The Public's Right to Know

Briefing Follies

At his press briefing yesterday, Snow repeatedly answered his own questions -- but not those put to him by reporters. He repeatedly ascribed motives to reporters that were not justified. And he uncorked some truly memorable non-answers, including this one in response to a question on a telling 18-day gap in the e-mails that have been released so far: "I've been led to believe that there's a good response for it"

Here's a typical exchange:

"Q But, Tony, in the interest of getting at the truth, in the interest of accuracy, why not have an official, indisputable record of what was said -- a transcript?

"MR. SNOW: Well, first, Jonathan, you're jumping way ahead and I think -- but let's lay out some of the things that go on. This is a decision that was made at the U.S. Department of Justice. What we have said is, all the key officials are available; sworn testimony, whole bit. Furthermore, the email traffic is available. You will also have available an exhaustive rendering of email from the White House on the outside. And you've got the fact basis there. The question you need to ask is what do you gain from the transcript? And the answer is, not much, because --

"Q You gain accuracy.

"MR. SNOW: No, no --

"Q -- what was said, not a characterization of what was said, but you know exactly what was said.

"MR. SNOW: Well, no, what you're trying to do is create a presumption of a hearing or a trial."

Here's Snow a bit later: "So the question you've got to ask yourself is, is this pressure on transcripts and everything, is this really something where somebody thinks that there's going to be a fact that they're not going to receive? The answer is, no. The question is whether you are trying to create a political spectacle, rather than simply the basis of getting at the truth. This, I think, is an important and crucial distinction, because, again, I'm not sure -- well, I think we can say with confidence that they're going to get every fact they need to find out what's going on."

When a reporter suggested that second-hand reports of what was said behind closed doors wouldn't be as reliable as a transcript, Snow accused the reporter of "insinuating that members of Congress are going to act in something less than good faith."

And CNN's Ed Henry stumped Snow but good:

"Q Just to follow up on one point earlier, yesterday the President said, and you've repeated, that the principle at stake here with executive privilege is that the President needs to get candid advice from his advisors, right?