James S. Brady Press Briefing Room
1:40 P.M. EST
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Good afternoon, everyone.
Q Good afternoon.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I have a couple things at the top, and then I'll hand it over to our guest today.
Today, the Vice President and the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention are hosting community violence intervention leaders from across the country to recognize their efforts in reducing and preventing violence — (a reporter sneezes) — and ultimately saving lives. God bless you.
The event is a culmination of a week of activities host [hosted] by the Office of Gun Violence Prevention for Community Violence Awareness Week.
Community violence intervention programs are a key piece of the President's Safer America Plan and have been shown to reduce violence by as much as 50 percent. That's why the Biden-Harris administration continues to make major investments in community violence intervention, and other proven solutions to end the epidemic of gun violence.
The President's American Rescue Plan provided over $15 billion to prevent crime and promote public safety, while the Bipartisan Safer Community Act provides $250 million in funding for community-based violence prevention initiatives.
These actions are reducing crime and saving lives nationwide, with homicides and gun violence rates on the decline in 2023.
We will continue to work to protect American communities from this senseless violence while calling on Congress to do its job and take further action to implement commonsense gun safety measures.
And finally, I also want to share a brief readout from a recent visit by — by senior U.S. officials to Guyana, Colombia, and also Mexico.
Principal Deputy National Security Advisor Jon Fi- — Finer traveled to Guyana and Colombia February 4th and 5th, which followed a series of other high-level U.S. visits.
In Guyana, he met with President Ali and Caribbean Community — CARICOM — Secretary-General Dr. Carla Barnett to reaffirm U.S. support to Guyana's sovereignty, to advance economic and security cooperation, and to discuss CARICOM's priorities for their February 25th meeting. Haiti and Venezuela figured prominently in these discussions, as did Guyana's priorities on the United Nations Security Council.
In Colombia, we issued a joint statement following Mr. Finer's meeting with President Gustavo Petro that — that covered financing for sustainable infrastructure under President Biden's Americas Partnership for Economic Prosperity initiative, as well as ongoing cooperation on security and migration. The statement reaffirmed support for competitive and inclusive elections in Venezuela and implementation of the Barbados Agreement between representatives of Nicolás Maduro and the Uni- — Unitaria Platform.
Mr. Finer expressed appreciation for Colombia's continued effort to promote dialogue but also underscored the need for the international community to support an electoral process free of harassment and intimidation, where all candidates are eligible to run for office.
Turning to Mexico for a second. White House Homeland Security Advisor Dr. Sherwood-Randol- — -Randall led an interagency delegation to Mexico February 6th and the — and 7th. She engaged in a wide-rang- — -ranging discussion with President — President AMLO. And then, separately, our delegation met with Mes- — Mexico's security cabinet — both focused on bilateral and regional issues, including sustained cooperation on migration and joint efforts to promote economic opportunity and development in the Americas.
During the fourth meeting of the Trilateral Fentanyl Committee — established by President Biden, President AMLO, and the Prime Minis- — Prime Minister Trudeau — the United States, Mexico, and Canada agreed to a 10 joint actions to counter the trafficking of illicit synthetic drugs, including fentanyl, and firearms in North America. These are contin- — these are outlined in our joint statement that was issued yesterday.
On February 7th, Treasury des- — designated one of the — one of Ecuador's most violent gangs and its leader for fueling the recent surge of violence in Ecuador. The sanctions are just one part of the significant assistance we are providing to our Ecuadorian partners as they confront transnational organized crime and illicit narcotics.
Finally, allow me to once again pay respect for the people of Chile as they mourn the loss of former President Sebastián Piñera. Our prayers also go out to the — to all in Chile who lost loved ones to the wildfires and forced thousands to leave their homes.
The United States is supporting firefighters by deploying technical staff, by providing satellite imagery, and offering funds to the purchasing fi- — to purchasing firefighting equipment. And we stand ready to do more.
With that, thank you for your patience. I will turn things over to my colleague, Ian Sams, from the White House Counsel's Office.
Ian.
MR. SAMS: Thank you, Karine. Good to see everybody.
Q Thank you for coming.
MR. SAMS: Sure. Thanks.
I want to start by talking about a few things that I think are important for you all to hear and for the American people to hear.
The President spoke powerfully about this last night. After a long investigation that turned over every stone and explored every theory, the special counsel decided that there was no case there.
Notably, he said this would be true whether President Biden was president or a private citizen.
The special counsel's assignment when he was appointed was to determine whether any criminal conduct occurred. He found it didn't. That was the finding.
The case is closed.
I want to read you something from none other than Ken Starr — who most people in this room will remember is the independent counsel who investigated former President Clinton. After that investigation, here is what he said to Congress: Quote, "What I see the conclusion as being is just a determination that no criminal charges would be brought. Period. Full stop. That is it. It is all over at that stage," end quote.
That rings true here.
The Special Counsel report goes on at length about the President's unprecedented cooperation in this case. I want to share a few things about that because I think it's very important.
One, when the classified documents were found, it was self-reported. The President directed his team to ensure that any classified documents were returned immediately.
Why did he do that? Because the President takes classified information seriously. He always has. He did not intentionally take classified documents. He understands documents like that belong with the government. He never, never made any attempt to obstruct.
Two, he took unprecedented action to get the special counsel what he needed.
He opened up every room in his family home and his beach house for comprehensive FBI searches — a first time in history. He sat for two days of interviews — an interview that, I'll add — and the President talked about this last night — took place the day after the brutal attack on Israel. The President was managing an intensive international crisis. You just heard the Vice President talk about this.
He answered dozens of follow-up questions to the special counsel in writing.
Three, he didn't exert executive privilege over any contents of the report. He was transparent. He had nothing to hide. There was a long, intensive, and, in many ways, yes, excessive investigation.
But for context, you should all remind — remember, in the case of former Vice President Mike Pence — who had a very, very similar incident occur right after President Biden — the case was closed within a few months. It was a brief, one-page letter to Mike Pence.
But in this case, there was a 15-month investigation. The Special Counsel interviewed 150 witnesses. He sought and obtained 7 million pages of documents, down to emails about moving trucks during the transition in 2016 and 2017. He spent more than three and a half million taxpayer dollars exploring every possible theory that he could.
And what was the result? He reached the inevitable conclusion based on the facts and the evidence that there was no case here.
And this is important to think about in context of how this report is being viewed and, by many of you, being covered. This is the first special counsel investigation ever that hasn't indicted anyone. Every theory was explored. But the facts and the evidence disputed them. The decision was that there was no case to be made.
In that reality, we also need to talk about the environment that we are in. For the past few years, Republicans in Congress and elsewhere have been attacking prosecutors who aren't doing what Republicans want politically. They have made up claims of a two-tiered system of justice between Republicans and Democrats. They have denigrated the rule of law for political purposes.
That reality creates a ton of pressure. And in that pressurized political environment, when the inevitable conclusion is that the facts and the evidence don't support any charges, you're left to wonder why this report spends time making gratuitous and inappropriate criticisms of the President.
Over the past 24 hours, we've actually seen legal experts and former prosecutors come out and give their analysis. Former Attorney General Eric Holder said the report, quote, "contains way too many gratuitous remarks and is flatly inconsistent with longstanding DOJ traditions."
The former Acting FBI Director said he had overseen many cases like this, and, quote, "You have — you have to have explicit evidence of willful retention of those documents, and that is just not present in this case."
The former FBI General Counsel, who I'll add is als- — was also lead prosecutor in the Special Counsel Mueller investigation, said, it was, quote, "exactly what you're not supposed to do, which is putting your thumb on the scale that could have political repercussions."
That's the assessment of seasoned professional law enforcement officials and prosecutors with deep experience at the Department of Justice.
Unfortunately, the gratuitous remarks that the former Attorney General talked about have naturally caught headlines and all of your attention. They're wrong, and they're inaccurate. And they obscure a very simple truth that I want to repeat one last time, since I know it's is hard to wade through 400 full pages.
One, the report lays out example after example of how the President did not willfully take classified documents. The report lays out how the President did not share classified documents with anyone. The report lays out how the President did not knowingly share classified information with anyone.
On page 2, which I know you all read, the report argues the President willfully retained materials. But buried way later, on page 215, the report says, and I quote, "there is in fact a shortage of evidence on these points." Two hundred pages later.
Put simply, this case is closed because the facts and the evidence don't support the theories here. The gratuitous comments that respected experts saying is out of line are inappropriate. And they shouldn't distract from the fact that the case is closed, and the facts and evidence show that they reached the right conclusion.
With that, I'm happy to take questions.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead, Aamer.
Q Just a couple of housekeeping. When and whom was the President briefed about on the contents of the report?
MR. SAMS: The President was briefed by his lawyers.
Q And, second, the President — and as you mentioned, again, you thought some of the characterizations were gratuitous. Does the President still have confidence in Merrick Garland after selecting Hur to be put in this position?
MR. SAMS: The President spoke this last night. I think — I can't remember which of you asked him what his thoughts were on the appointment of the special counsel. And he answered that, I think, thoughtfully and powerfully. And I don't really have anything to add beyond what the President said.
Q And just finally, does the President support the release of the entire transcript of his interview to put to rest some of these things that you think are being overlooked?
MR. SAMS: And it's a reasonable question. I think that it's important to know that we're dealing with classified materials in this conversation. There are classification issues there. I don't have any announcement on, you know, releasing anything today.
But it's a reasonable question, and there were classified stuff, and we'll have to work through all that.
Q So, but once you can work through, like, say, a redacted version, would the President support the release, as long as you can obviously keep what needs to be kept secret secret?
MR. SAMS: Well, we'll take a look at that and — and make a determination.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead, Justin.
Q Thanks, Ian. Two questions. First, you said in the topper that the President takes classified information seriously, and the President said last night that he never discussed classified material with anyone. But the special counsel's report said that on three different occasions, he did discuss it with his ghostwriter.
I understand it didn't meet the bar for prosecution. But how do you reconcile the President's statement with what's in the report?
MR. SAMS: Sure. Well, if you read the full report, it actually gets into each of those three instances. I think Justin rightly points out that we're talking about three instances out of two hundred and, you know, fifty pages of evidence that they're talking about criticizing. I think it's important to look at those three examples.
