Bill Clinton: “Well, let me try to respond to all those things. First of all, the latter charge is simply untrue. We were notified--Mr.…”

“Well, let me try to respond to all those things. First of all, the latter charge is simply untrue. We were notified--Mr. Berger was notified sometime in 1996 of the possibility that security had been breached at the labs, the Energy Department labs where a lot of our nuclear work is done, in the mideighties--not in the 1990's, but in the mideighties--and that there was an investigation being undertaken by the FBI. Then, sometime in the middle of 1997, he was notified and I was notified that the extent of the security breach might have been quite extensive. So we had the CIA looking into that, the Energy Department looking into that, and the FBI investigation continued with the cooperation, the full cooperation of the Energy Department. In early 1998 I propounded a Presidential directive designed to improve security at the labs. And as you know, Secretary Richardson's been talking quite a bit in recent days about what has been done since that directive was signed and what continues to be done today. Now, I think there are two questions here that are related but ought to be kept separate. One is, was there a breach of security in the mideighties; if so, did it result in espionage? That has not been fully resolved, at least as of my latest briefing. The second is--there are really three questions, excuse me. The second is, once the executive branch was notified and the investigations began, was everything done in a timely fashion? I am confident that we in the White House have done what we could to be aggressive about this. Look, if there was espionage against the United States, I will be very upset about it, as I have been every time there has been. And anybody who committed it ought to be punished, just as we went after Mr. Ames, anybody else who committed espionage against the United States. In an effort to ensure that there was an independent review of this, in addition to whatever work is being done by the Senate and House committees--who have, as you know, received more than a dozen briefings over the course of this investigation, going back to 1996--I asked Senator Rudman, former Republican Senator from New Hampshire, and the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board to review the chronology, to make an assessment, and to make any recommendations about what further action also might need to be taken. So I believe that's the appropriate thing to do. Now, the third question is, what, if anything, does this mean about our relationship with China? I don't believe that we can afford to be under any illusions about our relationship with China, or any other country, for that matter, with whom we have both common interests and deep disagreements. I believe the course I have followed with China is the one that's best for America: disagreeing where we have serious disagreements, pursuing our common interests where I thought it was in the interest of the United States. And again, let me say just one or two examples. I think if we hadn't been working with China, China would not have signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, the Chemical Weapons Convention. They would very likely not have refrained from transferring dangerous technology and weaponry to countries that we don't believe should get it. I doubt if they would have helped us as much as they have to try to contain the North Korean nuclear threat, or that we would have had the level of cooperation we had in trying to limit the Asian financial crisis, which is a serious economic and security problem for our country. And I think we should just take the facts as they come and do what is best for the American people. But I can say categorically that it never crossed my mind that I should not disclose some inquiry being undertaken by the United States Government for reasons of commercial or other gain. That is not true. I just think we should always pursue what is in the interest of the United States. And if we think we've got a security problem, we ought to fix it. Plainly, the security was too lax for years and years and years at the labs. And a lot of important changes have been made, and yesterday the Secretary of Energy announced some others. I think that if anybody did, in fact, commit espionage, it is a bad thing, and we should take appropriate action. But in our dealings with China, we should do quite simply what is in the interest of the American people, and that's what I intend to do. Yes. And Larry [Larry McQuillan, Reuters], you're next.”