Transcript: Gibson Interviews Rahm Emanuel

EMANUEL: Well, Charlie, as you know, that has happened in other situations. It doesn't mean that's how it's going to happen in this situation. And these are all good questions that you're going to have to wait until the results come out in the stress tests next week.

GIBSON: Are we going to get a Chrysler/Fiat deal by tomorrow? And is it still necessary?

EMANUEL: Well, number one, the president said about the auto industry that it is important that we have viable, independent auto companies on a going-forward basis that can adjust to the new market, so to say. That is the objective, but not at all costs. And he said that early on.

And these are very sensitive -- and specifically on Chrysler -- very sensitive negotiations. About 48 hours to go, or maybe even less.

And I think it would be proper and prudent -- I didn't say anything because I don't want anybody to use what I said as leverage in the final hours of the negotiation. I've been in negotiations legislatively, and I've been in negotiations in the business transactions. And I don't want to say anything in these final hours that kind of tilt the scale, because anybody in the parties would use it, because nothing's done until everything is done.

GIBSON: But it is the president's position still that that deal is necessary?

EMANUEL: I think, Charlie, you saw his comments in the past. Necessary? I think what he said was what is an independent, viable industry in the United States and what it's going to take. And that means all the parties -- suppliers, management, labor, creditors -- all are going to have to play a role in creating that. And the United States government won't just be there if you're not going to make the choices that are necessary yourselves to do that.

GIBSON: Is there a growing sense that GM may have to go into bankruptcy?

EMANUEL: All good questions, Charlie. As you know, I'm not going to prejudge that. And it would be inappropriate and imprudent for me to do that.

GIBSON: Let me turn to terrorist interrogation techniques.

EMANUEL: We banned those, Charlie.

GIBSON: You told George Stephanopoulos that the president did not believe those who devised the interrogation policy should be prosecuted. A day later, the president opened the door to that. What happened?

EMANUEL: I think that what was said is -- and I think it's clear.

First of all, I can't strongly advocate enough that folks look at what the president said Thursday night -- Thursday day in his statement as it related to those techniques, his view of why he let those documents out, and his view that on an ongoing basis, where we need to focus our time and energy.

One, it's important for the American people to know that we banned those techniques. Within, I think, the second or third day, he made that clear.

Second, that a lot of this information has already been public. So therefore, it was appropriate to let it out. Let me just get to the point.

Third, is that he operated within the four corners of what clearly the law, and with the intent to follow what was then the legal guidance. There would be no sense that you would be prosecuted.

This building, the president, or anybody here, doesn't make any of the other decisions. That's for the Department of Justice. And that's the line that was drawn.

GIBSON: But George asked you specifically about whether or not those people who devised the techniques would be prosecuted.

Join the Discussion
blog comments powered by Disqus
You Might Also Like...