than ever before. >> just to follow on the pakistan question, if there,was a u.s. drone strike, it would be the second u.s. attack that killed a senior al qaeda leader within pakistan's borders in a very short period of time. >> what i can tell you, ann, is that our government has been able to confirm al libbi's death. i don't have anything for you on the circumstances of his death or the location. i can simply say that he was the number two leader in al qaeda. this is the second time in less than a year that the number two leader of al qaeda has been removed from the battlefield and that represents in the wake of the death of osama bin laden another serious blow to core al qaeda in what is an ongoing effort to disrupt, dismantle and

ultimately defeat a foe that brought great terror and death to the united states on september 11th, 2001, and that has perpetrated acts of terrorism against innocent civilians around the globe. >> you said that his breadth of experience would be difficult to replace, but organization has shown that it can get a warm body wherever it fields to and continually regenerate. what is it about him that makes him -- made him particular ly valuable? >> i think he was very much an operational leader, general manager of al qaeda, with a range of experience that is hard to replicate. i think that it is a job that's hard to fill and that there may not be, given the duration of

late that people have held that job, that there could be a lot of candidates hoping to fill. so the point is that removing leaders like al libbi from the very top of al qaeda is part of an ongoing effort to disrupt and dismantle and ultimately defeat al qaeda, and that is an important piece of business. yes, reuters. >> jay, with the crisis in europe deepening by the day, can you talk about what the president's been doing behind the scenes in the last few days and what his conversations with european leaders have intended to send a message on? >> throughout this crisis in the eurozone, the president has remained closely engaged with his european counterparts, as i have said in the past, and that

has continued throughout recent days and weeks. we believe that economic performance in europe is a great importance to us here in the united states. the eurozone crisis creates a head wind for the global economy, and we are obviously connected to the global economy, so trouble in the eurozone presents a challenge to the american economy. europe is our -- is an important trading partner and our financial systems, as you know, are deeply connected. as i've said in the past, european leaders have taken significant steps in implementing a fire wall, establishing a fire wall and in various countries implementing reforms that are necessary, and we support those efforts. more needs to be done, as we have said, and today, as you know, i believe, the g-7 ministers and governors reviewed developments in the global economy and financial markets, and the policy response currently under consideration, including progress towards financial and fiscal union in

europe. they agreed to monitor developments closely ahead of the g-20 summit in los cabos. i can see that european leaders seem to be moving with a heightened sense of urgency, and we welcome that, and we're hoping to see accelerated european action over the next several weeks, including in the run-up to the aforementioned g-20 leaders meeting in mexico. a movement to strengthen the european banking system will be of particular importance in this time period. >> the president has tried to walk a fine line over the last several months between not appearing to lecture his european counterparts but also trying to prod them into action. he's felt that strong action was needed. is it time now to step up that message? does he feel that he needs to underscore that even more strongly? >> the president and secretary geithner and others have shared the united states' experience

with the kinds of challenges that the europeans have been facing, whether it's the need to implement very strict stress tests on banks, the need to ensure that financial institutions are recapitalized. these are decisions that are sometimes difficult politically but important for the long-term fiscal health, in the case of the decisions we made here in the united states, and in the case of the decisions being made in europe of the countries of the eurozone and the region. you know, he's discussed, as you know, and he talked about at camp david, he has discussed with european leaders the efforts that we have taken here in washington to restart our economy, to reverse the extreme economic decline that was taking place here in 2008 and 2009 and to put the economy on a path

towards economic growth and job creation. that focus on growth and job creation is very important in the near term, and as you saw coming out of the g-8, there was a commitment by and a consensus from european leaders there to focus on growth and job creation. there is much work to be done in europe, and we -- this administration, the president, secretary geithner and others, continue to advise and consult their european counterparts as they -- as they make some very important decisions. jay? >> did your intelligence sources provide information about whether or not there were any other people killed other than al libb sydney. >> i don't have anything more for you except for the confirmation that they have that al lib biis dead. beyond that i would refer you to the other agencies. >> it's not difficult to foresee a world in which the united states is not the only country with this kind of technology. is the administration at all

concerned about the precedent being set in terms of secrecy, in terms of operating military craft in other sovereign nations and what we might see as a result when china and/or russia get their hands on drones? >> i can't discuss methods from here, and i -- and i do not discuss -- well, this is in relation obviously to the particular incident that we've been discussing, and i can't get into details about al libbi's death, the circumstances or the location. you know. i would simply say that this president is firmly committed to carrying out his policy objective in afghanistan and in the afghanistan-pakistan region which is to disrupt, dismantle and ultimately defeat al qaeda. he's committed to disrupting, dismantling and ultimately

defeating al qaeda beyond that region, too. that's why we cooperate with countries around the world in efforts to counter al qaeda and other extremists. >> okay. not relating this question to the death of al libbi. the united states has this technology. president obama has said that the administration should be more transparent about it. is there not any concern that the administration has that there is a precedent being set? you've just heard assad this week blame the massacre that took place in hula on -- >> everyone knows how preposterous that assertion is. >> and countries claim terrorism as a justification for their actions all the time. even positing that the united states under any president only acts righteously every time. is there not any concern that a

precedent is being set, either for some future -- >> jake, without getting into -- >> or any other country? >> without getting into very sensitive issues that go to the cover our national security interests, i can say this president this, commander in chief, pus a great deal of thought and care into the prosecution and implementation of the policy decisions he makes and that includes in the effort to combat al qaeda, in the af-pak region and around the world. there is no question as the president has stated on many occasions that the decisions that a commander in chief has to make when it comes to war and peace, when it comes to defending the united states and protecting the united states and our allies, are weighty, serious decisions, and he treats them that way every time he makes one. >> what gives the united states the moral foundation to object

in the future to when russia -- i'm sorry. >> just wondering how many questions. maybe you should have like an interview with him. >> go ahead. >> do you mind if i continue? >> go right ahead. >> i'm wondering what the moral foundation comes from if the united states objects in the future to an action being taken by russia or china along these same lines? >> i reject the comparison, but would i simply say that, as i said just now, that this president, this administration takes very seriously the decisions that are involved in the effort to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al qaeda, but this president is absolutely committed to that objective, as commander in chief, as president, protection of the united states, protection of the american citizens, protection of our allies and our interests are

a high priority, the highest. and that will be the case, as long as he's in office. >> jay, has the killing of al libbi complicated efforts for pakistan to open up its supply routes? >> as i already noted, i can only discuss the fact that we have confirmation of his death. i can't get into location or circumstances, and -- and i would simply say that we have an important relationship with pakistan that we endeavor to work on every day because it is in our national security interest to do so. >> well, to ask is t in another way. obviously this was a big topic of conversation during the nato summit. has the administration made progress since nato towards getting pakistan to reopen routes? >> i don't have an update for you on that. both this administration and the government of pakistan are committed to resolving that

issue. we believe that it will be resolved, but i have no specific updates on that. >> so are talks ongoing? >> again, i don't have specific information about discussions on that issue. obviously we have regular contacts and consultations with the pakistanis. move around a little bit. yes. >> jay, as you know, yesterday was third-year anniversary of the speech that the president gave in cairo. in that speech he made some promises concerning iraq, iran, afghanistan, the middle east peace process, of course, about changing the american image in the muslim world. now three years later do you think that the president has kept these promises, and how about does the administration

see its role? >> would i say without going in detail the president's speech, yes, the president has made the commitments he's made. he's been i think very transparent and clear about what his objectives are, about what the interests of the united states are, who are foes are and who they are not. he, as i think you've seen throughout the arab spring, has very carefully made clear the united states sides with the democratic desires and aspirations of the people of the region, and while each country is different and the process by which each country engages in a democratic transformation has been and will be different. our commitment to that democratic future is strong and

will continue to be so. you know, the president has also committed, as i've just been discussing with jake, to make sure that our military operations in a place like afghanistan have a very clear objective. when he took office in january of 2009, you could ask ten members of the united states military or the previous administration what our objective in afghanistan was, and you would get ten different answers because it was so uncle unclear, around that was highly unacceptable to president obama, and he made sure that he thoroughly reviewed the situation in afghanistan, thoroughly reviewed our policy objectives, our resources and put in place a policy with a very specific goal, and the resources necessary to fulfill

it, and i think that has contributed to a clarity about u.s. interests and u.s. objectives. >> jay, on the economy. former president clinton last night at one of the fund-raisers said that if you look at history an economic recovery takes five to ten years, and if there -- >> after a financial crisis. >> i did not sayre that. >> you said an economic recovery. there's a distinction between the types -- >> after a downturn -- >> i think it's more specific than just a downturn. shallow recessions take less time to recover from. when you suffer from a financial crisis that appropriate tastes the worst recession than the great depression the hole is quite deep. i think are important distinctions to be made. >> and another distinction he made when there was a housing collapse as in this case it usually takes longer, it can take up to ten years to turn it around. does the president, do you agree with that timetable? >> i think that the president has made clear, president obama has made clear from the very beginning that we did not get

into the mess that was the great recession, the worst recession since the great depression, overnight. it took a number of years of flawed policy decisions, of an absence of appropriate oversight and regulation, of unfortunate risky behavior in our financial markets to precipitate the economic freefall we experienced in 2008 and 2009, and it will take a long time for us to get out of that hole that that created. what he's also said is that he, working with congress and other folks, he has presided over a situation where that severe economic decline was halted and reversed, a situation where almost 9% shrinkage in our gdp has now turned around to the

point where we've seen two and a half years of economic growth, positive gdp, a situation where we were losing 750,000 jobs per month to now a situation where even though growth in jobs has not been satisfying, has not been enough, it has created 4.3 million private sector jobs. we have more work to do. there is no question. i think that's what president clinton was speaking to and certainly what president obama talks about all the time. >> so it may take up to ten years? >> again, i'm not an economist, and i think we all believe that we need to do everything we can to bring about the day when the 8 million jobs that were lost as a result of that recession are recovered and that we are in a situation where not only are we back to where we were before but we are stronger economically,

that we have a foundation economically upon which to build in the 21st century that doesn't rely on financial bubbles or housing bubbles or dotcom bubbles but relies on strength in our manufacturing sector, strength in education, strength in innovation and strength throughout the country economically. >> last night president clinton also said remember me. i'm the only guy that gave you four surplus budgets out of the eight that i sent. is it awkward for president obama to hear president clinton say that when he's not had surpluses? >> that is a profoundly interesting question, that you would phrase it that way. the point that president clinton was making and i concede that he makes it well, but i will attempt on my own to make it, is that when he was in office he inherited a deficit. after eight years in office he presided over a number of years of surpluses and turned over to his successor an economic

circumstance which was judged by the cbo and everyone else to be one that would produce surpluses as, quote, as far as the eye could see. eight years later when president obama took office, handed the oval office by his predecessor, a republican president, we had the largest deficits in history up to that time. something happened in those eight years, and it was not fiscal responsibility, and that is unfortunate. we had a situation in eight years where record surpluses were turned into record deficits, so claims by those who supported the policies that led to record deficits, that they are the bastions of fiscal conservatism do not meet the laugh test. it's just not borne out by the facts. we need to work together. this is not about one side being

better than the other, and i think that's -- it's important to bring it back to this. what was a fact under president clinton is that he had a contentious relation with a republican congress, but in the end he had republicans in congress who were willing to work with him to help bring about those surpluses, all it be in economic times that were not nearly as strained as we've experienced in the last few years, but, still, it takes bipartisan cooperation, and, unfortunately, we have not seen enough that have in the last several years, but hope springs eternal, and this president is committed to putting forward the kinds of proposals that address the weak spots in our economy. i mean, look at where we still have weaknesses in our economy, in construction, in state and local employment, especially in education. these are areas where the president has put forward specific proposals that would

boost employment and boost economic growth. the kinds of proposals that should, i think, earn bipartisan support. you know, the american jobs act which a portion of which was passed by this congress, the extension of the payroll tax cut and extension of unemployment insurance had within it elements that republicans in congress refused to vote for, that outside economists said at the time would create more than a million jobs, so republicans in congress left a million jobs on the table, unfortunately, because they didn't want to ask oil and gas companies to give up subsidies, despite record profits. they didn't want to ask others to give up tax breaks and loopholes that would have allowed for the funding of those initiatives that would have taken those million jobs off the table and put teachers back into the classroom and construction

workers back on the job. the employment picture would look a little different today had they chosen otherwise, and those proposals remain on the table and available for action. alexis. >> jay, you mentioned unemployment insurance. can we clarify. what is the president's message to the millions of people who have been unemployed for six months or longer about the worries that their unemployment insurance will trigger off. is the president going to fight to extend that? >> the president fought very hard and faced quite remarkable resistance to extending unemployment insurance in december and again in february, i believe it was. the fact is we need to take a number of steps to strengthen the economy and create an environment where more jobs are being created by the economy, and that is what's needed right now. i don't have anything specific for you on new proposals or

along the lines that you suggest, but this is not calculus. it's just math. we know what we can do to improve the employment picture and toirm prove the growth picture, you know. we've been studying these issues quite a bit, and you have, too, for months and years now, and action can and should be taken so that the american people feel that washington is addressing their highest priority. >> if the president were by some miracle to succeed in getting some of these initiatives through, is he concerned that adding to the deficit would bring the debt ceiling closer, not push it farther out? >> you're aware that, of course, the american jobs act was paid for entirely. again, there's -- you have to make choices, and -- and that was the debate we had, and that's the debate we're

continuing to have. you're right. if you don't want to ask oil and gas companies to give up their subsidies, if you don't want to ask corporate jet owners to give up their subsidies, if you don't want to ask the wealthiest americans who have enjoyed a pretty good run the past ten years or so to pay a little bit more, then it's harder to pay for these initiatives that would put, in the case of the remaining elements of the american jobs act, more than a million people to work, but that's what governing is all about. you've got to make these choices. the president's clear about the choice he thinks ought to be made. overwhelmingly the american people tend to support those initiatives, and, you know, hopefully congress will act. there's pressure on them, too, to demonstrate to their constituents that they are not just sitting on their hands and hoping the economy doesn't get better because it will improve their prospects in november. i mean, they -- you know, i

don't think their constituents think that that's generally a responsible approach, so hopefully there will be pressure on them to do something and to demonstrate that they did something to help the economy. leslie and then nora. >> have you discussed the cbo report that came out today with pretty grim numbers. republicans are seizing on it suggesting that it's proof that the president is not taking the country on the right path and what he's going to do with the negotiations later this year >> i think what the cbo report demonstrates is that we need to take sensible measures to deal with our middle, medium and long-term deficit and debt challenges. again, this is a rite matic, not calculus. we know what we have to do. there's been a great deal of ink spilled on the various options available to us. there is either an option that

says dealing with our deficits and debt, the responsibility for that should be borne entirely almost by the middle class and seniors and folks who depend on programs like medicaid, or it should be borne evenly, in a balanced way, which is what the president believes. that approach has been endorsed not just by this administration, not just by democrats in congress, but by every bipartisan commission of any credibility that's looked at this issue. the holdouts thus far have been elected members of the republican party in congress, not all of them, but most of them. hopefully that will change, too. occasionally there's glimmers of hope on the horizon with regards to recognition of the need to take a balanced approach to our deficit and debt challenges. look, this is a responsibility that everyone needs to take and to bear dealing with our deficit

and debt, and going back to my answer to ed's question about the fact that this president in the midst of a cataclysmic economic decline was also, in addition to the keys to the building, handed the largest deficit thus far in history, plus the need to take dramatic steps to prevent a depression, dramatic steps that were seen almost across the board as including the need for a program like the recovery act. so he also took steps like saving the automobile industry that was not popular at the time but has gained more and more adherence in retrospect as every week passes because it's been the right thing to do so obviously when we see the numbers coming out of detroit.

you know, these are tough calls and tough decisions, and there's no question that they created a situation where we need to take action on our deficit and debt, and we need to do it in a balanced way. nora. >> i want to return to the eurozone crisis affecting the u.s. economy. does the president believe june is the month that european leaders have to get something done? >> i haven't heard him give a date or a month. i think, as i just said when discussioning this earlier, we have noted that european leaders, european officials seem to be acting with a sense of urgency, and we -- we anticipate and hope that there will be expedited action in the weeks ahead, in the run-up to the g-20, but i don't have a deadline to provide to you. i think europeans are fully aware of the situation that they

find themselves in, and they understand that i think, as you would expect, you know, what the options are and what steps are available to them that would help stabilize the situation, stabilize the banking sector and -- and help -- help them emerge from this crisis. >> the treasury department said today that finance ministers in the g-7 countries, along with central bank presidents, had an emergency conference call. what's the emergency conference call about? >> well, i mentioned that when i was answering questions on europe that today the g-7 ministers and governors did meet via teleconference and reviewed developments in the global economy and financial markets, and the policy response under consideration, including the progress towards financial and fiscal union in europe. i think