Committed to the First Amendment and OUR Freedom of Speech since 2008
Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jen Psaki, November 19, 2021
Q Do you have - do you have any reaction to the report that the U.S. is considering deporting a group of Afghans who did not meet the vetting requirements back to Afghanistan?
MS. PSAKI: I would have to look into the specific details, but I would note that our - our thorough vetting processes are in place for a reason - and we follow those to the letter of the law - and ensure that we are not only welcoming people who served by our side for many years during a challenging, long war but also that we are making sure the American people know they're safe. But I have to look into these specific examples.
Q And then one on Russia if I may. According to Kremlin spokesman - spokesperson Dmitry Peskov, some certain preparations are underway for the virtual meeting between President Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Can you confirm that?
MS. PSAKI: I don't have any meeting to preview or call to preview for you at this point in time. If something like that is confirmed or finalized, we're happy to share that information.
Go ahead.
Q Thanks, Jen. Ahead of Thanksgiving, I wanted to ask you about hunger in the country, specifically hunger among military families. We've seen some of these recent reports that as many as 15 percent of enlisted military families were dealing with food insecurity even before the pandemic. Secretary Austin, as you know, talked about this as an issue just this week.
I know that Chairman McGovern has been pushing the White House to hold a summit on hunger. Is that something the White House is really considering? And is there anything new the White House is doing on this?
MS. PSAKI: Well, because of the American Rescue Plan, we've cut childhood hunger in half over the last year.
And I would tell you that when we look to getting the Build Back Better agenda passed, to the impact it's going to have on lowering childcare, lowering eldercare - the cost of eldercare, lowering the cost of healthcare - these are all costs on families that impact what they're able to afford in their daily lives.
And, certainly, the impact on military families - as a military family himself - or, I should say, the President and Dr. Biden - that is heartbreaking. And they're going to continue to fight to do more to make sure there are not hungry families, whether they're military or not, in this country.
In terms of a summit, I don't have any plans to preview for you on that front.
Q Can I just follow up, because there's two - in both the House and the Senate version of the NDAA, it called for a basic needs allowance to help military families that are low income and having a hard time. But there's a difference - this is wonky, but the Senate -
MS. PSAKI: It's okay. We're a safe place. Wonky.
Q - the Senate version would basically count the housing allowance as income, which a lot of activists say would mean that a lot of low-income families would no longer qualify for that basic needs allowance, so thousands of military families could suddenly not qualify for that extra money and that extra help.
OMB said that they just need more, you know, comprehensive data and analysis to determine if they support the inclusion or exclusion. Is there any update on where the White House stands on that?
MS. PSAKI: I'm happy to check and see if there's any update on it. Obviously, our objective - overarching objective is not to make it more challenging for anyone, including - especially military families - to put food on the table.
That - making sure that's not the case is central to the President's agenda. But I will see if there's more to report on that.
Go ahead.
Q Again, Jen, Catholic bishops fear -
MS. PSAKI: Chris, did you have a question?
Q - faith-based preschools could be excluded from -
MS. PSAKI: We don't need to scream or shout over other people in here -
Q - receiving Build Back Better money. I'm raising -
MS. PSAKI: - so we're going to keep moving on.
Q - I'm rais- - I've got a legitimate question here.
MS. PSAKI: Go ahead. Go ahead.
Q Okay. Legitimate question.
Q I had a question about Section 230. Yesterday, the Justice Department announced that they were going to defend Section 230 in a lawsuit filed by the former president, but as a candidate, President Biden repeatedly called for the repeal of Section 230. So, does the Justice Department's actions yesterday represent a change in President - the President or the administration's attitude?
MS. PSAKI: He called for reforms of Section 230; that continues to be his position.
Q I have a question that concerns religious liberty -
MS. PSAKI: Go ahead in the middle.
Q - religious freedom.
MS. PSAKI: Go - wait - go ahead in the middle, Brett. Go ahead.
Q Thanks, Jen. Appreciate it.
Q Hoping you can respond that.
Q Does the White House have any reaction to Senator Rubio this morning calling the President's pick to lead the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency a "communist" or any of the criticism that she faced at her hearing yesterday?
MS. PSAKI: Well, I did see some of that commentary. I also enjoyed the pushback from Senator Elizabeth Warren, who maybe we should just point to as our response. But I would say the President nominated her to serve in this job because she is eminently qualified, and she's somebody who would represent the role and the United States effectively in the position. And certainly we're hopeful she's confirmed.
Go ahead.
Q Jen, thank you. I'm not an economist either -
MS. PSAKI: (Laughs.)
Q - but I can divide by 10 years. And even if you take - would you be willing to go so far as to say that even if you take the lower CBO expectation of what the IRS would bring in in a Build Back Better Act, that the deficits on an annual basis will be so low that it might - it would be palatable to the American people and palatable to Senator Manchin in particular? Would you go so far as to say?
MS. PSAKI: I don't want to speak for Senator Manchin or all of the American people; I can only speak for the President and the White House. But what I think it's important for the American people to understand, and certainly Senator Manchin too, is what I've noted a little bit already to date: The former head of the CBO conveyed how difficult it is to score IRS enforcement. We have former Treasury Secretaries who don't always agree with us - former Secretary Paulson, former Secretary Larry Summers - conveying that there could be much greater savings.
So, what I'm conveying to you is that our calculations and assessments, and those of outside economists, are that it will actually be - this bill will actually reduce the deficit, and it will also lower costs and reduce inflationary pressures.
Q Can I follow up there for a second? Seventeen billion dollars, or whatever, a year is a drop in the bucket compared to the natural deficits the country is actually running up right now. Is that - do you think that's palatable, then, to Senator Manchin, to the American people?
MS. PSAKI: I can't speak for Senator Manchin or the American people. What I can speak for is what we believe our assessment is based on outside economists and experts of what the actual savings will be over the course of time. And it will reduce the deficit over the course of 10 years. And that's what we're communicating to the American people and to Senator Manchin.
Go ahead.
Q Thank you, Jen. A couple questions on Ukraine and Russia (inaudible). Yesterday, the Ukrainian government pleaded for more military aid to defend itself against Russia. At the same time, Putin is complaining that Western countries don't take his "red lines," as he called them, seriously, and blamed Western countries for the tension in Ukraine, particularly with these weapons supplies to Ukraine.
So, given those two conflicting things, what is the President's - you know, what's the way forward for him? Does he go with Putin's red lines, or does he go with United States wants to help Ukraine defend itself, as it says?
MS. PSAKI: Well, we go with what is in the interests of the United States and what is in our own national security interests. You know, the President's - Putin's speech - which is what I think what we're referring to here - touched on a range of topics, including U.S.-Russian relations and the need to maintain dialogue to address many disagreements. We agree. That's a part of an important discussion, even as I don't have anything to preview about what that will look like or what's next.
We welcomed President Putin's statement about resolving the Donbas conflict peacefully using the Minsk Agreements. We support reenergized efforts to reach a settlement under the Minsk framework and call for immediate steps to restore the July 20 ceasefire. We also continue to have serious concerns about Russian military activities and harsh rhetoric toward Ukraine, and call on Moscow to deescalate tensions.
We have been - have had extensive interactions with our European allies and partners in recent weeks, including with Ukraine. And we've discussed our concerns about Russian military activities and harsh record - harsh rhetoric toward Ukraine with the Russians over the course of time as well.
So, I wouldn't say we're reacting to any component of President Putin's speech. We are going to continue to proceed and welcome steps or comments where we feel they are encouraging or positive, and convey concern where we see action or rhetoric that is - that is not in line with what we feel should be happening.
Q How about Ukraine's request for - they're saying, "We need more weapons." It's pretty clear - their message.
MS. PSAKI: I don't have thing to preview or predict for you in terms of additional assistance. We've provided, as you know, a range of assistance - military and non-military assistance to Ukraine, and strong supporters of Ukraine over the course of time.
Q And then a follow-up on Ukraine.
MS. PSAKI: I'm just going to keep going around. Chris, go ahead.
Q So, it's been several months since the - people were hopeful that the pandemic was ending, that the mask-wearing guidance went away. Now numbers are ticking back up, we're going into a second winter that could be deadly, and we're still having, you know, more than a thousand deaths a day.
What is the White House's message to the American people who are, you know, frustrated over this turn of events and now potentially need to get a third shot and continue to get shots into the future to protect themselves from the virus?
MS. PSAKI: Well, first, we would say: We understand. We are tired and exhausted by the pandemic as well. And what we can do is encourage action; we're encouraging every eligible American to get the extra protection a booster offers. They're readily available across the country. It doesn't take a lot of time. It should be easy for people to do. And that is what our focus is on.
We're encouraging all children - all parents of children who are eligible for the vaccine to get vaccinated. We've already seen 10 percent of 5- to 11-year-olds vaccinated. Getting kids protected is a key part of moving forward in fighting the pandemic.
We also have taken actions like securing 10 million Pfizer and 3 million Merck antiviral pills. So, the American people should know that we are continuing to look for any way available and possible to get the pandemic under control, to make sure people know we're moving in a continued, better direction on this.
And we believe that moving forward with requirements and other measures that will boost vaccinations is also a positive step.
We know we're heading into the winter. We are - that's one of the reasons we've been encouraging people who are eligible to get the boosters. We've been encouraging parents of kids to get their kid - who are eligible - to get their kids vaccinated. Again, they could be fully vaccinated by Chris- - by Christmas, or the holiday season, at this point in time.
So, that's what our focus is on now. We believe we have strong measures to keep people safe, and we just need to continue to press forward in communities across the country.
Q Is there nothing else that the administration can do? Is it basically up to the American people at this point? Or is there - you know, what powers - other powers do you have to take more steps? Or is it really just on Americans now to do what they can?
MS. PSAKI: Well, I would say, you know, under the President's leadership, we not only purchased enough supply to ensure the entire American population is vaccinated, we've made it readily available across the country. We've made it accessible. We have also secured 10 million doses of - as I noted - of the antiviral pills. We've ensured we've run mass-vaccination communications campaigns across the country.
So, I would say the American - the federal government and the President - this has been his number one priority, and we've done everything humanly possible.
At a certain point, it is true that people have to go get shots, get themselves vaccinated, and protect themselves. But we want to do everything we can to make it as easy as humanly possible.
Let me go all the way to the back.
Q Thank you, Jen. I really appreciate it. Nominees to serve in senior State Department positions and as U.S. ambassadors have been told by handlers that the backlog for confirmations is, quote, "unprecedented" and to expect to wait months longer even than they already had expected with a really delayed process.
Is President Biden considering the possibility of recess appointments, at least for postings of high operational and strategic importance?
MS. PSAKI: I don't have anything to preview on that front, but I will note it is unprecedented. And I would also note that there have been statements, including from former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates just a few days ago, emphasizing the - how concerning the historic nature of this is.
Whether you're a Democrat or a Republican or nonpolitical at all, I think most people recognize we should have ambassadors serving in posts around the world. We should have an ambassador to China serving in that country right now, an eminently qualified one, who the President has nominated.
We should have ambassadors at posts around Europe - all around Europe - at a time where ensuring we are supporting NATO is a pivotal message to send to Russia and other countries around the world.
And these are not only being blocked by some but also delayed. A lot of these - and I talked about this a little bit yesterday - but the fact is that many of these ambassadors will move forward with bipartisan support once there's a vote. And what's happening now is there's an insistence on a lengthy debate process instead of moving forward through unanimous consent, which would mean just basically allowing for a vote without going through a lengthy floor process that would use a lot of time on the floor. That can happen.
So, there's a lot of ways that this can move forward. I don't have anything to preview for you in terms of recess appointments, but it is frustrating, it is unprecedented, and it does certainly hurt our national security.
Go ahead, all the way in the back. John, what do you have for me today?
Q Thank you, Jen. Does the administration still recognize the government of Prime Minister Ahmed Ali as the legitimate government of Ethiopia? And are they standing by it firmly?
MS. PSAKI: I don't know if the State Department has spoken to this, and I don't want to speak out of turn here. So let me check with them and see if there's any update on this front. Obviously, we have expressed significant concern. We've put in place sanctions. I will see if there's anything more official I can convey to all of you from here.
Q And just as a follow-up to the previous question on ambassadorships: The President has not named anyone to the key ambassadorships in Ukraine and in Hungary right now. Are any of those pending? Because this is not anything tied up in Congress; it's from the administration.
MS. PSAKI: Fair. And obviously, as is true of other personnel appointments, the President certainly wants to ensure we have the right person to nominate for each of those vital and important positions. But there are dozens of qualified nominees who are waiting to be confirmed, and we're certainly eager to see that move forward.
Q Thanks, Jen.
MS. PSAKI: Thanks, everyone. Happy Friday.
You can visit a collection of all Biden White House posts by clicking here.
Go Back
MS. PSAKI: I would have to look into the specific details, but I would note that our - our thorough vetting processes are in place for a reason - and we follow those to the letter of the law - and ensure that we are not only welcoming people who served by our side for many years during a challenging, long war but also that we are making sure the American people know they're safe. But I have to look into these specific examples.
Q And then one on Russia if I may. According to Kremlin spokesman - spokesperson Dmitry Peskov, some certain preparations are underway for the virtual meeting between President Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Can you confirm that?
MS. PSAKI: I don't have any meeting to preview or call to preview for you at this point in time. If something like that is confirmed or finalized, we're happy to share that information.
Go ahead.
Q Thanks, Jen. Ahead of Thanksgiving, I wanted to ask you about hunger in the country, specifically hunger among military families. We've seen some of these recent reports that as many as 15 percent of enlisted military families were dealing with food insecurity even before the pandemic. Secretary Austin, as you know, talked about this as an issue just this week.
I know that Chairman McGovern has been pushing the White House to hold a summit on hunger. Is that something the White House is really considering? And is there anything new the White House is doing on this?
MS. PSAKI: Well, because of the American Rescue Plan, we've cut childhood hunger in half over the last year.
And I would tell you that when we look to getting the Build Back Better agenda passed, to the impact it's going to have on lowering childcare, lowering eldercare - the cost of eldercare, lowering the cost of healthcare - these are all costs on families that impact what they're able to afford in their daily lives.
And, certainly, the impact on military families - as a military family himself - or, I should say, the President and Dr. Biden - that is heartbreaking. And they're going to continue to fight to do more to make sure there are not hungry families, whether they're military or not, in this country.
In terms of a summit, I don't have any plans to preview for you on that front.
Q Can I just follow up, because there's two - in both the House and the Senate version of the NDAA, it called for a basic needs allowance to help military families that are low income and having a hard time. But there's a difference - this is wonky, but the Senate -
MS. PSAKI: It's okay. We're a safe place. Wonky.
Q - the Senate version would basically count the housing allowance as income, which a lot of activists say would mean that a lot of low-income families would no longer qualify for that basic needs allowance, so thousands of military families could suddenly not qualify for that extra money and that extra help.
OMB said that they just need more, you know, comprehensive data and analysis to determine if they support the inclusion or exclusion. Is there any update on where the White House stands on that?
MS. PSAKI: I'm happy to check and see if there's any update on it. Obviously, our objective - overarching objective is not to make it more challenging for anyone, including - especially military families - to put food on the table.
That - making sure that's not the case is central to the President's agenda. But I will see if there's more to report on that.
Go ahead.
Q Again, Jen, Catholic bishops fear -
MS. PSAKI: Chris, did you have a question?
Q - faith-based preschools could be excluded from -
MS. PSAKI: We don't need to scream or shout over other people in here -
Q - receiving Build Back Better money. I'm raising -
MS. PSAKI: - so we're going to keep moving on.
Q - I'm rais- - I've got a legitimate question here.
MS. PSAKI: Go ahead. Go ahead.
Q Okay. Legitimate question.
Q I had a question about Section 230. Yesterday, the Justice Department announced that they were going to defend Section 230 in a lawsuit filed by the former president, but as a candidate, President Biden repeatedly called for the repeal of Section 230. So, does the Justice Department's actions yesterday represent a change in President - the President or the administration's attitude?
MS. PSAKI: He called for reforms of Section 230; that continues to be his position.
Q I have a question that concerns religious liberty -
MS. PSAKI: Go ahead in the middle.
Q - religious freedom.
MS. PSAKI: Go - wait - go ahead in the middle, Brett. Go ahead.
Q Thanks, Jen. Appreciate it.
Q Hoping you can respond that.
Q Does the White House have any reaction to Senator Rubio this morning calling the President's pick to lead the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency a "communist" or any of the criticism that she faced at her hearing yesterday?
MS. PSAKI: Well, I did see some of that commentary. I also enjoyed the pushback from Senator Elizabeth Warren, who maybe we should just point to as our response. But I would say the President nominated her to serve in this job because she is eminently qualified, and she's somebody who would represent the role and the United States effectively in the position. And certainly we're hopeful she's confirmed.
Go ahead.
Q Jen, thank you. I'm not an economist either -
MS. PSAKI: (Laughs.)
Q - but I can divide by 10 years. And even if you take - would you be willing to go so far as to say that even if you take the lower CBO expectation of what the IRS would bring in in a Build Back Better Act, that the deficits on an annual basis will be so low that it might - it would be palatable to the American people and palatable to Senator Manchin in particular? Would you go so far as to say?
MS. PSAKI: I don't want to speak for Senator Manchin or all of the American people; I can only speak for the President and the White House. But what I think it's important for the American people to understand, and certainly Senator Manchin too, is what I've noted a little bit already to date: The former head of the CBO conveyed how difficult it is to score IRS enforcement. We have former Treasury Secretaries who don't always agree with us - former Secretary Paulson, former Secretary Larry Summers - conveying that there could be much greater savings.
So, what I'm conveying to you is that our calculations and assessments, and those of outside economists, are that it will actually be - this bill will actually reduce the deficit, and it will also lower costs and reduce inflationary pressures.
Q Can I follow up there for a second? Seventeen billion dollars, or whatever, a year is a drop in the bucket compared to the natural deficits the country is actually running up right now. Is that - do you think that's palatable, then, to Senator Manchin, to the American people?
MS. PSAKI: I can't speak for Senator Manchin or the American people. What I can speak for is what we believe our assessment is based on outside economists and experts of what the actual savings will be over the course of time. And it will reduce the deficit over the course of 10 years. And that's what we're communicating to the American people and to Senator Manchin.
Go ahead.
Q Thank you, Jen. A couple questions on Ukraine and Russia (inaudible). Yesterday, the Ukrainian government pleaded for more military aid to defend itself against Russia. At the same time, Putin is complaining that Western countries don't take his "red lines," as he called them, seriously, and blamed Western countries for the tension in Ukraine, particularly with these weapons supplies to Ukraine.
So, given those two conflicting things, what is the President's - you know, what's the way forward for him? Does he go with Putin's red lines, or does he go with United States wants to help Ukraine defend itself, as it says?
MS. PSAKI: Well, we go with what is in the interests of the United States and what is in our own national security interests. You know, the President's - Putin's speech - which is what I think what we're referring to here - touched on a range of topics, including U.S.-Russian relations and the need to maintain dialogue to address many disagreements. We agree. That's a part of an important discussion, even as I don't have anything to preview about what that will look like or what's next.
We welcomed President Putin's statement about resolving the Donbas conflict peacefully using the Minsk Agreements. We support reenergized efforts to reach a settlement under the Minsk framework and call for immediate steps to restore the July 20 ceasefire. We also continue to have serious concerns about Russian military activities and harsh rhetoric toward Ukraine, and call on Moscow to deescalate tensions.
We have been - have had extensive interactions with our European allies and partners in recent weeks, including with Ukraine. And we've discussed our concerns about Russian military activities and harsh record - harsh rhetoric toward Ukraine with the Russians over the course of time as well.
So, I wouldn't say we're reacting to any component of President Putin's speech. We are going to continue to proceed and welcome steps or comments where we feel they are encouraging or positive, and convey concern where we see action or rhetoric that is - that is not in line with what we feel should be happening.
Q How about Ukraine's request for - they're saying, "We need more weapons." It's pretty clear - their message.
MS. PSAKI: I don't have thing to preview or predict for you in terms of additional assistance. We've provided, as you know, a range of assistance - military and non-military assistance to Ukraine, and strong supporters of Ukraine over the course of time.
Q And then a follow-up on Ukraine.
MS. PSAKI: I'm just going to keep going around. Chris, go ahead.
Q So, it's been several months since the - people were hopeful that the pandemic was ending, that the mask-wearing guidance went away. Now numbers are ticking back up, we're going into a second winter that could be deadly, and we're still having, you know, more than a thousand deaths a day.
What is the White House's message to the American people who are, you know, frustrated over this turn of events and now potentially need to get a third shot and continue to get shots into the future to protect themselves from the virus?
MS. PSAKI: Well, first, we would say: We understand. We are tired and exhausted by the pandemic as well. And what we can do is encourage action; we're encouraging every eligible American to get the extra protection a booster offers. They're readily available across the country. It doesn't take a lot of time. It should be easy for people to do. And that is what our focus is on.
We're encouraging all children - all parents of children who are eligible for the vaccine to get vaccinated. We've already seen 10 percent of 5- to 11-year-olds vaccinated. Getting kids protected is a key part of moving forward in fighting the pandemic.
We also have taken actions like securing 10 million Pfizer and 3 million Merck antiviral pills. So, the American people should know that we are continuing to look for any way available and possible to get the pandemic under control, to make sure people know we're moving in a continued, better direction on this.
And we believe that moving forward with requirements and other measures that will boost vaccinations is also a positive step.
We know we're heading into the winter. We are - that's one of the reasons we've been encouraging people who are eligible to get the boosters. We've been encouraging parents of kids to get their kid - who are eligible - to get their kids vaccinated. Again, they could be fully vaccinated by Chris- - by Christmas, or the holiday season, at this point in time.
So, that's what our focus is on now. We believe we have strong measures to keep people safe, and we just need to continue to press forward in communities across the country.
Q Is there nothing else that the administration can do? Is it basically up to the American people at this point? Or is there - you know, what powers - other powers do you have to take more steps? Or is it really just on Americans now to do what they can?
MS. PSAKI: Well, I would say, you know, under the President's leadership, we not only purchased enough supply to ensure the entire American population is vaccinated, we've made it readily available across the country. We've made it accessible. We have also secured 10 million doses of - as I noted - of the antiviral pills. We've ensured we've run mass-vaccination communications campaigns across the country.
So, I would say the American - the federal government and the President - this has been his number one priority, and we've done everything humanly possible.
At a certain point, it is true that people have to go get shots, get themselves vaccinated, and protect themselves. But we want to do everything we can to make it as easy as humanly possible.
Let me go all the way to the back.
Q Thank you, Jen. I really appreciate it. Nominees to serve in senior State Department positions and as U.S. ambassadors have been told by handlers that the backlog for confirmations is, quote, "unprecedented" and to expect to wait months longer even than they already had expected with a really delayed process.
Is President Biden considering the possibility of recess appointments, at least for postings of high operational and strategic importance?
MS. PSAKI: I don't have anything to preview on that front, but I will note it is unprecedented. And I would also note that there have been statements, including from former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates just a few days ago, emphasizing the - how concerning the historic nature of this is.
Whether you're a Democrat or a Republican or nonpolitical at all, I think most people recognize we should have ambassadors serving in posts around the world. We should have an ambassador to China serving in that country right now, an eminently qualified one, who the President has nominated.
We should have ambassadors at posts around Europe - all around Europe - at a time where ensuring we are supporting NATO is a pivotal message to send to Russia and other countries around the world.
And these are not only being blocked by some but also delayed. A lot of these - and I talked about this a little bit yesterday - but the fact is that many of these ambassadors will move forward with bipartisan support once there's a vote. And what's happening now is there's an insistence on a lengthy debate process instead of moving forward through unanimous consent, which would mean just basically allowing for a vote without going through a lengthy floor process that would use a lot of time on the floor. That can happen.
So, there's a lot of ways that this can move forward. I don't have anything to preview for you in terms of recess appointments, but it is frustrating, it is unprecedented, and it does certainly hurt our national security.
Go ahead, all the way in the back. John, what do you have for me today?
Q Thank you, Jen. Does the administration still recognize the government of Prime Minister Ahmed Ali as the legitimate government of Ethiopia? And are they standing by it firmly?
MS. PSAKI: I don't know if the State Department has spoken to this, and I don't want to speak out of turn here. So let me check with them and see if there's any update on this front. Obviously, we have expressed significant concern. We've put in place sanctions. I will see if there's anything more official I can convey to all of you from here.
Q And just as a follow-up to the previous question on ambassadorships: The President has not named anyone to the key ambassadorships in Ukraine and in Hungary right now. Are any of those pending? Because this is not anything tied up in Congress; it's from the administration.
MS. PSAKI: Fair. And obviously, as is true of other personnel appointments, the President certainly wants to ensure we have the right person to nominate for each of those vital and important positions. But there are dozens of qualified nominees who are waiting to be confirmed, and we're certainly eager to see that move forward.
Q Thanks, Jen.
MS. PSAKI: Thanks, everyone. Happy Friday.
- Contact: White House
- Press Office
Home
Contact
About
Service Rates
Privacy Policy
Follow on Facebook
Subscribe to Newsletters
Rss Feed
Keywords
Eastern NC Now & ENC NOW © Copyright 1998-2024 All Rights Reserved.
