscape changed, particularly from Mr. Putin's war in Ukraine, but military capabilities and organizational concepts and operational concepts have changed as well. And it's time for the Alliance to step up to those -- to those new developments.

John Kirby

00:06:55 - 00:07:24 ()

I think it's a reflection -- you asked about China specifically -- I think it's a reflection of our allies' equal concerns over the effect of Chinese economic practices, use of forced labor, intellectual theft, and coercive, aggressive behavior not just in the region, but elsewhere around the world, that they believe it's important to factor China into the new strategic concept.

John Kirby

00:07:24 - 00:07:45 ()

It builds on -- you might remember, less than a year ago, the defense ministers, for the first time in NATO, put mention of China in the communiqué. So it's building on what has been months and months of discussions and deliberations with the Allies about the threat that China poses to international security well beyond just the Indo-Pacific region.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:07:45 - 00:07:46 ()

Go ahead, Phil.

Question

00:07:46 - 00:07:56 ()

Hey, John. Thanks for doing this. The durability of the coalition or alliances that have been put into place to respond to the invasion, what's the level of concern right now about how that can be sustained?

Question

00:07:56 - 00:08:05 ()

And you mentioned food and energy prices. Are there things that the President or the U.S. will specifically put on the table to try and ease some of the issues that have been rattling elements of that?

John Kirby

00:08:05 - 00:08:20 ()

To your second question, the answer is yes. I don't want to get ahead of specific deliverables right now, Phil. But I think it's fair to say that -- that there will be announcements forthcoming about how to impose further cost and consequences on Russia.

John Kirby

00:08:20 - 00:08:22 ()

But again, I don't want to get ahead of that.

John Kirby

00:08:22 - 00:08:37 ()

On your first question, I mean, my goodness, he's going -- he's going into a NATO Summit where the Alliance has truly never been more unified. And now there's active discussions about adding to that list of nations another two -- two countries willing to seek accession in NATO.

John Kirby

00:08:37 - 00:08:59 ()

It's just truly never been more relevant or viable. And the same goes for the G7. And the -- if you just look at the scope of the things they're going to be talking about, from climate, energy, food, food security, as well as the war in Ukraine, and the fact that there are additional countries coming to the G7 -- four additional countries -- there's an awful lot -- there's an awful lot of unity to see here.

John Kirby

00:08:59 - 00:09:17 ()

You know, we -- we've had this discussion since before the invasion: You know, can NATO stay solid? Are they going to be fractured? Because, of course, the last thing Mr. Putin wants is a strong NATO on his Western flank. And, of course, he's gotten just that. And we haven't seen any fractures or fissures.

John Kirby

00:09:17 - 00:09:33 ()

I mean, every country speaks for themselves, every country has concerns for what they're willing to do or not do. But as far as the Alliance goes, it truly has never been stronger and more viable than it is today. And the President is looking forward, when he gets to Spain, to -- to seeing that, to seeing that in real time.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:09:33 - 00:09:35 ()

I'm going to go to the back. Nadia.

Question

00:09:35 - 00:09:44 ()

Thank you. John, I noticed that you have invited other countries to join, like South Africa, Argentina, Senegal, and India.

John Kirby

00:09:44 - 00:09:46 ()

India and Indonesia.

Question

00:09:46 - 00:09:58 ()

And Indonesia. Some of them have huge economy and others have lesser economy. What was the significance of inviting these countries? And is it an attempt from the administration to take them off from any alliance with Russia?

John Kirby

00:09:58 - 00:10:02 ()

To splinter them off from alliances with Russia?

Question

00:10:02 - 00:10:05 ()

It could be a potential -- potentially could be. Some of them, not all.

John Kirby

00:10:05 - 00:10:28 ()

So these -- these additional countries that you mentioned, they have been invited because there's certain agenda items at the G7 that -- that will apply to them. And I'll let them speak for their involvement in those sessions and -- and the relevance to them. But -- but because the agenda is so diverse and so deep, it was -- it was deemed appropriate to bring them into that discussion.

John Kirby

00:10:28 - 00:10:39 ()

It is not about trying to splinter them off or coax them away from any other association or partnership that they might have with another country. That's not the goal here.

John Kirby

00:10:39 - 00:10:52 ()

The goal is to unify around a set of common principles and initiatives that the G7 -- you know, you'll -- you'll hear more about this at the summit -- but that the G7 wants to advance in terms of climate change, energy and food security.

John Kirby

00:10:52 - 00:11:08 ()

As I said, adding additional costs and consequences to Mr. Putin, further isolating Russia -- all these nations have a pi- -- a piece of that. And certainly in the G7, there's -- there's unity around that sort of an agenda.

Question

00:11:08 - 00:11:32 ()

You were talking about the effort to add two additional countries to NATO right now. There's obviously been real challenges as it relates to Turkey with the addition of Finland and Sweden. Can you take us, as best possible, behind the scenes of the status of that, if there's going to be a direct contact between President Biden and President Erdoğan, and how you go about shifting that? Because I know there's unity among the members of NATO, but there's not unity among the members of NATO about the addition of the fast track of those two countries.

John Kirby

00:11:32 - 00:11:46 ()

Yeah. So, clearly, the potential accession here of Sweden and Finland will be on the agenda at the summit. No question about that. And, actually, there is terrific support inside the Alliance for their accession.

John Kirby

00:11:46 - 00:12:02 ()

Right now, the conversations are -- are trilateral between Sweden, Finland, and Turkey. We're confident that they're going to be able to get there, that they're going to be able to work out the differences that they have, and that Sweden and Finland will be able to join the Alliance.

John Kirby

00:12:02 - 00:12:11 ()

When exactly, I couldn't tell you that. I mean, these discussions are still ongoing. But we're confident that it's going to lead to 32 nations in the Alliance.

John Kirby

00:12:11 - 00:12:19 ()

And we have also indicated that -- that should it be desired, we'd be willing to help in those -- in those conversations. But right now, it's between those nations.

John Kirby

00:12:19 - 00:12:27 ()

And I don't have anything in particular in terms of bilateral discussions to speak to or to announce today with respect to President Erdoğan.

Question

00:12:27 - 00:12:31 ()

John, you mentioned food security is -- food security is one of the --

John Kirby

00:12:31 - 00:12:31 ()

Question

00:12:31 - 00:12:43 ()

-- topics. A couple days ago, you spoke to us a bit about the grain trapped in Ukraine. Is that going to be a subject of conversation at the G7? Or can you give us an update on either the bloc's efforts or U.S. efforts specifically to get some of that grain out?

John Kirby

00:12:43 - 00:12:57 ()

Well, I do think food security in general will be a topic at the G7. And I certainly think that with -- inside the context of what's going on in Ukraine, it absolutely will as well. Again, I don't want to get ahead of specific announcements one way or the other.

John Kirby

00:12:57 - 00:13:04 ()

I would tell you that we are already working with Allies and partners to help try to get this grain out of the country.

John Kirby

00:13:04 - 00:13:21 ()

As I said the other day, we know it's a perishable good and it's an important good. And we have been able to increase the flow of some grain through the west by ground routes out of Ukraine, but it's not sufficient, it's not enough, given the immense amount of grain that -- that's sitting unused right now inside Ukraine.

John Kirby

00:13:21 - 00:13:29 ()

So, we know we have to find other ways to do this. And we're willing -- as I said the other day, the President is willing to keep an open mind about that.

John Kirby

00:13:29 - 00:13:41 ()

Obviously, it would certainly help if the Russians would lift what is essentially a blockade in the Black Sea and a blockade over Odessa, which they have obviously shown no -- no desire to lift. But that's a real key here.

John Kirby

00:13:41 - 00:13:58 ()

And so, you -- I know you know, you're aware that -- that Turkey is talking to Russia about this. We certainly welcome Turkey's involvement in trying to broker some sort of arrangement where that grain can tran- -- can be transferred by -- by sea. But I think it just remains to be seen whether that's going to be viable.

Question

00:13:58 - 00:14:02 ()

There were some reports out of Turkey that there might be some kind of meeting next week on this. Is there anything you can share on that?

John Kirby

00:14:02 - 00:14:20 ()

I don't have any details on that. I'd refer you to our Turkish counterparts and our Turkish allies on that. I -- again, we welcome their efforts to try to get this to happen because it is absolutely -- I mean, it's critical. I mean, as we -- Putin is weaponizing food, literally, and this is a prime example of that.

Question

00:14:20 - 00:14:20 ()

Question

00:14:20 - 00:14:35 ()

Yes, if I may ask you a question on a different topic. Is there any consideration being given to fully unfreezing Afghan reserve funds? I know that, given the devastating earthquake this week, there has been an appeal to do that. Is that something you all are considering?

John Kirby

00:14:35 - 00:15:05 ()

What I can tell you is two things. One, we're still working through the processes here with respect to that three and a half billion dollars that you're referring to. That was assets frozen here in the United States. We're working through a series of processes, including on the legal front, to see how we can get that access quicker than -- than we can right now. But we want to make sure -- it has to be done the right way. And so there's a -- there's a process here that we're working through.

John Kirby

00:15:05 - 00:15:20 ()

But we're not waiting. That -- that money is set aside, and President Biden was wise to do that, to set that money aside for use in Afghanistan for humanitarian assistance purposes. And that's still the intent every -- in every way.

John Kirby

00:15:20 - 00:15:49 ()

But there's an urgent need now. And so the President, while we're working on that process and we want to get it solved as quickly as possible -- and there's a lot of hoops to jump through -- we're also working very, very stridently right now through USAID and their international partners to get aid and assistance to the Afghan people now. I think the death toll is now over 1,000. We understand that, and we're working hard to get that aid and assistance to them. And frankly, it's already starting to show up through our international partners, through USAID's international partners.

Question

00:15:49 - 00:16:00 ()

Can you articulate at all, when you say that there are some loopholes to go through and that it may take some time, some of the legal challenges? Can you help us understand what -- what has been some of the hang-ups?

John Kirby

00:16:00 - 00:16:01 ()

Yeah, it's not loopholes. There's a -- there's a --

Question

00:16:01 - 00:16:03 ()

I'm sorry, [inaudible].

John Kirby

00:16:03 - 00:16:13 ()

Yeah. There's a legal process here that has to be pursued to be able to apply that -- to be able to apply that funding for that purpose. And we're still working our way through that.

John Kirby

00:16:13 - 00:16:21 ()

And I think because we're still working through a legal process here, it wouldn't be wise for me to talk in too much detail here from the podium about that.

Question

00:16:21 - 00:16:35 ()

Thank you, Karine. Thank you, John. So, earlier, you talked about the debt trap that -- you know, you won't address that issue on this trip. The Global Infrastructure Partnership, which is going to be announced on this trip, how --

John Kirby

00:16:35 - 00:16:35 ()

Question

00:16:35 - 00:16:44 ()

-- is it a reboot on the Build Back Better World? And is it supposed to be an alternative to China's One Belt and One Road Initiative?

Question

00:16:44 - 00:17:00 ()

And I want to add a question on the Allies. You're talking about the Allies have never been stronger. However, we see yesterday China is hosting a BRICS business forum, and we see India and Brazil sitting down with Xi Jinping and Putin. So, what's the White House reaction to that?

John Kirby

00:17:00 - 00:17:10 ()

So, let me take the second one first, because I tend to forget questions if I do them in the order you ask them. [Laughter]

Question

00:17:10 - 00:17:11 ()

John Kirby

00:17:11 - 00:17:16 ()

No, it's okay. It's just age. [Laughter]

Question

00:17:16 - 00:17:16 ()

John Kirby

00:17:16 - 00:17:18 ()

John Kirby

00:17:18 - 00:17:35 ()

So, on the -- on the BRICS, we'll let those countries speak for themselves and for the meetings they're having and the discussions and -- and whatever outcomes there might be from that. They can speak for themselves.

John Kirby

00:17:35 - 00:17:59 ()

What I think is important for us to speak to today is this weekend is G7 and the NATO Summit, and multilateral efforts that President Biden is applying to revitalizing these alliances and partnerships and really -- and really putting forth ideas and concrete initiatives that are going to -- that are going to help -- help our national security, help economic security, help food security. And so that's what we're focused on.

John Kirby

00:17:59 - 00:18:11 ()

Those countries can speak for themselves. And it's obviously not the first time that they have gotten together, but I'll let them speak for their agenda. I can only talk about ours, and I just laid that out in the opening statement.

John Kirby

00:18:11 - 00:18:53 ()

On the Global Infrastructure Partnership, I think, you know, this was something that the President unveiled at the G summit -- G7 summit last year. And so, this year, what you're going to see is him and his G7 partners really actualizing this. You'll -- I don't want to get ahead here of announcements, but you'll -- you'll see the G7 really putting some energy and some resources behind this going forward. And it is about -- as I put in my opening statement, it is about alternatives to other models out there that -- that are highly transactional and actually work to the disadvantage of lower- and middle-income countries.

John Kirby

00:18:53 - 00:19:05 ()

We think there's -- there's better ways of doing business, there's better ways of fostering economic development and infrastructure than some of the models out there. And we believe that this is one of them, and we're excited to get it started.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:19:05 - 00:19:07 ()

Question

00:19:07 - 00:19:08 ()

[Inaudible] my question.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:19:08 - 00:19:10 ()

Oh, okay. Go ahead.

Question

00:19:10 - 00:19:23 ()

Thank you. I had a question about NATO and Sahel, because you mentioned Russia, China, but I understand Spain and also France pushed, like, for, you know, the summit to also address threats originating on the southern front --

John Kirby

00:19:23 - 00:19:23 ()

Question

00:19:23 - 00:19:32 ()

-- like jihadism, and, you know, non-military threats linked to climate change, food and security, migration, et cetera. So, will this part be part of the discussions as well?

John Kirby

00:19:32 - 00:19:52 ()

Look, in general, the security situation on the southern flank of NATO is almost always on the agenda. And we recognize the challenges and the threats that continue to affect security of our NATO Allies on that southern flank.

John Kirby

00:19:52 - 00:20:03 ()

You know, there's a lot of focus right now on the eastern flank, as it should be. But there remains a continued effort to make sure we're also paying attention to the southern flank. So, I think, in general, it will come up.

John Kirby

00:20:03 - 00:20:12 ()

I won't get into details about the Sahel specifically. And that's really a better question left to -- to those countries in the Alliance to speak to.

John Kirby

00:20:12 - 00:20:16 ()

But just in general speaking, security along the southern flank remains key.

Question

00:20:16 - 00:20:24 ()

John, how much longer does the White House believe the war in Ukraine will last? How much longer would you say that the White House believes the war in Ukraine will last -- weeks, months, or years?

John Kirby

00:20:24 - 00:20:42 ()

I don't think anybody can know for sure, sir. We've said when Mr. Putin decided that he was going to focus on the Donbas region, which is a more confined geographic space, that it could be a prolonged fight. And that was -- what? -- a couple of months ago. And we're starting to see that now play out.

John Kirby

00:20:42 - 00:20:50 ()

This is an area of Ukraine that both armies know well. They've been fighting over it since 2014. And it's largely a gunfight. It's largely about artillery.

John Kirby

00:20:50 - 00:21:11 ()

And what you're seeing now is movement in almost block by block, street by street. I mean, much smaller movement of smaller-sized units and smaller progress. The Russian progress has been incremental at best, and they have been thwarted at almost every turn. The Ukrainians continue to fight hard for this.

John Kirby

00:21:11 - 00:21:17 ()

So, I think if anybody told you they could predict how long this was going to go, they'd be fooling you.

Question

00:21:17 - 00:21:24 ()

Let me follow up on that. The longer it drags on, does that increase the risk U.S. soldiers could be pulled into a hot war with Russia the longer it goes by?

John Kirby

00:21:24 - 00:21:39 ()

The President has been crystal clear that there's not going to be U.S. troops fighting in Ukraine. What we are going to do is continue to help Ukraine defend itself. And that's why we just announced yet another package -- $450 million today -- to help that -- to help that be the case.

Question

00:21:39 - 00:21:53 ()

But what about Russia condemning Israel? Russia has been threatening Israel for helping Ukraine and also for Israel's bombing of the Damascus, Syria, airport. Any response to Israel that's being threatened by Russia?

John Kirby

00:21:53 - 00:22:11 ()

I think our response would be the same as it has been now for the last several months. I mean, obviously, Russia is feeling the pressure -- the pressure of being isolated, the pressure of having a military on the ground that clearly has not performed as advertised.

John Kirby

00:22:11 - 00:22:22 ()

I mean, they still haven't solved their command-and-control problems, their logistical problems, their unit cohesion problems, their joint fires integration problems. And so they tend to lash out at countries that are providing support to Ukraine.

John Kirby

00:22:22 - 00:22:41 ()

We're grateful for the support that Israel has been -- has been providing, as well as so many other nations. More than 50 have signed up to provide some measure of security assistance to Ukraine. And that shows you that this is not just a Europe problem. It's nations around the world that are stepping up to hear -- to defend Ukraine.

Question

00:22:41 - 00:22:56 ()

Regarding G7 and concrete initiatives, does the administration support Germany's proposal for G7 countries to set specific minimum standards for each country to cut fossil fuel emissions and combat climate change -- a "climate club" idea?

John Kirby

00:22:56 - 00:23:15 ()

Again, I don't want to get ahead of specifics here on the discussion. Obviously, climate change and cutting emissions is a key component of President Biden's agenda here. I mean, he just met today with -- with executives for offshore wind capabilities. I mean, that's a key -- that's a key focus of our agenda on climate.

John Kirby

00:23:15 - 00:23:22 ()

But I don't have anything specific with respect to this proposal and to what degree, you know, it's going to be --

Question

00:23:22 - 00:23:24 ()

Do you expect this to be part of the bilateral with Scholz?

John Kirby

00:23:24 - 00:23:32 ()

I think there'll be a whole range of issues that he'll be talking about with the -- with Chancellor Scholz. And I have no doubt that climate change will be -- will be on that.

John Kirby

00:23:32 - 00:23:32 ()

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:23:32 - 00:23:33 ()

Jane, and then the woman behind you.

John Kirby

00:23:33 - 00:23:35 ()

Janny (ph), how you doing?

Question

00:23:35 - 00:23:36 ()

Good to see you.

John Kirby

00:23:36 - 00:23:38 ()

Been a long time.

Question

00:23:38 - 00:23:39 ()

Yeah, thank you.

John Kirby

00:23:39 - 00:23:40 ()

I know what's coming. [Laughter]

Question

00:23:40 - 00:24:02 ()

Yes, I [inaudible]. I have two questions for you, on NATO Summit and Korea. Do you have any plans to hold a trilateral summit between U.S. and South Korea and Japan at the NATO Summit?

John Kirby

00:24:02 - 00:24:13 ()

I don't have any additional meetings to talk about today, outside of the agenda of the G7 Summit. So I don't have anything to announce with respect to a trilateral meeting.

John Kirby

00:24:13 - 00:24:26 ()

I think you know, and we've talked about this many times, that President Biden is keen to see greater trilateral cooperation between us and our two allies. In fact, he just was -- just visited there not long ago, in Japan and South Korea.

John Kirby

00:24:26 - 00:24:35 ()

We also are keen to see increased bilateral cooperation between Japan and South Korea. And that's happening. So he's very much looking forward to seeing them.

Question

00:24:35 - 00:24:57 ()

Yeah, second question. China opposes South Korea's participation in the NATO Summit. Do you think if South Korea operating defensively within NATO, it will sufficiently contain China and Russia?

John Kirby

00:24:57 - 00:25:34 ()

So a couple of thoughts there. China doesn't get a veto on what meetings the South Koreans attend and associate themselves with. And this isn't about an Asian version of NATO. NATO is a transatlantic security alliance, the most effective, the most viable one in the world, the most successful one in the world. And we're excited that the South Koreans are going to be there to talk about this. And as I said -- to be part of the agenda there.

John Kirby

00:25:34 - 00:25:58 ()

And as I said at the outset, it's an indication of the linkage of global security between Europe and the Indo-Pacific. It's -- it's not one or the other anymore. It's not binary. The same kinds of assaults on territorial integrity and sovereignty that we're seeing in Europe can happen in the Indo-Pacific. And, of course, our South Korean allies know that better than most.

John Kirby

00:25:58 - 00:26:11 ()

So we think it's significant that they're going to be there. We're excited to have them there. But this isn't about -- this isn't about creating some like version of NATO in the Pacific.

Question

00:26:11 - 00:26:31 ()

Thanks. You just noted that the U.S. intends to continue, obviously, supporting Ukraine, but I'm wondering if -- how much the administration is weighing its aid to Ukraine in terms of the economic hardships here at home, and if there's a point at which the U.S. will curb its support for Ukraine down the line.

John Kirby

00:26:31 - 00:26:34 ()

Can you repeat the first part? How much what?

Question

00:26:34 - 00:26:40 ()

How much the administration is weighing its aid to Ukraine with the economic hardships that Americans are seeing here at home.

John Kirby

00:26:40 - 00:26:57 ()

That's a -- that's a great question. So, you know, we just got an additional supplemental from Congress for $40 billion. Not all of that is designed for security assistance; a lot of it is for humanitarian assistance as well. And it was passed on a bipartisan basis.

John Kirby

00:26:57 - 00:27:24 ()

It's clear that members of Congress from both parties believe strongly that we have to continue to support Ukraine, and so we're going to do that. And will we need to go back for additional funding? We just don't know right now. I mean, war is, by nature, unpredictable. And so President Biden has made it clear we're going to continue to support Ukraine as much as we can, as fast as we can. And we're doing that. And we'll see where this goes going forward.

John Kirby

00:27:24 - 00:27:37 ()

But obviously, the President is not insensitive to the -- to the pressures, particularly in gas and food prices, that the American people are facing. And you have to balance that, and he's trying to strike that balance.

John Kirby

00:27:37 - 00:28:00 ()

He said, and -- I mean, he has said this since he said it -- but when he made clear that we were going to support Ukraine in this fight, literally, for their lives, let alone their democracy, that there were going to be costs incurred by that. And we're starting to see -- we are seeing that -- that happen right now. The President was nothing but honest with the American people about that.

Question

00:28:00 - 00:28:01 ()

Mr. Kirby, does the President support --

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:28:01 - 00:28:02 ()

The gentleman in the blue. The gentleman in the blue.

Question

00:28:02 - 00:28:03 ()

Mr. Kirby, does the President --

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:28:03 - 00:28:07 ()

We'll get -- we'll get to you, Simon. Simon, right after the gentleman in the blue. Right behind her.

Question

00:28:07 - 00:28:08 ()

John Kirby

00:28:08 - 00:28:08 ()

They're all in blue. [Laughs]

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:28:08 - 00:28:12 ()

Well, this guy has, like, a light blue, aqua thing going on.

John Kirby

00:28:12 - 00:28:13 ()

Okay, I got you.

Question

00:28:13 - 00:28:15 ()

That's how we're deciding, by the way, is fashion?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:28:15 - 00:28:18 ()

Not fashion. Just pointing him out.

Question

00:28:18 - 00:28:23 ()

If it's okay, I want to go off topic just for a second and ask you about a letter that's been --

John Kirby

00:28:23 - 00:28:24 ()

Question

00:28:24 - 00:28:45 ()

-- a letter that's been sent by Democratic senators to the President regarding the Shireen Abu Akleh killing, asking for a full U.S. investigation. I'm wondering if the NSC has seen this. Do you have a reaction? And do you support or agree with their assessment that the Israelis can't be trusted to conduct their own investigation?

John Kirby

00:28:45 - 00:28:54 ()

I don't know if the -- I don't know the status of the letter here at the White House, sir. So you're going to have to let us take that question and get back to you. I'm not aware.

John Kirby

00:28:54 - 00:29:13 ()

But I can tell you that we've been nothing but consistent that this death needs to be fully and transparently, thoroughly investigated. And that's our expectation. We've made that very, very clear to all parties. And we're going to continue to -- continue to --

Question

00:29:13 - 00:29:17 ()

Is there any discussion about an independent U.S. investigation [inaudible]?

John Kirby

00:29:17 - 00:29:20 ()

I know of no discussion about an additional independent U.S. investigation.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:29:20 - 00:29:23 ()

Simon, go ahead.

Question

00:29:23 - 00:30:03 ()

Okay. On the Countering Malign Russian Activities in Africa Act that has been debated or prepared in the Senate to actually compel African nation to choose between Russia and the U.S., does the President support it? And is he concerned that by trying to almost compel African nations to choose between working with Russia and working with the U.S., he's really making it difficult for those nations, especially because African nations have had really good relationships with the U.S. and good relationship with Russia at the same time?

John Kirby

00:30:03 - 00:30:08 ()

Look, every nation has to make a sovereign decision for itself, but -- who it's going to associate with.

Question

00:30:08 - 00:30:23 ()

But I'm talking about the act. The act says they will identify Africans who continue to work with Russia; it will identify government and sanction government that continue to work with Russia. So, I'm asking you, does the President support that act [inaudible]?

John Kirby

00:30:23 - 00:30:29 ()

I don't -- I don't -- I'd have to get back to you on that. I don't know if we've taken a position on this pending legislation.

John Kirby

00:30:29 - 00:30:47 ()

We understand that there are a range of security challenges in Africa. And those challenges aren't getting any easier or any better by the involvement of nations like China and Russia on the continent. Every nation there has to make their own decisions about who they're going to associate with.

John Kirby

00:30:47 - 00:31:10 ()

Look, one of the things that -- back to the G7 -- that this partnership for infrastructure -- the Global Partnership for Infrastructure that the -- that the President is looking forward to actualizing will do is help economic development and infrastructure in places like that, that empower these nations to improve them -- to improve their own situations and that of their citizens.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:31:10 - 00:31:14 ()

Okay. Last question. Go ahead, Niels.

Question

00:31:14 - 00:31:39 ()

Thank you. When -- since we've been here, there's been some reporting that the Senate Intelligence Committee yesterday, when they were marking up the intelligence authorization, included a provision from Senator Wyden seeking to end the practice of denying security clearances based on past marijuana or cannabis use. I don't know if the administration has seen that yet or if you have a -- if there's a position on that.

John Kirby

00:31:39 - 00:31:44 ()

You're going to have to let me take that question, sir. I don't have any for you on that.

John Kirby

00:31:44 - 00:31:45 ()

James, why don't you go ahead.

Question

00:31:45 - 00:32:30 ()

Thanks very much. I appreciate it. I wanted to ask two questions about Russia/Ukraine. First, I wonder if you could address a disparity that has exhibited itself in the President's conduct and rhetoric over the course of the Russia-Ukraine crisis: At certain times, he opts to withhold certain lethal forms of assistance from the Ukrainian armed forces. And he says that he does this because to provide those forms of assistance would be to risk initiating World War Three. At other times he opts to provide more lethal forms of assistance and even boasts publicly, as has the Secretary of Defense and others, that it is this very U.S. aid that is helping the brave and skillful Ukrainian armed forces to inflict casualties on the Russians and to destroy their hardware.

Question

00:32:30 - 00:32:39 ()

So, my first question is: I wonder if you could address for us the President's decision-making surrounding these steps up what you all have called the "escalatory ladder."

John Kirby

00:32:39 - 00:33:11 ()

So, a couple of thoughts there. The one escalating here is Mr. Putin, James. He's the one who decided on the 24th of February that he was going to invade a sovereign, independent nation next door. He's the one who flowed in more than 100,000 troops and thousands of tanks, aircraft; has launched literally thousands of missiles into Ukraine. That's the escalation.

John Kirby

00:33:11 - 00:33:25 ()

And I think, quite frankly, I would, with all respect, take issue with the premise of the question -- that we have been sort of not consistent in the kind of aid and assistance that we've been providing to Ukraine.

John Kirby

00:33:25 - 00:33:40 ()

We are working with Ukraine in lockstep every day about what their capabilities -- gaps are, what they need for the fight. And the reason, James, that we do it in parcels like this is so that we can keep it relevant to what's going on on the battlefield.

John Kirby

00:33:40 - 00:33:58 ()

And so you remember, in the opening weeks, everybody wanted to talk about Stingers and Javelins. And you know why? Because Stingers and Javelins were relevant to the fight at the time when Mr. Putin was advancing on Ukraine along three major geographic axes -- north, south, and from the east.

John Kirby

00:33:58 - 00:34:10 ()

He has now constrained and limited himself to the Donbas, to a flat, more rural environment that is very reliant on artillery. And so, we started flowing in howitzers.

John Kirby

00:34:10 - 00:34:29 ()

The other thing that we started to do was to train on some of these systems. In the early goings, we were focused on systems that we knew the Ukrainians could use quickly because they'd already been trained on it, because they grew up with these systems. And so that's why we're working so hard with other countries to provide long-range air defense systems like the S-300, because that's what they're used to using.

John Kirby

00:34:29 - 00:34:39 ()

So as the war has changed and evolved, which war does, their needs have changed and evolved, and our contributions have changed and evolved too.

Question

00:34:39 - 00:35:20 ()

And my follow-up, if I may. A few weeks into the conflict, the administration declassified and disclosed fresh intelligence -- passed to us through a number of administration spokespeople, including yourself -- suggesting that President Putin was receiving sanitized and inaccurate reporting from his own team about the status of the Russian war effort in Ukraine. Is that still your assessment? Or is it the assessment of the United States that somewhere along the line -- and if you can tell us when, that would be helpful -- President Putin rectified this problem? And do you believe that he has for some time now been receiving accurate reporting from his own team about the status of the war effort?

John Kirby

00:35:20 - 00:35:45 ()

We -- we did provide some context about the intelligence reporting, which was relevant and true at the time. I don't have additional intelligence or context on intelligence to provide today. So, I can't tell you definitively exactly what briefings and reports Mr. Putin is getting and how accurate they are or inaccurate, or, frankly, how that information changes his decision-making calculus.

John Kirby

00:35:45 - 00:35:53 ()

It is clear to us, just in the main, that he very much is in charge of this war; that he very much is making

John Kirby

00:35:53 - 00:35:59 ()

the decisions; that he very much is responsible for the activities, the actions, the atrocities that his troops are conducting on the battlefield.

Question

00:35:59 - 00:36:00 ()

John Kirby

00:36:00 - 00:36:04 ()

Thanks, everybody. I got to go. Karine is going to --

Question

00:36:04 - 00:36:06 ()

What about Israel, Africa --

John Kirby

00:36:06 - 00:36:09 ()

-- Karine is going to kick me out. I got to go.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:36:09 - 00:36:10 ()

[Laughs] We'll never kick you out. Don't forget --

John Kirby

00:36:10 - 00:36:12 ()

[Inaudible] my old-man glasses.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:36:12 - 00:36:12 ()

-- your glasses.

John Kirby

00:36:12 - 00:36:13 ()

All right. Thanks, everybody.

Question

00:36:13 - 00:36:13 ()

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:36:13 - 00:36:17 ()

Okay. Thanks, John. I just have one thing for all of you.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:36:17 - 00:36:31 ()

This morning, the number of Americans on insured unemployment hit the lowest level since 1970 -- lower than any year of the presidencies of Reagan, H.W. Bush, W. Bush, or Trump.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:36:31 - 00:36:52 ()

Today's weekly UI data is consistent with a job market where unemployment is low and people can seamlessly find jobs. That's not [at] all what a recession labor market looks like. We brought unemployment below 4 percent, four years faster than forecasters thought was possible before we passed the American Rescue Plan.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:36:52 - 00:37:18 ()

We have added an average more -- on average more than 400,000 jobs per month in recent months. And as we make a transition to steady and stable growth over the course of the next year, even something closer to the range of 150,000 jobs per month would be consistent with an unemployment rate as low at is -- at it is now and a sign of a healthy economic transition.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:37:18 - 00:37:21 ()

With that, Aamer, you want to kick us off?

Question

00:37:21 - 00:38:00 ()

Why yes. Thank you. On the Supreme Court decision today on New York's concealed carry law, is the administration concerned that -- and this comes, you know, on the cusp of major legislation here in Washington. But I was wondering if -- is the administration concerned that for whatever efforts you might make on gun legislation -- we're now in an era of a conservative high court that's going to probably be conservative-leaning for a while that is oriented towards gun owner rights. Are we now in a period where, for whatever the President may try, that gun owner rights are just going to be expanding?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:38:00 - 00:38:12 ()

Well, let me just say that we are disappointed by the Supreme Court's ruling today. The Second Amendment, as you've heard the President say, is not absolute and permits commonsense gun regulation.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:38:12 - 00:38:34 ()

The Justice Department defended New York's concealed carry law, which had been in place since 1911 and imposed only a modest burden on most gun owners. The law applied only to hand guns and public places and contained an exception for people who could establish an actual articulable need for self-defense.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:38:34 - 00:38:45 ()

Despite the setbacks, the President earlier urged states to continue to enact and enforce commonsense laws to make their citizens and communities safer for gun violence.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:38:45 - 00:39:02 ()

As it relates to what's happening in Congress right now, we think that's separate and apart, clearly. That is a bipartisan effort. The President is encouraged by what he is seeing. The cloture vote happened today, so it's moving along in the right direction.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:39:02 - 00:39:17 ()

Look, when the President went to Uvalde, when he went to Buffalo with the First Lady, those are trips that he does not want to do again. The President understands. He's had a long career in doing gun reform, in ending gun violence, since he was a senator.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:39:17 - 00:39:33 ()

We have not seen this type of -- bipartisan type of coming together to push this legislation in decades, so we are definitely encouraged by what we're seeing. And the President wants them to move quickly so it could get to his desk and he can sign that.

Question

00:39:33 - 00:39:54 ()

And if I could ask just one more. Secretary Granholm met with oil executives today. I guess, has peace between the administration and the oil executives broke out? And more importantly, have some concrete ideas come out of this meeting? And finally, just why did the President -- he stopped by the wind executive meeting we were just in. Why didn't he spend some time with the oil executives as well?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:39:54 - 00:39:59 ()

Well, let me take your -- let me take your first question. And I have a bit of a readout for you here on the meeting.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:39:59 - 00:40:24 ()

So, at -- at President Biden's direction, Energy Secretary Granholm, who was in front of you all yesterday, met with the CEOs and executives of the seven major U.S. oil companies this morning at the Department of Energy headquarters in Washington, D.C. The meeting was a productive dialogue focused on creating an opportunity for industry to work with government to help deliver needed relief to American consumers.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:40:24 - 00:40:38 ()

The Secretary highlighted the fact that the U.S. has achieved record oil production under the Biden administration and that President Biden is taking historic actions -- actions to add to that supply.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:40:38 - 00:40:58 ()

So, the Secretary made clear that the administration believes it's imperative that companies increase supply of gas, and she reiterated that the President is prepared to act quickly and decisively using the tools available to him, as appropriate, on sensible recommendations as well.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:40:58 - 00:41:14 ()

So, this is an ongoing dialogue. I think you've heard -- and some of you may have heard from the oil companies themselves saying it was productive. And so what -- what Secretary Granholm has called on is for her team to continue having conversations with the oil companies.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:41:14 - 00:41:27 ()

As it relates to your second question -- as to your second question: Look, the President -- it was a stop-by. This is something that he does very often. It was -- there were governors in that meeting who were virtual and in person.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:41:27 - 00:41:31 ()

So we see this as a -- part of his schedule where there was actually a meeting here at the White House.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:41:31 - 00:41:31 ()

Question

00:41:31 - 00:41:47 ()

Just to follow on that, you've described this as, you know, a productive dialogue, they're going to continue to have ongoing conversations. But should we take that to mean that there were no, sort of, concrete steps taken? I mean, yesterday you said that the hope was that some solutions --

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:41:47 - 00:41:47 ()

Question

00:41:47 - 00:41:50 ()

-- would come of this. Where they able to identify and agree on any solutions?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:41:50 - 00:41:59 ()

Yeah, I think what we -- what I was saying and Secretary Granholm was -- was conveying as well: This is a first step, with -- with a continued dialo- -- dialogue.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:41:59 - 00:42:05 ()

Clearly, we want to come to solutions. And I think that's going to -- there's going to be multiple other steps to get there.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:42:05 - 00:42:24 ()

Look, the President asked Secretary Granholm to do this so that we -- that ideas can come forward and, hopefully, we can get to a solution. We want oil company to get to a higher capacity. That's what we're asking for, so that we can bring down gas prices, as you know, as we have been saying.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:42:24 - 00:42:32 ()

So they're going to continue to have dialogue. And hopefully we get to a point where there is a solution and we can figure this out together.

Question

00:42:32 - 00:42:49 ()

And on the Supreme Court, as we await a decision on Roe, you know, you said that the administration is, you know, looking into options for executive action. I understand you're not ready to detail what those might be, but does the administration have executive actions that are ready to go that we could expect to see if and when a decision is announced?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:42:49 - 00:43:03 ()

So, I appreciate the question, and it's an important question, because this decision that we are all anticipating coming forth is -- is going to be -- it's going to change so many lives, so many people's lives, take away women's rights.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:43:03 - 00:43:12 ()

So we -- we understand the question. We are just still trying to figure -- go through in having that discussion to see what our options are before we move forward.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:43:12 - 00:43:28 ()

We don't want to get ahead of the President, clearly. But if -- you know, and I've said this before -- if indeed there is a -- the Supreme Court, in the decision, the Dobbs decision, is -- overturns Roe, we will ask Congress to restore Roe.

Question

00:43:28 - 00:43:34 ()

And just to be clear, will the President accept this decision as legitimate, even if he disagrees with it?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:43:34 - 00:43:48 ()

It -- well, it's going come from the Supreme Court, so it's going to be a decision that we're certainly going to respond to. So I'll leave it at that. I mean, it's just like any other Supreme Court decision, just like the one that they did today on guns.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:43:48 - 00:44:04 ()

So as we know, the -- the draft was leaked, so we can't really -- you know, we don't want to speak to that too much until there's an actual decision, which we know is -- is supposed to be coming. So we're all, just like you, waiting to see when that happens.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:44:04 - 00:44:10 ()

But in the meantime, we're doing our due diligence to be prepared. I just don't have anything for you at this time.

Question

00:44:10 - 00:44:13 ()

Thanks. Back to the gas tax, since I see you have a --

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:44:13 - 00:44:14 ()

Question

00:44:14 - 00:44:16 ()

-- a graphic up there on the screen.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:44:16 - 00:44:19 ()

Oh. Oh, my gosh. I have a graphic.

Question

00:44:19 - 00:44:28 ()

Was the President surprised or disappointed by the lukewarm reaction that his gas tax holiday proposal got on Capitol Hill?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:44:28 - 00:44:44 ()

So I just want to step back for a second, because this is very important. So the President wanted to be sure and wanted to find a way to simply and straightforward -- find a straightforward way to give consumers relief at the gas pump.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:44:44 - 00:45:07 ()

The next three months -- this is a three-months, 90-day suspension on the gas tax -- a gas tax holiday, as we -- as we all know it's called. And it's an important time during -- during when people are driving a lot around the country, you know, visiting their families, going on vacation. And so, you know, it is important to -- to give people a little bit of relief.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:45:07 - 00:45:27 ()

If you think about it on the federal level, that's 18 cents. He also called on states -- we've seen some states -- this is one of the states here, Maryland -- do the same and average -- and average -- the average amount in states is about 30 cents. So already you're at 48 cents right there, almost 50 cents.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:45:27 - 00:45:44 ()

That matters for people. That matters for people, like teachers, like healthcare aides, like -- like construction workers, like plumbers, who -- who spend a lot of time driving from one place to another as part of their jobs. That's going to make a difference.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:45:44 - 00:45:53 ()

And if the oil refineries do their part, we're looking at a dollar being taken off per gallon. So that -- that matters. And we know it works. We know the policy works.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:45:53 - 00:46:02 ()

I mentioned Maryland up here. Connecticut has done the same. Georgia has done the same, suspended their gas tax -- and most of their tax relief was passed to consumers.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:46:02 - 00:46:15 ()

And as you see from this chart here, you see when it was -- here's where it was when it was enacted, and then it dropped. And then when it end, it went back up. So it did make a difference.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:46:15 - 00:46:25 ()

So -- so, the President is calling on other states to take similar measures and for Congress to suspend the national gas tax [DEL: on :DEL] [and] oil companies to pass that relief on to consumers.

Question

00:46:25 - 00:46:47 ()

But Maryland is now actually getting ready to increase its gas tax next month, I guess to make up for some of the revenue that it lost when it imposed this gas tax holiday. And given the level of ambivalence or opposition on Capitol Hill, how hard is the President willing to fight to try to convince Congress to change its mind?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:46:47 - 00:47:01 ()

This is important to the President, which is why he asked Congress to take this on. This is a -- the way that we see it is a simple, fast way to give American families, the American public a little relief for 90 days.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:47:01 - 00:47:16 ()

As you know, there are -- there are plenty of legislation that's on the Hill right now that talks about cutting -- cutting taxes. This is one of them. This is something that's simple, that's easy, that's 90 days during a critical period for the American public.

Question

00:47:16 - 00:47:19 ()

So he's going to keep fighting for it?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:47:19 - 00:47:24 ()

He's going to keep -- he's going to keep fighting for it. We think it's a simple thing to do. And he's going to keep fighting for it.

Question

00:47:24 - 00:47:42 ()

So, I wanted to go a little bit deeper on the trip or the ramifications of it. The President heads overseas at sort of a thorny time for his domestic agenda. You know, the gas tax holiday. There could be the first movement on gun reform in a generation. We're all awaiting the Supreme Court decision.

Question

00:47:42 - 00:47:54 ()

Is there any concern about his ability to shepherd his domestic agenda from 4,000 miles away? Is there anything different being done, given how many, you know, balls are in the air at the same time?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:47:54 - 00:48:08 ()

Look, we believe that a president could do his job anyplace, anywhere, at any time. So that is not a concern for us. Clearly, yes, to your point, Cleve, there is a lot going on in the world. But that is what is expected of a president.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:48:08 - 00:48:17 ()

There is always multiple issues, sometimes multiple crises that a president has to deal with. But it doesn't stop them for -- from doing the work that they need to do.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:48:17 - 00:48:30 ()

The -- what he's doing abroad, as you heard from my colleague, is critical, is important -- that leader-to-leader engagement, talking to our NATO Allies, being there at the G7, especially what's going on with Russia's war.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:48:30 - 00:48:44 ()

For the President to be there and to continue to be a leader in bringing those countries together and talk about real issues that matter to all sides is also an important -- is an important agenda for the President to continue to move forward.

Question

00:48:44 - 00:48:51 ()

Sure. And to the second question, is there anything special or different being done about this trip as opposed to other foreign trips?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:48:51 - 00:48:51 ()

I mean, because --

Question

00:48:51 - 00:48:53 ()

Given -- given how many things are -- yeah.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:48:53 - 00:49:05 ()

No, not at all. We're -- we're moving forward like we do with any OCONUS trip that we have had. I think this is -- I've lost track -- maybe the fourth or fifth trip, as you guys are probably keeping track better than I am, that the President has done.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:49:05 - 00:49:27 ()

And during a time -- I mean, this past year and a half has not been an easy year. The President walked in having to turn back on the economy, if you will. He walked in having to deal with a COVID -- a COVID crisis, a pandemic -- once-in-a-generation pandemic. So he has had to deal with multiple things on his plate. So this is just part of another trip that he's going on.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:49:27 - 00:49:31 ()

Let me try and -- go ahead, Peter.

Question

00:49:31 - 00:49:38 ()

Thank you, Karine. The President isn't really doing everything he can to bring gas prices down, is he?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:49:38 - 00:49:43 ()

I feel like there's a -- what -- is there something else to the question? [Laughs]

Question

00:49:43 - 00:49:44 ()

Oh, there's a lot to the question.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:49:44 - 00:49:45 ()

Oh, okay. Well --

Question

00:49:45 - 00:49:46 ()

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:49:46 - 00:49:47 ()

Question

00:49:47 - 00:49:54 ()

-- as you mentioned earlier, he's meeting today with people installing offshore wind equipment but not oil and gas CEOs who are rarely ever in town, but they are today. So how did that help lower gas prices?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:49:54 - 00:49:57 ()

Well, the President has done a -- so let me step back for a second.

Question

00:49:57 - 00:49:58 ()

But -- no, no, no --

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:49:58 - 00:49:59 ()

Question

00:49:59 - 00:50:00 ()

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:50:00 - 00:50:02 ()

Question

00:50:02 - 00:50:03 ()

-- by meeting with offshore wind folks --

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:50:03 - 00:50:05 ()

No, no. You're asking me --

Question

00:50:05 - 00:50:06 ()

-- and not with gas --

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:50:06 - 00:50:07 ()

You're asking me the question --

Question

00:50:07 - 00:50:10 ()

-- oil and gas CEOs, how does that lower gas prices?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:50:10 - 00:50:11 ()

Question

00:50:11 - 00:50:14 ()

You said he's done everything in his power. They were a mile away.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:50:14 - 00:50:17 ()

Peter, you're asking me a question. Let me -- can I -- may I answer?

Question

00:50:17 - 00:50:18 ()

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:50:18 - 00:50:34 ()

Okay, here we go. I just want to take this back a second on how we got here, right? So we have seen gas prices go up by $2.00 a gallon. One of the reasons we have seen that -- the reason we have seen that is because of Russia's war in -- in Ukraine.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:50:34 - 00:50:59 ()

And once that happened, once we saw what that impact was going to be, the President took action. He took action. He made his- -- he made a historic choice to tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve -- 1 million barrels a day -- and that was for six months. And that helped blunt the impact of what we're seeing right now with prices going up. So that matters.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:50:59 - 00:51:14 ()

The -- the ethanol 15 that the President -- the action that the President took, that matters, because it's going to -- it's going to bring down gas prices in gas stations -- over 1,000 gas stations across the country, including the Midwest. That matters.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:51:14 - 00:51:35 ()

And so the President is trying to figure out and take -- take steps in how we can bring the gas prices down. And we have a high level of oil production. So what we are asking the oil refinery companies to do is to take that -- that production, turn it into -- refine that oil so that there is capacity.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:51:35 - 00:51:47 ()

We are not at capacity right now. And it does matter that the Secretary of Energy, which is her purview -- that is her portfolio, to meet with these oil execs, that she does on pretty regular basis.

Question

00:51:47 - 00:51:57 ()

But your point was about how we got here. The President said, as a candidate, "No more drilling on federal lands. No more drilling, including offshore. No ability for the oil industry to continue to drill, period."

Question

00:51:57 - 00:52:03 ()

Wouldn't that -- aren't some of those things that would bring the price of gas down now?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:52:03 - 00:52:15 ()

Well, let me tell you how we got here, since you just said how we got here. Due to a decreased demand at the start of the pandemic, U.S. oil companies reduced production and refining capacity, which is what I was just saying, Peter.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:52:15 - 00:52:24 ()

Refiners, for instance, cut their capacity by more than 800,000 barrels per day in the year before the President took office.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:52:24 - 00:52:46 ()

Oil production is now back -- back to near pre-pandemic levels. In fact, we produced more oil in the first year of the President's administration than in the first two years of the previous administration. And we are on track to set a new record for oil production next year this time. But oil refiners have still not brought refinery capacity back online.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:52:46 - 00:53:01 ()

At the same time, as I was just stating to you about Putin's war, Putin's invasion of Ukraine disrupted the global oil supply, and gas prices have gone up nearly to $2.00 since the beginning of the year, before the invasion.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:53:01 - 00:53:12 ()

President Biden has taken historic actions, again, to alleviate the pressure and to blunt what -- the impacts that we have seen because of Putin's war. And that matters. And that's what the President has been focused on.

Question

00:53:12 - 00:53:32 ()

Okay. And the President, yesterday, was talking about this transition to greener energy someday. A lot of people can't afford a $60,000 electric car, and they also are having a hard time affording gas right now. That sounds like a painful transition. So how much of that kind of pain is the President okay with?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:53:32 - 00:53:49 ()

No, that transition -- we are in a transition to clean energy. That is something that -- that is important. It is going to create jobs, when you think about electric vehicles. It is going to give -- give families some -- some tax credits. It's going to be really important to have --

Question

00:53:49 - 00:53:53 ()

But right now, who can afford an electric car? The average price is $61,000.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:53:53 - 00:53:57 ()

What we're going to continue to move forward with, and what -- we have put forward the bipartisan infrastructure --

Question

00:53:57 - 00:54:01 ()

Is that a realistic -- is that the choice: $5.00-a-gallon gas or a $61,000 electric car?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:54:01 - 00:54:19 ()

That is not -- first of all, you're -- that's apples and oranges. It is not the same. What we're trying to do right now is to deal with an acute problem right now, which is why the President, again, asked for a 90-day suspension of the gas tax -- the gas tax holiday. It is going to make a difference.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:54:19 - 00:54:54 ()

Peter, we're talking about 18 cents on the federal -- on the federal level; we're talking about an average of 30 cents on the state level. And if the oil refinery does their job, if they do what we are asking them to do, which is put their profits back in so that gas prices can go down -- that's almost $1.00 per gallon. That matters. That matters to teachers, that matters to home healthcare aides, that matters to construction workers, that matters to plumbers, that matters to lifeguards. Those are the people that -- and many others -- who are going to feel this in a way that will give them relief at the pump.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:54:54 - 00:54:55 ()

All right. We're done.

Question

00:54:55 - 00:54:56 ()

A Supreme Court follow-up?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:54:56 - 00:54:57 ()

Question

00:54:57 - 00:55:03 ()

On the Granholm meeting, the refiners wanted to dissuade the White House from any sort of ban on fuel exports. Did Granholm agree to that?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:55:03 - 00:55:07 ()

I'm sorry, I was distracted. Can you say that one more time, Steve?

Question

00:55:07 - 00:55:16 ()

The ban on fuel exports -- the refiners don't want that. Was that discussed at the meeting today? Did Secretary Granholm agree to set it off the table?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:55:16 - 00:55:21 ()

I can tell you, Steve, that decision has not been made. There's no decision on that at this time.

Question

00:55:21 - 00:55:29 ()

And secondly, on the gas tax holiday, has the President talked to lawmakers today about this to try to get them on his side?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:55:29 - 00:55:47 ()

So I don't have any meetings to preview for you at this time, but we are going to -- our Office of Leg Affairs is in constant communication with folks on the Hill. So that is going to be an ongoing conversation. And the President -- this is something that the President thinks is going to be really important for the American people, to give them that relief -- a little bit of breathing room, as you've heard the President.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:55:47 - 00:55:49 ()

I'm just going to take a couple more. Go ahead.

Question

00:55:49 - 00:56:07 ()

On refinery capacity, refiners right now are operating at about 93, 94 percent capacity. When you talk about asking them to increase their capacity, bringing other refineries online is not as simple as flipping a switch. Do you want them to take 93, 94 percent up to 98 percent? How are you guys thinking through the problem as it exists in terms of what they can do?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:56:07 - 00:56:30 ()

So there's a difference between the share of existing capacity being utilized and the amount of total capacity available. The overall capacity of the U.S. refining industry fell due to the pandemic, which is what I was going through earlier. And that capacity has not been brought back online, even as consumers' demand has returned thanks to the President's recovery plan.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:56:30 - 00:56:42 ()

So, the President is calling, again, on U.S. refiners to increase capacity and output in the near term, and making clear he is committed to using all reasonable tools and authorities, as appropriate, to help.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:56:42 - 00:56:48 ()

And so there is a difference there. And so we're asking them to increase that capacity, which we have not seen yet.

Question

00:56:48 - 00:57:00 ()

Bringing those back online, one of the issues has been, you know, willing to invest on the capex side. Is the administration looking anything on the regulatory side they think they can do to help that process along?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:57:00 - 00:57:25 ()

So, I don't have anything here to share on what else we might be looking at. Again, the President is willing to use his -- his executive authorities. We just haven't made a decision. We want to come to a resolution here, or a solution. That's why Secretary Granholm had this meeting today. We're -- they're going to continue to have the discussion. And so that's what we would prefer, and so that's where -- the direction that we're going.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:57:25 - 00:57:47 ()

At the same time, making sure that, you know, the gas -- that gas tax holiday, making sure that we're doing other things as well, to do our part. Again, the gas tax holiday is a -- is a -- is a -- one of the solution, right? It's not the whole thing. We've done a series of things, and the President is going to continue to see what else he can -- he can do to give relief to the American people.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:57:47 - 00:57:50 ()

Go ahead. I'm just going to take a couple more.

Question

00:57:50 - 00:57:59 ()

Does the administration have any response to Intel announcing that it is indefinitely delaying the groundbreaking of its very large semiconductor facility in Ohio?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:57:59 - 00:58:11 ()

I don't have any -- I don't have any more information on that. I heard that reporting. I would have to check in with our -- with our team. But I don't have anything for -- to share from the podium today.

Question

00:58:11 - 00:58:22 ()

One of the things that has come up before today's meeting with Secretary Granholm was Jones Act waivers. Is that something that was discussed in the meeting, or do you know if that's still on the table for the President?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:58:22 - 00:58:25 ()

I don't have more to share from -- from the meeting, from what I just read out.

Question

00:58:25 - 00:58:29 ()

So we don't know whether it was --

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:58:29 - 00:58:31 ()

I just don't have anything from what I just read out.

Question

00:58:31 - 00:58:32 ()

But the President hasn't ruled it out?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:58:32 - 00:58:35 ()

I just don't have anything for you right now, Josh.

Question

00:58:35 - 00:58:45 ()

Okay. Then, going to Phil's question, I mean, part of the reason capacity has shrunk is because facilities are being converted to produce -- or some of them are being converted to produce renewable diesel instead of petroleum-based fuels.

Question

00:58:45 - 00:58:51 ()

Others are simply, you know, old. They're like old cars being taken off the road. They can't just turn on again.

Question

00:58:51 - 00:59:02 ()

Do you think those conversions should be reversed or halted? Or do you think the refiners are overstating the sort of pain that they'd have to go through to turn off -- turn on some of these plants again?

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:59:02 - 00:59:25 ()

What we believe is that they are not operating at full capacity. That is what we believe. And, you know -- so, just to give you a little bit here, and I said this yesterday and I'm happy to share it again: You know, as of yesterday, I said crude oil prices have dropped by nearly 15 percent from two weeks ago, but prices at the pump have barely budged.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:59:25 - 00:59:36 ()

The last time the price of crude oil was $110 a barrel and the price of gas was $4.60 a gallon. Today, it's about 35 cents higher.

Karine Jean-Pierre

00:59:36 - 01:00:08 ()

That difference is a result of companies' record-high profit margins for refining oil. Refinery margins have tripled since the beginning of the year. It's just the first three months of this year. The biggest oil companies made $35 billion -- four times what they made in their first quarter of last year. We want them to put their profits back into refining oil so that we can bring prices down. And that is what we are seeing. And, you know, there are 9,000 approved drilling permits that remain unused.

Karine Jean-Pierre

01:00:08 - 01:00:16 ()

So, there are things that -- that could be done that we are just not seeing happen. This is why we're having the conversation. This is why the President wrote the letter.

Karine Jean-Pierre

01:00:16 - 01:00:18 ()

I'm just going to try and get other questions.

Question

01:00:18 - 01:00:30 ()

Sure. But on the G7 very quickly: One of the things the President has tried to do is boost gas shipments to Europe that aren't coming from Russia. Is there any discussion about that that we should expect at the G7, or is that more of a medium-term thing?

Karine Jean-Pierre

01:00:30 - 01:00:33 ()

I just don't have more to add. I don't want to get ahead of what the agenda is going to be on G7.

Question

01:00:33 - 01:00:33 ()

Thanks, Karine.

Karine Jean-Pierre

01:00:33 - 01:00:35 ()

No problem. Thanks, Josh.

Karine Jean-Pierre

01:00:35 - 01:00:37 ()

Question

01:00:37 - 01:01:03 ()

In terms of ensuring that savings from any sort of gas tax holiday would be passed along to the consumers, Secretary Granholm seemed to say yesterday that the administration, at least at first, would be relying on asking them, like just dialogue with these companies. Is it the White House's view that that is the only option to actually ensure savings are passed on to the consumer? Or is there anything Congress can mandate, or any regulatory action you could do to force these companies?

Karine Jean-Pierre

01:01:03 - 01:01:24 ()

Yeah, I mean, I can't speak to what Congress could do to mandate it. Here's what we know: We know that this has worked. It's worked in Maryland. It's worked in Connecticut. It's worked in Georgia. Maryland and Georgia are Republican governors who have this -- who have made that decision, and consumers have felt the relief. So, it's doable. We have examples of doing that.

Karine Jean-Pierre

01:01:24 - 01:01:41 ()

And so -- so, we're going to -- like Secretary Granholm said, we're going to talk to -- we're going to talk to the companies and make sure that the families and the American people should feel that directly. They should not be holding on to any of the -- to any of the funds, any of that 18 cents at the federal government.

Question

01:01:41 - 01:01:49 ()

But at this point, though, is that the only option for the administration -- just to ask those companies?

Karine Jean-Pierre

01:01:49 - 01:01:53 ()

At this point, that's basically what Secretary Granholm stated, is where we are at this point.

Question

01:01:53 - 01:02:28 ()

On expanding capacity of refineries as well, you've talked about the need -- you know, the need to do that, but there are some options the administration could take. There's a refinery that has had plenty of accidents in the past, has sparked environmental concerns. And, you know, some have said the administration could also loosen permit regulations. This refinery is in St. Croix, Virgin Islands; it's had environmental concerns in the past. Would the administration consider loosening any permitting regulations for refineries that have had environmental concerns to expand capacity?

Karine Jean-Pierre

01:02:28 - 01:02:40 ()

We don't have anything to share on the two points that you just made. All I can say is the President is willing to use his executive authority to do what he can to give relief to the American public.

Karine Jean-Pierre

01:02:40 - 01:03:03 ()

Right now, we're focused on -- on calling on Congress to do the gas holiday tax -- or the gas tax holiday, and also having this conversation with oil refinery to make sure that they are refinery -- refining that crude oil that is -- that is at a high level, that they can do to help bring down gas prices.

Karine Jean-Pierre

01:03:03 - 01:03:05 ()

And I'll take one last question.

Question

01:03:05 - 01:03:06 ()

A Supreme Court follow-up, Karine?

Karine Jean-Pierre

01:03:06 - 01:03:09 ()

I'm trying to call -- go ahead. I've never called on you before.

Question

01:03:09 - 01:03:19 ()

Thanks, Karine. I know you've addressed this a little bit before, but I'm wondering if you can kind of quantify how much of these January 6th hearings the President's been watching and what his overall reaction is.

Karine Jean-Pierre

01:03:19 - 01:03:30 ()

So, I can say that, you know, the President catches it from time to time. He's -- you know, he has a busy schedule, obviously -- and we have said this before -- and keeps updated on what's happening.

Karine Jean-Pierre

01:03:30 - 01:03:55 ()

You know, we'll just continue to reiterate that what we saw on January 6, 2020, was one of the darkest chapters of our nation. And it was a brutal attack on our democracy, a brutal attack on law enforcement, and we believe that Americans should be watching and paying attention to learn exactly what happened on that day.

Karine Jean-Pierre

01:03:55 - 01:04:01 ()

And we have full confidence in the January 6th Select Committee and the work that they're doing.

Karine Jean-Pierre

01:04:01 - 01:04:09 ()

Okay. Thanks, everybody. We'll be back tomorrow. I'll be back tomorrow.