anytime that information like this is released in the ,ontext of a criminal complaint is federal government reminded of how important it is to be vigilant about protecting national security of the country and information that is relevant to our national security. situationrtainly a that the department of justice takes seriously, as evidenced by their complaint. this is also a situation that president obama takes very seriously. it is a good reminder for all of us with security clearances about how important it is for us to protect sensitive national security information. context ongive us ministers efforts to

[indiscernible] mr. earnest: there have been a variety of statements from didn't mess around the world who are seeking to address -- from diplomats around the world were seeking to address the situation in aleppo. the international community expresses grave concern about the situation there. there are diplomatic conversations in europe to the multilateral organization formed to address the situation in syria and promote international cooperation to confront the situation inside of syria. obviously there is a u.n. led effort.

they're trying to facilitate the kind of diplomatic conversations that can reduce violence inside , and the united states continues to be involved in a range of diplomatic efforts with other countries in the region that have deep concerns about the situation in syria, and share the u.s. is deep concerns 's deep concerns about the situation in syria. there are extensive diplomatic conversations taking place in a locations, the united states is continuing to extend effort in diplomacy to reduce violence in syria, to expedite humanitarian assistance inside of syria, and to facilitate the kind of political talks that will lead to a political transition inside of syria. >> the u.n. today released

[indiscernible] is that the type of thing the president would be receiving in briefing? the president is certainly being regularly updated about the situation in syria. the satellite imagery that was released by the united nations illustrating the terrible impact of the bombing campaign of the syrians and the russians tragically is not particularly surprising. there are a wide variety of anecdotal reports of cluster ,unitions, bunker busters bunker buster bombs, and other incendiary explosive devices. they're taking up an extraordinary toll on the

civilian population in aleppo. there are widespread reports of children killed in aleppo in the last few weeks by government, to say nothing of the innocent men and women who have been killed in those military operations. ordinarily, you would be heartbroken to learn that this was the result of some sort of accident, but it is clear that the syrian regime, backed by the russians, is engaged in a strategy of bombing those civilians intentionally to try to get them to bend to the will of the assad regime. they are seeking to drive those innocent civilians out of their homes and out of their ammunities to accomplish military and political objective. it is why the united states has supported a range of diplomatic

efforts, including at the u.n., to ensure that those who are responsible for those actions are held accountable. troubling,are deeply and the president israel he updated on the situation. the newspaperads sees jarring images revealed. >> it was reported that the u.s. government is building a software program to scan arriving e-mails. why did the government want to have similar orders been issued to other companies to scan incoming traffic for words or characters? mr. earnest: i appreciate the question. as i think you would anticipate, i'm quite limited in what i can , because the report purportedly refers to intelligence program, and i do

not spend a lot of time discussing intelligence programs here, and i certainly don't confirm the existence of individual intelligence programs or individual intelligence tools. but in trying to respond to your question knowing that i cannot discuss the details of the report, or even the -- even confirm the report is accurate. let me just say that what we as the united states congress was working to implement a bunch of reforms championed by the president to ensure that we are protecting our national security and 70 -- and civil liberties of the american people what we discussed in the context of that debate is that the intelligence immunity has specific tools available to collect information, including the foreign intelligence surveillance act. is subjectunder fisa

to rigorous oversight by all three branches of government. activity is narrowly focused on foreign intelligence targets, and does not involve both collection or the use of -- bulk collection or the use of keywords or phrases. we do not indiscriminately review e-mails or phone calls of ordinary people, and certainly not of law-abiding american citizen. the reforms that the president has championed, both using his executive authority and in supporting the usa freedom act, does bring a measure of transparency to these programs, with obvious limits. those reforms also include beefed up oversight of these of these tools.

we haveontext of fisa, previously discussed the existence of fisa courts, essentially federal judges who in a classified setting act independently to review requests from intelligence professionals about tools or tactics that they .end -- intends to deploy those judges obviously have a very important role in the process, and these federal judges are able to provide oversight. within the to that, executive branch, there are --ependent inspectors inspector general offices that have jurisdiction over these kinds of programs. these are attorneys who take very seriously the responsibilities that they have to ensure that reforms are implemented and that the rules are followed. there has also been an expedited for our intelligence

professionals reporting to activities,ut their and providing that information to the legislative branch. that also enhances oversight. the president has also been determined to prioritize self reporting, within the constraints of classified programs. theexample, there is privacy and civil liberties oversight board that is a bipartisan agency within the executive branch. earlier this year, it released sts most recent recommendation assessment report. you'll recall in 2014, they put forward 22 suggested reports. they have on an annual basis been releasing other annual -- on -- releasing other reports on how those have been incremented.

the president has also mandated on annual schedule in which the director of the office of national intelligence issues effectivenessthe of implementing reforms that balance our civil liberties with national security needs. there have been a couple different versions of that report that have come out. i can tell you that the director of the office of national anotherence will issue one of those reports before they president leaves in january. thee is a mechanism for public, within the constraints of our ability to discuss classified information, to evaluate the effectiveness of the reforms that president obama has championed to ensure that the civil liberties of law-abiding citizens are protected even as we use tools to protect our homeland security. >> if any tool is used, it would

be subject to that kind of oversight you described? general, thein tools that are used by the intelligence community to keep a safe are subjected to rigorous oversight by all three branches of government, particularly when these tools are approved in a fisa court. >> and the lead european they are says concerned about this report. giveder if officials would assurances to their counterpart about whether or not american citizens are caught up in these tools, and whether the government was able to provide on assurance in this case. mr. earnest: the united states has important relation -- important information sharing relationships with other agencies.

some of the ones based in europe are our closest partners. i cannot speak to any specific conversations that have taken place between u.s. intelligence officials and their foreign intelligence counterparts, but the principles of the reforms of is president initiated rooted in the idea that the u.s. does not collect intelligence for the purpose of suppressing criticism or dissent. it does not collect intelligence for the purpose of .isadvantaging people it does not collect intelligence to provide a competitive advantage to u.s. commercial sectors. in fact, this administration has made clear that we recognize the between what we are able to do with our intelligence capability, and what the united

states should do with our intelligence capability. that is the bedrock of many of these reforms, particularly as it relates to some of the confirms that have previously been raised by foreign intelligence agencies. again, the president is quite proud of the success that we have had in instituting reforms that certainly protect the privacy and civil liberties of the american people, but also do have a positive impact on the privacy and civil liberties of people outside the united states as well. the president at each step in employing these reforms has also gone to great lengths to make sure that we are using these tools effectively to protect our national security. as the president of the united states, he takes very seriously the responsibility he has to

prioritize the u.s. national security. the information both of the contractors -- bulk contractors, though the u.s. target -- mr. earnest: you're talking about the case of mr. snowden as well. mr. snowden is obviously somebody who has been charged related tos crimes classified information, and to liveto his failure up to the commitment he made to protect that information. 2013, dear that all of us

heard of evidence -- edward snowden for the first time, the federal government had taken a number of steps to protect the release of classified information, including guarding against unauthorized disclosures , especially intentional disclosures. the steps include building up an effort at the director of national intelligence call the national insider threat task force. this task force is essentially established governmentwide minimum standards for insider threat programs for all agencies that handled classified information. this task force has also launched continuous evaluation programs within the intelligence community to ensure that the high standards they have set are being adhered to. there are also more basic changes that have been made with regard to the way background investigations are conducted.

for example, there is now a five-year reinvestigation requirements for all individuals with security clearance. there is also an effort undertaken to enhance the quality of background investigation. part of this involves the creation of a national background investigations bureau will ensure that these background investigations are conducted more efficiently and more effectively. , the newtly are not director of the national background investigations bureau was announced. that is an indication that they're moving forward on these kinds of reforms. one other reform that was promoted in the context of the review about what we could do to counter insider threats was reducing the number of people

that have access to classified information. in just the last couple of years, we have succeeded in reducing the number of people that hold classified clearances by 17%. that is an indication of some of the progress we have made in ensuring that this information is well protected. are two high profile cases in just three years. what is your confidence level that there are not more subsequently -- subsequent leaks? mr. earnest: the president has a lot of conference -- confidence that the best majority of people who serve in the national ourrity arena, particularly professionals in the intelligence community, are genuine american patriots. these are people who could pursue a rather lucrative private-sector career based on their specific skills and expertise, but have chosen to use the skills to serve the american people and to protect the united states of america and

our allies. patriots, andre they take very seriously the responsibility they have to protect the united states of america and to protect the information that could endanger the united states of america. that said, we have a responsibility as professionals and is american people to be vigilant to ensure we are doing everything possible to protect the sensitive information and allow our intelligence professionals to do the important work that they are charged with to protect the american people. the present watch the debate last night. how should he watch and wendy think -- and what did he think? mr. earnest: we talked in here couple of times about the warm feelings the president has four senator kaine -- for senator kaine. he was among the first, if not

the first, statewide elected officials to endorse president obama's campaign. that is a pretty good sign to the president that he could count on somebody like tim kaine to have his back when he needed ,t, and throughout his campaign tim kaine have the president's back. in the earliest days of the presidency, the president asked then governor kane to serve as the chairman of the dnc. he served in that role with distinction. while his serve the commonwealth of virginia in the united states senate, president obama has been able to work effectively with senator kaine. i think senator kaine was able to demonstrate publicly that when he makes a commitment to back you up, that is exactly what he is going to do. is a testament to his character, and a testament to his leadership. it is a testament to his commitment to a whole set of values that secretary clinton shares.

it is also a testament to why the presidency is such a good friend. i know there has been a lot of analysis that has been done here, and i will let others weigh in with their personal opinion. i'm obviously more than a little biased. that didn't pop up during the debate was governor pence's decision to sign into allowing lgbtn discoloration -- discrimination. mr. earnest: i am not going to second-guess the efforts of the moderator last night. longame prepared with a list of very serious, direct questions for each of the candidates. the sharpness of her most one, that was a

of the questions she had in her stack. she probably just did not get around to it. i'm not going to second-guess the moderator. she had a difficult job, and the most important responsibility they have is to be fair and ask tough questions. it seems to me that is exactly what she did or -- did. importantthink it is that reporters are reminded that that voters are reminded of governor pence's record for voting for a anti-lgbt log as a record that as an example of how he would govern. is up to theit public to look at the president and vice presidential candidate in this race.

.hat is worthy of scrutiny i'm not going to second-guess the moderator in terms of what russians were asked. questions were asked. governor should weigh on the decision that voters make. ultimately, it will be up to voters to decide how they factor that criteria into their decision. wasn your opinion, the law a detrimental action? mr. earnest: what i will say is i have spoken out publicly with some sharp criticism of the law, in part because of the impact that that law has on the people of indiana. the business climate in the

state of indiana does not benefit from laws that open up potential customers or employees to be discriminated against. has got an for the negative economic concert it's his of signing those kinds of bills into law -- consequences of signing those kinds of bills into law. i remember when governor pence show, mr. stephanopoulos trying to defend his decision to support this law. he struggled mightily to do so, in part because it is hard to make a case that is good for the state. again, in terms of what impact it has on people's decision in the presidential election, people are going to have to weigh these factors for themselves. there are on the same number of things to consider. certainly would be legitimate in the eyes of the president for

somebody to consider that aspect of governor pence's record in determining whether or not to support the republican presidential ticket this fall. notr, that -- --ould like to know what [indiscernible] do you know if the president has any chance of going to wrigley field or watching from chicago? the president is a lowell chicago -- a loyal what -- a loyal chicago white sox fan.

when it comes to baseball teams, that is the team that comes first. the president is also the champion of his hometown area he has certainly been pleased to this year.cago cubs chicago fans have been waiting a long time for a team that looks like this. there is a reason they are can -- they arehis considered favorites for the world series. i know the president is looking forward to tracking their progress to the playoffs. >> do think there's a chance he might go to wrigley? cubsamily that owns the are conservative republicans who are helping to bankroll efforts to elect republicans. mr. earnest: i know there is at

least one member of the family that is an enthusiastic supporter of president obama. the confident that political leanings of the team's would have no impact on the president's decision to attend a game. the president has talked about how much fun he has had taking in games at wrigley field in the past. the vast majority of those were before anybody knew they were sitting next to somebody amos -- somebody famous. i am not aware currently of any plans the president has to go to wrigley field. if that changes, we will obviously let you know. as always your on the issue of chicago commit -- chicago, could you say if the present will be casting his vote when he is there this weekend? mr. earnest: he is pretty enthusiastic about publicly

demonstrating his support for secretary clinton's campaign. we have indicated in the past our conversations involvedcampaign have the discussion about the most effective way to leverage the way that the time -- leverage the time the president can support secretary clinton so that his visits can coincide with registration deadlines or the start of early voting. i do not have any detailed updates on his schedule. we'll sure to keep you posted. >> i would also like to ask about the state department statement today which used the condemn" thegly israeli government about its decision to create a new settlement in the west bank.

i was struck by the phrase strongly condemn. that is a set -- that is something the u.s. usually uses a terrorist act. why is that an overly harsh way to describe the u.s. position? mr. earnest: the recent announcement from the israeli government does provoke strong feelings in the administration. is every u.s. administration since 1967, democratic and republican alike, has opposed israeli settlement activity in the occupied territories. this administration on a number of occasions, unfortunately, has publicly restated that view. our concern is based on our long-standing view that settlement activity and other efforts to change the facts on the ground of the west bank in undermines the goal of a two state solution to

the israeli-palestinian conflict. expanding these settlements only makes it harder to negotiate a sustainable and equitable peace agreement in good faith between the two parties. it is also troubling, i would add, that in the wake of israel and the united states concluding an unprecedented agreement on military assistance designed to further strengthen israel's security, that a grill -- that israel would take an action so contrary to its long-term security interest. a long-term security that the united states is going to invest billions of dollars to protect. the united states has long believed that it is within the clear interest of israel's theonal security to resolve israeli-palestinian conflict and

away -- in a way that allows a jewish and palestinian state in israel. the announcement of the that nationalkes security priority harder to achieve. i think another aspect of this that is troubling is this announcement was made while the world was mourning the death of shimon peres. he was a great champion of peace. the plan to announce by the israeli government fundamentally undermined the prospects of the two state solution that he dedicated his life to passionately supporting. one other thing about this that distinguishes this announcement from so many others is the location.

this settlement plans location -- planned location is deep in the west bank. it is far closer to jordan than it is to israel. it would effectively link a outpostsout post -- of that could divide the west bank, and make the possibility of a viable palestinian state all the more remote. all of those factors -- the location, the timing of the announcement, the recent announcement of the u.s. security, to israel's would that combined explain why the united states is so disappointed and even sharply critical of this announcement by the israeli government. >> i understand the disappointment.

,hat is a less vitriolic phrase a more appropriate one dealing with a friend and strategic ally? mr. earnest: i think in some ways this is one of those situations where actions are more important than words. if there are people who are wondering about the u.s. commit into israel's national security, they have to look no further than a few weeks ago when the united states was prepared to make the single largest commitment that we have made in our history to another country's security, that decade-long of 38 billion dollars. i think that is an indication of how strongly the united dates -- the united states feels about protecting israel's national security and protecting israel's qualitative edge militarily in the region. israel is the united states' closest ally in the middle east.

the long-standing bipartisan commitment to israel's security has endured for decades. but as long as we're talking about action, the actions of the israeli government in announcing the settlement undermined the pursuit of peace. our concerns about that are the policy that has been championed by democratic and republican presidents alike, which is that the pursuit of peace and the pursuit of a two state solution is squarely within israel's national security interests. -- [indiscernible]

mr. earnest: we received public assurances from the israeli government that contradict this announcement. about how talking ,ood friends treat one another that is a serious concern as well. >> the president was just in israel for the funeral. mr. earnest: and the world was observing -- mourning the death peres, someone who had dedicated a significant portion of his career to trying to achieve the kind of two state solution that would resolve the israeli-palestinian conflict. this kind of announcement from the israelis only puts this kind ,f solution farther from reach

and that is not good for israel's national security, that is not good for the security interests of the united states, it is inconsistent with public assurances that have been made by the israeli government. all of that is the source of disappointment and deep concern here at the white house. you have a very detailed thisnation and list of screening of policies. with this gritty of e-mails filing these policies -- the --eening of e-mails but like toest: i would discuss openly the details of this report. i'm just not going to be in a position to. that is going to limit my ability to do her -- and to your

question as directly as i would like. sincee been quite clear the obama administration initiated a set of wide-ranging reforms three years ago that we draw a clear distinction between the unitedlity states has, and the capability that we should you -- should use. discretion should be used to protect civil liberties, to protect privacy, without those tools in a way that contradict or undermine our national security. the point is we can do both. i think the observation that the president made is that dealing doesaw that distinction undermine our national security.

the way some of those tools were deployed prior to these reforms raised serious concerns around the globe, and affected our ability to work with other intelligence agent these. that is not a good thing. the judicious and effective use of these programs consistent with independent oversight among three different branches of government is good for protecting privacy and civil liberties of law-abiding american citizens. it also happens to advance international security interest. that is why the president has not just pursue these reforms, but ensures that we have mechanisms to report back to the public about how effective these reforms have been. we have made important progress with regard to appropriately striking the balance between protecting civil liberties and protecting united dates of america -- the united states of america.

as innovations occur that give us new capabilities, it is important for our national security professionals to use these principles to guide their decisions as they appropriately strike this balance. , there's proof of the progress we've been able to made. the progress actually dates back even prior to the emergence of mr. snowden. this administration had initiated a series of reforms even before the alleged criminal acts of mr. snowden were disclosed. the president is proud of his record on these issues. the president would also be the first to a knowledge that these that -- acknowledge reportinge public that we have gotten from the director of the office of national intelligence, the public reporting we have gotten from the privacy and civil

liberties oversight board would indicate that we have been effective in him lamenting these reforms. in part because the commander-in-chief has made them a priority. again, it will be a challenge the next president will also have to prioritize. as the united states develops additional capabilities, the united states has the best national security apparatus in the world. there's a reason other countries wants to partner with united states, want to improve their communication with the united states, because they can benefit from the apparatus that we have. the evolution and improvement of those capabilities is going to her wire the intelligence committee -- going to require the intelligence committee to ask policy to make smart decisions about balancing the need to protect our basic constitutional rights and the need to protect the united states of america. >> how would the administration

described as relationship to the community in reference to this? mr. earnest: i think i would acknowledge, and i think the tech community would, that there are some places we do not see eye to eye. the most effective way for us to strike the balance. i think it is undeniable that this administration has significantly improved the way we communicate with technology companies in the valley. that is important because innovators in silicon valley should be partners with the that theates we know engineers and executives at technology companies didn't that these platforms so terrorists would be more effective. toolsid not build these so that people who want to harm innocent people could be more violent.

in fact, they built these tools toause they are committed the potential impact they could in making people freer to communicate, or express their views, or to associate with people who share their opinions on a range of topics. there is a lot of common ground to be shared. this administration is committed to protecting free speech and of expression and association. we have found innovation in the tech sphere has been good for the u.s. economy. do anything too inhibit innovation of that technology. we also want to make sure that those innovations are not used by people who are seeking to do harm to the united states of america.

thee is an opportunity for united states government and tech companies in the united states to coordinate. there is one example -- there are many examples, but on me cite one example -- where the united states and technology companies have become more effective at coordinating their efforts. we know extremists affiliated with isis use a great range of social media tools to propagate their ideology. there are documented cases where the propagation of that ideology through social media has radicalized people in far-flung corners of the world. the united states government has worked effectively with twitter and other social media organizations to shut down the channels that are being used by those extremists. that is a good thing, and that is an indication of the kind of effective coordination between

the u.s. government and technology. i don't what a lady with the impression that twitter or any other social media company agrees on all of these issues with the u.s. government. they probably disagree with is more often than they agree. these are complicated issues. our ability to communicate and work with them to find common ground that will enhance national security and the privacy of the american people is important. we have succeeded in doing that that hasn't been done before. >> do you think that president clinton's comments from a couple days ago will hamper efforts to get people to sign up? i don't think so, because i think people are making decisions based on a very specific consideration of what is best for their family and what is best for their pocketbook. the vast majority the people who go shopping on the marketplaces will find quality affordable health care options available to them for less than $100 a month. , one pieceindication

of evidence that the affordable care act is succeeding in its mission. totainly when you compare it the growth of health care costs we saw before when into effect. -- it has undeniably also undeniably succeeded in expanding quality health insurance to more americans. >> the russian government said the spending an agreement with -- given that nuclear security is a priority for the administration, is the president worried that nuclear secures the use of a bargaining chip? mr. earnest: you have to discuss that with my rushing counterpart, the true intentions of -- russian counterpart, the thep intentionsit is certainlyn

national interest of the united states of america for us to prioritize security, and i think any impartial observer would say it is within the interests of russia for national security to be prioritized. there is an opportunity for the u.s. and russia to work together. recently.e have we hope to be up to continue to do that moving forward, including i missed some vigorous disagreement on other issues. reporter: other issues? well, again, i will leave it to vladimir putin to say what his motive is. i believe that is somehow connected to other disagreements he has with the united states. he is obviously making a range of unilateral decisions, and i will let him explain that. we are hopeful that agreements that were reac