Home > Politics > Political Punch
Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper

« Previous | Main | Next »

Obama's National Security Team

December 01, 2008 12:42 PM

President-elect Obama introduced his national security team today. Pending Senate confirmation they will be:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton;
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates (already confirmed);
Attorney General Eric Holder;
National Security Adviser Gen. James Jones (Ret.) (confirmation not needed for this position);
Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano; and
United States Ambassador to the United Nations Dr. Susan Rice (position will be made Cabinet rank.)

My q and a (or, more accurately, q's and a's):

TAPPER: Thank you, Mr. President-elect. During the campaign you said that you thought the U.S. had a right to attack high-value terrorist targets in Pakistan if given actionable intelligence, with or without the Pakistani government's permission.

Two questions on that. One, do you think India has that same right? And two... some people up there on the stage took issue with your saying that. They have strong opinions about issues ranging from Pakistan to the surge. And while they're all committed to having a successful United States, what private assurances have they given you that they will be able to carry out your vision, even when they strongly disagree with that vision, as some of them have been able to do in the past? Thank you, sir.

PRESIDENT-ELECT OBAMA: I think that sovereign nations obviously have a right to protect themselves. Beyond that, I don't want to comment on the specific situation that's taking place in South Asia right now.

I think it is important for us to let the investigators do their jobs and make a determination in terms of who was responsible for carrying out these heinous acts. I can tell you that my administration will remain steadfast in support of India's efforts to catch the perpetrators of this terrible act and bring them to justice. And I expect that the world community will feel the same way.

Now, in terms of my team and carrying out my vision, my policies: As I've said, during campaigns or during the course of election season, differences get magnified. I did not ask for assurances from these individuals that they would agree with me at all times. I think they understand and would not be joining this team unless they understood and were prepared to carry out the decisions that have been made by me after full discussion.

And, you know, most of the people who are standing here are people who I've worked with, and on the broad core vision of where America needs to go, we are in almost complete agreement. There are going to be differences in tactics and different assessments and judgments made. That's what I expect; that's what I welcome. That's why I asked them to join the team.

More to come...

-- jpt

December 1, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (33)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

there was a reporter in the group who had his clock cleaned by obama with his snarky question...anyone want to take a guess who? Were is Helen Thomas, bring her back to the front, and put Mr. Snarky question on the back row.


I think our country is going to be in good hands again.

the nightmare is almost over.

Posted by: what? | Dec 1, 2008 3:22:19 PM

The only comfort in this administration of our Greatest Smartest Dearest Leader's is Hillary Clinton, who will ensure no major boneheaded mistakes taken place under her watch.

Posted by: fat cat | Dec 1, 2008 3:06:15 PM

I am a little nervous about Hillary being SOS.I mean I respect her now more than ever, but is she really at ease with calling Barack Mr. President.I guess we will see the professionalism a nd leadership abilities of these people in the coming future, because questions like these could stir up tension if they are agitated like it was during the campaign.Still I guess we'll have to wait an see and I hope Hillary as well as the rest of the Obama administration makes us Americans proud.I wish them all success in advancing the best interests of America.

Posted by: TV | Dec 1, 2008 2:50:53 PM

Jake getting hammered by his faithful readers. The Hillary PUMAS are nowhere to be found. I'm expecting the extreme left will not be happy with the change they see, but as a moderate, I do expect positive changes, and in the midst of crises on every hand, what more can we hope for?

Posted by: norms | Dec 1, 2008 2:40:39 PM

Hawks? Funny how people latch onto this meaningless jargon and then regurgitate it as if it actually means anything.

I'm very pleased with Obama. These are very serious times, and he's taking his responsibilities very seriously. He's picking people based on qualifications and experience, not cronism and politics.

Good for him! Good for us!

Posted by: Teri B. | Dec 1, 2008 2:32:28 PM

Jake -

Dig out a copy of Irving Janis' Victims of Groupthink. You'll understand why Obama wants an administration of smart, pragmatic people who aren't afraid to forcefully express their views.

Posted by: Brooklyn Democrat | Dec 1, 2008 2:24:59 PM

Wow, he named three hawks to major foreign policy roles.

That's gotta have the Moveon crowd going absolutely nuts -- they view two of those picks as war criminals.

Posted by: jblog | Dec 1, 2008 2:13:44 PM

Jake,

The election is over buddy.

Time to govern.

Don't you like Obama's A-Team?

Posted by: Steve_NJ | Dec 1, 2008 1:38:57 PM

Jake:
When I heard 44 call out "Jake" I thought "Uh-oh".

Sure enough it was as kat said, "a snarky question"

Obama won. Maybe you need to accept that.

Or maybe you're "the loyal opposition."

Can't you concentrate on going forward rather than playing "gotcha" & re-hashing the nomination.

I think we have a few other problems that deserve attention!

Posted by: Wintermute | Dec 1, 2008 1:36:44 PM

well. Abcnews. go figures. along with Cnn, NBC perhaps the most trusted news sources (hope tapper isn't reading this). So, just to reach more people, that's why he gets to ask more questions. i mean, unlike cnn, u don't need cable.

Posted by: lupercal | Dec 1, 2008 1:32:54 PM

Why would someone ask for what private assurances have been given? The question negates itself. Private assurances are supposed to be kept exactly that!

Posted by: kat | Dec 1, 2008 1:24:51 PM

Good response to a snarky question, which brought up past campaigning differences between him and HRC. Is Obama supposed to be focused on the past or the most effective course to be taken on foreign policies?

Posted by: kat | Dec 1, 2008 1:19:48 PM

Jake, what was the question you asked? I couldn't hear. and why/how do you get to ask a question every time? i'm a little curious

Posted by: Question | Dec 1, 2008 1:05:47 PM

« Previous Comments

Post a comment





 

POLITICAL VIDEOS