Today’s Qs for O’s WH – 1/5/2010
EmailTAPPER: Some of the measures, the reforms that the president and the administration are talking about, including tighter security, more stringent safeguards on — on visas, people being added to the selectee and no-fly lists and — and other things having to do with challenging intelligence assumptions. Can you look at Abdulmutallab's path from Yemen to Ghana to Nigeria, to Amsterdam, to Detroit, and show us, tell us how these new reforms would have perhaps detected him along that path?
GIBBS: Well, let me not get into that. I think the president will begin to get into that some today and in the coming days as the review continues and wraps up. I think what you'll hear again from the president — part of what you'll hear from the president today was — is to go into a number of steps that we have taken, but also to walk people through the systemic failure that the president pointed out had happened in his remarks last week.
TAPPER: He also, in his remarks, mentioned human failure. And so far, as far as I know, nobody has lost their job or been reprimanded. Not to pick on Admiral Blair, but it is the job of the director of national intelligence — specifically, that job was created to connect the dots. Is anybody — is anybody at all going to lose their job over this?
GIBBS: Well, again, the review is ongoing. I think you'll hear the president begin to address aspects of that review today. I think the president is anxious to sit down. He's obviously spoken with a number of these individuals over the course of the many days, and he's anxious to sit down with them as a group and walk through this. I think the president has discussed ensuring that adequate steps are taken to ensure the American people's safety, and that's what he'll be discussing and working through today.
TAPPER: One — one final question, if I may. How cooperative has the Abdulmutallab been after he was arrested and since he got a lawyer?
GIBBS: The subject, as you know, was — was taken from the plane in Detroit. FBI interrogators spent quite some time with him. I don't want to get into all the specifics, but I think they would agree, and I would say, that he has provided in those interrogations useful intelligence.
TAPPER: And since he got a lawyer, anything?
GIBBS: I — I'm not going to get into all of what he said. But, again, I think that the — the interrogators have — believe that he has provided them with useful intelligence.
-jpt
Romney Takes Aim at Conservatives 
CPAC: Romney Struggles to Convince Voters
I’m still waiting for the day when Robert Gibbs stops talking in circles and actually answers a question…
Posted by: Erin | January 5, 2010, 2:32 pm 2:32 pm
Isn’t it nice working for ABC, Jake, where they won’t let you use any of this on the air…..
Posted by: Wake me up when bodies start falling from the sky | January 5, 2010, 2:36 pm 2:36 pm
“Can you look at Abdulmutallab’s path from Yemen to Ghana to Nigeria, to Amsterdam, to Detroit, and show us, tell us how these new reforms would have perhaps detected him along that path?”
This is a critical question to keep asking. We’ve put up with security theater for too long – I don’t care if it’s Bush or Obama pandering to the panicked masses, its driving Americans with a backbone up the wall and needs to stop.
I’d rather approve concealed carry by private citizens on planes than put up with an escalation of the shoe checking, liquids confiscating farce. (And I think guns in untrained hands on a plane is a bad idea.)
Posted by: jhw539 | January 5, 2010, 2:56 pm 2:56 pm
I just listened to this presser. I agree with you, Erin. Gibbs has a great career ahead of him as a used car salesman (with all due respect to used car salesmen) because he says a lot of nothing and takes humbrage at any hard questioning.
Another thing I cannot stand about this administration. Common sense questions are spun instead of being answered with common sense.
Posted by: Hillary Fan | January 5, 2010, 3:18 pm 3:18 pm
Told ya; our GSCL will ask you to take your cloths off to pass the screener (or so called full body scan), now that some terrorist has hidden something in his underwear rather than shoes.
Posted by: skinny dog | January 5, 2010, 4:19 pm 4:19 pm
If Obama determines one or more people ought to lose their jobs over this, but he decides not to, do those count as jobs “created or saved”? I think it would be neat if his blundering incompetence in the security arena helped him to bolster the most meaningless pseudostatistic he likes to use to try to hide his utter failure with respect to the economy.
Posted by: bgates | January 5, 2010, 4:22 pm 4:22 pm
“Another thing I cannot stand about this administration. Common sense questions are spun instead of being answered with common sense.”
Is this your first exposure to WH press secretaries?
Because this is what they do.
Some are better than others but at the end of the day spinning is their job.
Posted by: Ryan C | January 5, 2010, 4:47 pm 4:47 pm
Ryan C., it seems that the press secretary was very informative. His quote that the FBI believes the suspect gave important information is as much as he can say, seeing as it is a matter under investigation. And since the suspect will be tried in court, probably much of this information can’t go public until then, as in most court cases.
As for speculation as to whether new rules would stop the same scenario from happening today, that is just a silly question. Because we don’t just need new regs to deal with this one situation but need the new rules to cover as many other possible ways bad guys can think of to get a bomb on board.
Posted by: Lydia | January 6, 2010, 11:02 am 11:02 am
If you were President would you want Gibbs to represent you, in answering questions??
Not being mean but Gibbs is a babbling bafoon.
Posted by: betty | January 6, 2010, 4:35 pm 4:35 pm
“And since the suspect will be tried in court, probably much of this information can’t go public until then, as in most court cases.”
That is true, as far as it goes. I imagine that most of the information will never see the inside of a courtroom, however.
Jake is either ignorant of the court system or willfully spreading disinformation about this though. Miranda warnings and such only pertain to information you want to use against the person in court. I doubt there is any question there is enough information to convict this guy without a confession.
Since you don’t really need to ask him questions to try to get him to incrimitate himself, you don’t have to worry about Miranda warnings.
Posted by: Flash Override | January 6, 2010, 7:38 pm 7:38 pm