Contact: White House, Office of the Press Secretary, 202-456-2580

WASHINGTON, Dec. 20 /Standard Newswire/ -- The following text is of today's press conference by President Bush:   (see part 1)

Indian Treaty Room

10:00 A.M. EST

Elaine.

Q    Thank you, Mr. President.  This week we learned that Scooter Libby --

THE PRESIDENT:  A little louder, please.  Excuse me -- getting old.  (Laughter.)

Q    I understand, Mr. President.

THE PRESIDENT:  No, you don't understand.  (Laughter.)

Q    You're right, I don't.

This week, sir, we learned that Scooter Libby's defense team plans to call Vice President Cheney to testify in the ongoing CIA leak case.  I wonder, sir, what is your reaction to that?  Is that something you'll resist?

THE PRESIDENT:  I read it in the newspaper today, and it's an interesting piece of news.  And that's all I'm going to comment about an ongoing case.  I thought it was interesting.

Ann.

Q    Thank you, sir.  Mary is having a baby.  And you have said that you think Mary Cheney will be a loving soul to a child.  Are there any changes in the law that you would support that would give same-sex couples greater access to things such as legal rights, hospital visits, insurance, that would make a difference, even though you've said it's your preference -- you believe that it's preferable to have one man-one woman --

THE PRESIDENT: I've always said that we ought to review law to make sure that people are treated fairly. 

On Mary Cheney, this is a personal matter for the Vice President and his family.  I strongly support their privacy on the issue, although there's nothing private when you happen to be the President or the Vice President -- I recognize that.  And I know Mary, and I like her, and I know she's going to be a fine, loving mother.

Baker, I'm not going to call on you again.  You got too much coverage yesterday, you know?  (Laughter.)  Created a sense of anxiety amongst --  no, no, you handled yourself well, though.

Don.

Q    Thank you, Mr. President.  A question about the Iraq Study Group Report.  One of the things that it recommends is greater dialogue, direct talks with Syria and Iran.  James Baker himself, Secretary of State under your father, says that it's a lot like it was during the Cold War when we talked to the Soviet Union.  He says it's important to talk to your adversaries.  Is he wrong?

THE PRESIDENT:  Let me start with Iran.  We made it perfectly clear to them what it takes to come to the table, and that is a suspension of their enrichment program.  If they verifiably suspend -- that they've stopped enrichment, we will come to the table with our EU3 partners and Russia, and discuss a way forward for them.  Don, it should be evident to the Iranians, if this is what they want to do. 

I heard the Foreign Minister -- I read the Foreign Minister say the other day that, yes, we'll sit down with America, after they leave Iraq.  If they want to sit down with us, for the good of the Iranian people, they ought to verifiably suspend their program.  We've made that clear to them.  It is obvious to them how to move forward.

The Iranian people can do better than becoming -- than be an isolated nation.  This is a proud nation with a fantastic history and tradition.  And yet they've got a leader who constantly sends messages to the world that Iran is out of step with the majority of thinkers, that Iran is willing to become isolated -- to the detriment of the people.

I mean, I was amazed that, once again, there was this conference about the Holocaust that heralded a really backward view of the history of the world.  And all that said to me was, is that the leader in Iran is willing to say things that really hurts his country and further isolates the Iranian people. 

We're working hard to get a Security Council resolution.  I spoke to Secretary Rice about the Iranian Security Council resolution this morning.  And the message will be that you -- you, Iran -- are further isolated from the world. 

My message to the Iranian people is you can do better than to have somebody try to rewrite history.  You can do better than somebody who hasn't strengthened your economy.  And you can do better than having somebody who's trying to develop a nuclear weapon that the world believes you shouldn't have.  There's a better way forward.

Syria -- the message is the same.  We have met with Syria since I have been the President of the United States.  We have talked to them about what is necessary for them to have a better relationship with the United States.  And they're not unreasonable requests.  We've suggested to them that they no longer allow Saddamists to send money and arms across their border into Iraq to fuel the violence -- some of the violence that we see.  We've talked to them about -- they've got to leave the democrat Lebanon alone. 

I might say -- let me step back for a second -- I'm very proud of Prime Minister Siniora.  He's shown a lot of tenacity and toughness in the face of enormous pressure from Syria, as well as Hezbollah, which is funded by Iran.

But we made it clear to them, Don, on how to move forward.  We've had visits with the Syrians in the past.  Congressmen and senators visit Syria.  What I would suggest, that if they're interested in better relations with the United States, that they take some concrete, positive steps that promote peace, as opposed to instability. 

Knoller.

Q    Thank you, sir.  Mr. President, did you or your Chief of Staff order an investigation of the leak of the Hadley memo before your meeting with Prime Minister al Maliki?  And if the leak wasn't authorized, do you suspect someone in your administration is trying to undermine your Iraq policy or sabotage your meeting with Prime Minister al Maliki a few weeks back?

THE PRESIDENT:  I'm trying to think back if I ordered an investigation.  I don't recall ordering an investigation.  I do recall expressing some angst about -- about ongoing leaks.  You all work hard to find information and, of course, put it out for public consumption, and I understand that.  But I don't appreciate those who leak classified documents.  And it's an ongoing problem here, it really is -- not just for this administration, but it will be for any administration that is trying to put policy in place that affects the future of the country. 

And we've had a lot of leaks, Mark, as you know, some of them out of the -- I don't know where they're from, and therefore I'm not going to speculate.  It turns out you never can find the leaker.  It's an advantage you have in doing your job.  We can moan about it, but it's hard to find those inside the government that are willing to give, in this case, Hadley's document to newspapers.

You know, there may be an ongoing investigation of this, I just don't know.  If there is -- if I knew about it, it's not fresh in my mind.  But I do think that at some point in time it would be helpful if we can find somebody inside our government who is leaking materials, clearly against the law, that they be held to account.  Perhaps the best way to make sure people don't leak classified documents is that there be a consequence for doing so.

Jim.

Q    Mr. President, if we could return to the reflexive vein we were in a little while ago --

THE PRESIDENT:  The what?  Excuse me.

Q    Reflexive -- reflective.

THE PRESIDENT:  Reflective stage.

Q    Part of the process of looking at the way forward could reasonably include considering how we got to where we are.  Has that been part of your process?  And what lessons -- after five years now of war, what lessons will you take into the final two years of your presidency?

THE PRESIDENT:  Look, absolutely, Jim, that it is important for us to be successful going forward is to analyze that which went wrong.  And clearly one aspect of this war that has not gone right is the sectarian violence inside Baghdad -- a violent reaction by both Sunni and Shia to each other that has caused a lot of loss of life, as well as some movements in neighborhoods inside of Baghdad.  It is a troubling, very troubling, aspect of trying to help this Iraqi government succeed.  And therefore, a major consideration of our planners is how to deal with that, and how to help -- more importantly, how to help the Iraqis deal with sectarian violence.

There are a couple of theaters inside of Iraq, war theaters.  One, of course, is Baghdad, itself, where the sectarian violence is brutal.  And we've got to help them  -- we've got to help the Maliki government stop it and crack it and prevent it from spreading, in order to be successful. 

I fully understand -- let me finish.  Secondly, is the battle against the Sunnis -- Sunni extremists -- some of them Saddamists, some of there are al Qaeda, but all of them aiming to try to drive the United States out of Iraq before the job is done.  And we're making good progress against them.  It's hard fighting, it's been hard work, but our special ops teams, along with Iraqis, are on the hunt and bringing people to justice.

There's issues in the south of Iraq, mainly Shia-on-Shia tensions.  But primarily, the toughest fight for this new government is inside of Baghdad.  Most of the deaths, most of the violence is within a 30-mile radius of Baghdad, as well as in Anbar Province.  In other words, a lot of the country is moving along positively.  But it's this part of the fight that is getting our attention.  And, frankly, we have -- it has been that aspect of the battle, toward a government which can defend and govern itself and be an ally in the war on terror, where we have not made as much progress as we’d have hoped to have made.

Listen, last year started off as an exciting year with the 12 million voters.  And the attack on the Samarra mosque was Zarqawi's successful attempt to foment this sectarian violence.  And it's mean, it is deadly.  And we've got to help the Iraqis deal with it.

Success in Iraq will be success -- there will be a combination of military success, political success and reconstruction.  And they've got to go hand-in-hand.  That's why I think it's important that the moderate coalition is standing up.  In other words, it's the beginning of a political process that I hope will marginalize the radicals and extremists who are trying to stop the advance of a free Iraq.  That's why the oil law is going to be a very important piece of legislation.

In other words, when this government begins to send messages that we will put law in place that help unify the country, it's going to make the security situation easier to deal with.  On the other hand, without better, stronger security measures, it's going to be hard to get the political process to move forward.  And so it's – we’ve got a parallel strategy.

So when you hear me talking about the military -- I know there's a lot of discussion about troops, and there should be.  But we’ve got to keep in mind we've also got to make sure we have a parallel political process and a reconstruction process going together concurrently with a new military strategy.

I thought it was an interesting statement that Prime Minister Maliki made the other day about generals, former generals in the Saddam army, that they could come back in, or receive a pension.  In other words, he's beginning to reach out in terms of a reconciliation plan that I think is going to be important. 

I had interesting discussions the other day with provincial reconstruction team members in Iraq.  These are really brave souls who work for the State Department that are in these different provinces helping these provincial governments rebuild and to see a political way forward.  And one of the things that -- most of these people were in the Sunni territory, that I had talked to, and most of them were very anxious for me to help them and help the Iraqi government put reconciliation plans in place.  There's a lot of people trying to make a choice as to whether or not they want to support a government, or whether or not their interest may lay in extremism.  And they understand that a political process that is positive, that sends a signal, we want to be a unified country, will help these folks make a rational choice.

And so it's a multifaceted plan.  And absolutely, we're looking at where things went wrong, where expectations were dashed, and where things hadn't gone the way we wanted them to have gone.

Let's see here -- Julie.

Q    Thank you, Mr. President.  You said this week that your microphone has never been louder on some of the key domestic priorities you've talked about, particularly Social Security and immigration.  Your use of the presidential microphone hasn't yielded the results that you wanted.  So I'm wondering -- the Democratic Congress, at this point, Republicans no longer controlling things on Capitol Hill -- why you think your microphone is any louder, and how you plan to use it differently to get the results that you're looking for?

THE PRESIDENT:  Yes, microphone being loud means -- is that I'm able to help focus people's attentions on important issues.  That's what I was referring to.  In other words, the President is in a position to speak about priorities.  Whether or not we can get those priorities done is going to take bipartisan cooperation, which I believe was one of the lessons of the campaigns. 

I will tell you, I felt like we had a pretty successful couple of years when it comes to legislation.  After all, we reformed Medicare; we put tax policy in place that encouraged economic growth and vitality; we passed trade initiatives; passed a comprehensive energy bill.  I'm signing an important piece of legislation today that continues a comprehensive approach to energy exploration, plus extenders on R&D, for example, tax credits.  It's been a pretty substantial legislative record if you carefully scrutinize it.

However, that doesn't mean necessarily that we are able to achieve the same kind of results without a different kind of approach.  After all, you're right, the Democrats now control the House and the Senate.  And, therefore, I will continue to work with their leadership -- and our own leaders, our own members -- to see if we can't find common ground on key issues like Social Security or immigration.

I strongly believe that we can, and must, get a comprehensive immigration plan on my desk this year.  It's important for us because, in order to enforce our border, in order for those Border Patrol agents who we've increased down there and given them more equipment and better border security, they've got to have help and a plan that says, if you're coming into America to do a job, you can come legally for a temporary basis to do so. 

I don't know if you've paid attention to the enforcement measures that were taken recently where in some of these packing plants they found people working that had been here illegally, but all of them had documents that said they were here legally -- they were using forged documents, which just reminded me that the system we have in place has caused people to rely upon smugglers and forgers in order to do work Americans aren't doing.

In other words, it is a system that is all aimed to bypass no matter what measures we take to protect this country.  It is a system that, frankly, leads to inhumane treatment of people.  And therefore, the best way to deal with an issue that Americans agree on -- that is, that we ought to enforce our borders in a humane way -- is we've got to have a comprehensive bill. 

And I have made a proposal.  I have spoken about this to the nation from the Oval Office.  I continue to believe that the microphone is necessary to call people to action.  And I want to work with both Republicans and Democrats to get a comprehensive bill to my desk.  It's in our interest that we do this.

In terms of energy, there's another area where I know we can work together.  There is a consensus that we need to move forward with continued research on alternative forms of energy.  I've just described them in my opening comments, and be glad to go over them again if you'd like, because they're positive, it's a positive development.  We're making progress.  And there's more to be done.

So I'm looking forward to working with them.  There's a lot of attitude here that says, well, you lost the Congress, therefore, you're not going to get anything done; quite the contrary.  I have an interest to get things done.  And the Democrat leaders have an interest to get something done to show that they're worthy of their leadership roles.  And it is that common ground that I'm confident we can get -- we can make positive progress, without either of us compromising principle. 

And I know they don't -- I know they're not going to change their principles, and I'm not going to change mine.  But, nevertheless, that doesn't mean we can't find common ground to get good legislation done.  That's what the American people want.  The truth of the matter is, the American people are sick of the partisanship and name-calling. 

I will do my part to elevate the tone.  And I'm looking forward to working with them.  It's going to be an interesting new challenge.  I'm used to it, as Herman can testify.  I was the governor of Texas with Democrat leadership in the House and the Senate, and we were able to get a lot of constructive things done for the state of Texas.  And I believe it's going to be possible here -- to do so here in the country.

Michael.

Q    Thank you, Mr. President.  Merry Christmas.

THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you.

Q    Yes.  I've just two questions related to the amazing fact that a quarter of your presidency lies ahead.  First, I keep reading that you'll be remembered only for Iraq, and I wonder what other areas you believe you're building a record of transformation you hope will last the ages.  And second, a follow-up on Julie's question, what is your plan for either changing your role, or keeping control of the agenda, at a time when Democrats have both houses on the Hill, and when the '08 candidates are doing their thing?

THE PRESIDENT:  Well, one is to set priorities.  That's what I've just done, setting a priority.  My message is, we can work together, and here are some key areas where we've got to work together:  reauthorization of No Child Left Behind, minimum wage.  I hope we're able to work together on free trade agreements.  We can work together on Social Security reform and Medicare reform, entitlement reform.  We need to work together on energy, immigration, earmarks. 

The leadership has expressed their disdain for earmarks; I support their disdain for earmarks.  I don't like a process where it's not transparent, where people are able to slip this into a bill without any hearing or without any recognition of who put it in there and why they put it in there.  It's just not good for the system, and it's not good for building confidence of the American people in our process or in the Congress.

The first part of the -- oh, last two years.  I'm going to work hard, Michael.  I'm going to sprint to the finish, and we can get a lot done.  And you're talking about legacy.  Here -- I know, look, everybody is trying to write the history of this administration even before it's over.  I'm reading about George Washington still.  My attitude is, if they're still analyzing number 1, 43 ought not to worry about it and just do what he thinks is right, and make the tough choices necessary. 

We're in the beginning stages of an ideological struggle, Michael, that's going to last a while.  And I want to make sure this country is engaged in a positive and constructive way to secure the future for our children.  And it's going to be a tough battle. 

I also believe the Medicare reform -- the first meaningful, significant health care reform that's been passed in a while -- is making a huge difference for our seniors.  No Child Left Behind has been a significant education accomplishment, and we've got to reauthorize it.  We have proven that you can keep taxes low, achieve other objectives, and cut the deficit.  The entrepreneurial spirit is high in this country, and one way to keep it high is to keep -- let people keep more of their own money. 

So there's been a lot of accomplishment.  But the true history of any administration is not going to be written until long after the person is gone.  It's just impossible for short-term history to accurately reflect what has taken place.  Most historians, you know, probably had a political preference, and so their view isn't exactly objective -- most short-term historians.  And it's going to take a while for people to analyze mine or any other of my predecessors until down the road when they're able to take -- watch the long march of history and determine whether or not the decisions made during the eight years I was President have affected history in a positive way.

I wish you all a happy holiday.  Thank you for your attendance.  Have fun, enjoy yourself.  For those lucky enough to go to Crawford, perhaps I'll see you down there.

Thank you.

END 10:52 A.M. EST