The community here in hampton roads. Host we have 30 seconds left but were at a stateowned port here. Stateowned versus privately owned in this country, major ports. Whats the difference . How many are we talking about . Guest all of our members are public port agencies. Many are state, some are local like city, counties, harbor districts, et cetera. And they handle most of the public type groups like containers, et cetera. Many of the ports facilities that handle things like oil, petroleum products, liquefied natural gas, et cetera, are private facilities and they handle a lot of those types of bulk commodities. So theres probably roughly an equal amount of public and private terminals. Host kurt nagle, the president of the port authorities, we thank you for talking to our viewers and welcome us to the port of virginia. We appreciate it. Est happy to be here. President obamas News Conference from earlier old i from earlier. A look at first ladys Rachel Jackson, willie donelson, and angelica. Journalists report. President obama spoke about a range of issues including surveillance programs at nsa and u. S. russian relations. This is about 55 minutes. Good afternoon. These have a seat. Over the past few weeks thomas ive been talking about what i believe should be our number one priority in the country. Building a Better Bargain for the middle class and for americans who want to work your way into the middle class. At the same time i am focused on my number one priority keeping the American People safe. Been reminded once again about the threats to our nation. As i said at the National Defense university, and meeting those threats we have to strike the right balance between protecting our security and our freedoms. As part of this rebalancing, i called for review of our surveillance programs. Unfortunately, rather than orderly and lawful process, the , repeated leaks of classified information has initiated the debate in a very passionate but not always informed way. I held a healthy skepticism of these programs as a senator and as president i have taken steps to make sure that they have strong oversight by all three branches of government and clear safeguards to prevent abuse and protect the rights of the American People. But, given the history of abuse by government, it is right to ask questions about surveillance, particularly as technology is reshaping every aspect of our lives. Im also mindful of how these issues are viewed overseas because American Leadership amount leadership or around the world depends upon example of american democracy and american overtones. What makes us different from other countries is not just our ability to secure our nation but the way we do it, in open debate and the democratic process. In other words, it is not enough for me as president to have confidence in these programs. The American People need to have confidence in them as well. And that is why im over the last few weeks, i have consulted members of congress who have come at this issue from many different respectives and i have asked the Oversight Board to review where our counterterrorism efforts and our values come into tension, and i directed our National Security to be more transparent and to pursue reforms of our laws and practices. So i would like to discuss for specific steps, not all inclusive, but specific steps we will be taking to move the debate forward. First, i will work with congress to pursue appropriate reforms to section 215 of the patriot act, the program that collects telephone records. As i said, this program is an important tool in our effort to disrupt your wrist plots and it does not allow the government to listen to any phone calls without a warrant. But given the scale of this program, i understand the concerns of those who would worry that it could be subject to abuse. So after having a dialogue with members of congress and civil libertarians, i know that there are steps we can take to give the American People additional confidence that there are additional safeguards against abuse. For instance, we can take steps to put in place greater oversight, greater transparency, and constraints on the use of this authority. So i look forward to working with congress to meet those objectives. Second, i will work with congress to improve the publics confidence in the oversight conducted by the foreign Intelligence Surveillance court, known as the fisk. It was created by congress to provide judicial review of certain intelligence activities so that a federal judge must find that our actions are consistent with the constitution. However, to build greater confidence, i think we should consider some additional changes to the fisc. One of the concerns people raised is that a judge reviewing a request from the government to conduct programmatic civilian conduct programmatic surveillance may only see one side of it. While i have confidence in the court and i think they have done a fine job, i think they can provide greater assurances that the court is looking at these issues from both perspectives, security and privacy. So specifically, we can take steps to make sure Civil Liberties concerns have an independent voice in appropriate cases by ensuring that the governments position is challenged by an adversary. Number three, we can and must be more transparent. I directed the Intelligence Community to making to make public as much information about these programs as possible. We have already declassified unprecedented information about the nsa, but we can go further. So the department of justice will make public the rationale under article 215 of the patriot act. And release information that entails authority and oversight. And finally, the Intelligence Community is creating a website that will serve as a for further transparency. This will give americans and the world the ability to learn more about what our Intelligence Community does and what it doesnt do, how it carries out its mission and why it does so. Fourth, we are forming a High Level Group of outside experts to review our entire intelligence and communications technologies. We need new thinking for a new era. We have to unravel terrorist plots by finding a needle in a haystack occasions. Technology has given governments unprecedented capability to monitor situations. So im asking this independent group to step back and review our capabilities, particularly our surveillance technologies and how we can maintain the trust of the people, how we can make sure that there is absolutely no abuse in terms of how these surveillance technologies are used, ask how surveillance impacts our foreignpolicy particularly in an age when more and more information is becoming public, and provided an interim report in 60 days and a final report by the end of this year so we can move forward with a better understanding of how these programs impact our security, our privacy, and our foreign policy. So all of the steps are designed to ensure that the American People can trust that our efforts are in line with our interests and our values. And to others around the world, i want to make clear once again that america is not interested in spying on ordinary people. Our intelligence is focused above all on finding the information necessary to protect our people and, in many cases, detect our allies. Its true protect our allies. Its true, we have surveillance capability, but it is also true that we have shown a restraint that many governments around the world wont even think of doing or refuse to show. That includes, by the way, some of americas most of her most we should not. Forget stricter guidelines. Some other governments will throw their citizens in prison for what they say online. Let me close with one additional thought. The men and women of our Intelligence Community work every single day to keep us safe because they love this country and believe in our values. They are patriots. And i believe that those who have lawfully raised their voices on the on behalf of privacy and Civil Liberties are also patriots who love our country and want to live up to our highest ideals. So this is how we will resolve our differences in the United States, through vigorous public debate, guided by our constitution with reverence for our history as a nation of laws and with respect for the facts. So with that, i will take some questions. Lets see who weve got here. We are going to start with julie pace of ap. I wanted to ask about some of the foreignpolicy fallout from the disclosure of the nsa programs you discussed. Your spokesman said yesterday that theres no question that the u. S. Relationship with russia has gotten worse since Vladimir Putin took office. How much of that decline do you attribute directly to mr. Putin given that you had a good working relationship with his predecessor . Will there be additional unit of measures taken against russia for granting asylum to Edward Snowden or is canceling the summit must make the most that you can do . I think there has always been some tension in the u. S. Russian relationship after the fall of the soviet union. That has been cooperation in some areas and competition in others. It is true that, in my first four years, in working with medvedev, weve made a lot of progress. We got start 2 done. We were able to Work Together on iran sanctions. They provided us help in terms of supplying our troops in afghanistan. We were able to get russia into the wto, which is not just good for russia, but therefore are companies and businesses but for our companies and businesses because they are more likely to follow norms and rules. So there is a lot of good work that has been done and that will continue to be done. What is also true is that, when president putin came back into power come i think we saw more rhetoric on the russian side that was antiamerican that played into some of the old stereotypes about the cold war contest between the United States and russia. I have encouraged mr. Putin to think forward as opposed to backwards on those issues with mixed success. I think the latest episode is just one more in a number of emerging differences that we have seen over the last several months around syria, around human rights issues, where it is probably appropriate for us to take a pause, reassess where it is that russia is going, what our core interests are, that what were doing is good for for the United States and hopefully good for russia as well but recognizing that there are just going to be some differences and we will not be able to completely disguise them. And thats ok. Keep in mind that, although i am not attending the summit come i will still be going to st. Petersburg because russia is also in the g20. That is important business in terms of our economy and our jobs and all the issues that are of concern to americans. I know the one question that has been raised is how do we approach deal of picks . I just how do we approach the olympics . I just want to make clear that i do not think it is appropriate to boycott the olympics. We have a lot of americans out there who are working hard and doing everything they cap to they can to succeed. No one is more offended by me than some of the antigay lesbian legislation that you have seen in russia. But as i said, just this week, i have spoken out against that not just with respect to russia but a number of other countries. We continue to do work with them, but we have a strong disagreement on this issue. One of the things im really looking forward to is maybe some gay and lesbian athletes bringing home a gold or silver or bronze, which i think would go a long way in rejecting the kind of attitudes that we are seeing there. And if russia doesnt have gay or lesbian athletes, that will probably make their team weaker. [indiscernible] keep in mind that our decision to not participate in the summit was not simply around mr. Stood in mr. Snowden. It was on a whole host of issues that russia has not moved. So we dont consider that strictly punitive. We are going to assess where the relationship can advance u. S. Interests and increase descend stability and prosperity around the world. We will keep on working with them. Where we have differences, we will say so clearly. And my hope is that, over time, mr. Putin and russia recognize that, rather than a zerosum competition, in fact, if the two countries are working together, we can probably advance the betterment of both peoples. Chuck. Given that you Just Announced a whole bunch of reforms based on essentially the leaks that Edward Snowden made on all of the surveillance programs, does that change has your mindset changed . Is he more of a whistleblower that a hacker as you call them out one point or somebody who should be provided more protection . Is he a patriot . And just to follow up on the personal i just want to make sure that everybody asking one question would be helpful. It is part of a question they did not answer. Can you get stuff done with russia without having a good personal relationship with putin . I dont have a bad personal relationship with putin. When we have conversations, they are candid. They are blunt. Oftentimes, they are constructive. I know the press likes to focus on body language and hes got that kind of slouch, looking like a bored kid in the back of the classroom. [laughter] but the truth is, when we are in conversations together, oftentimes it is very productive. So the issue here really has to do with where they want to take russia. It is substantive on the policy front. No, right now, this is just a matter of where mr. Putin and the russian people want to go. I think that if they are looking forward into the 21stcentury and how they can advance their economy and make sure that some of our joint concerns on counterterrorism are managed effectively, then i think we can Work Together. If issues are framed as they u. S. Is for it then russia should be against it or we will be finding ways for we can help each other at every opportunity, then probably we dont get as much stuff done. Now i have forgotten your question, which is presumably is the more important one. No, i dont think mr. Snowden was a patriot. As i said in my opening remarks, i called for a thorough review of our surveillance operations before mr. Snowden made these leaks. My preference and i think the American Peoples preference would have been for a lawful, orderly examination of these laws, a thoughtful factbased debate that would then lead us to a better place. Because i never made claims that all the surveillance technologies that have developed since the time some of these laws were put in place somehow didnt require potentially some additional reforms. That is exactly what i called for. So the fact is that mr. Snowden has been charged with three felonies. If in fact he believes that what he did was right, then like every american citizen, he can come here and appear before the court with a lawyer and make his case. If the concern was that somehow this was the only way to get this information out to the public, i signed an executive order well before mr. Snowden leaked this information that provided as a blower protection to the Intelligence Community for the first time. So there were other avenues available for someone whose conscience was stirred and thought that they needed to question government actions. But, having said that, once the leaks have happened, what we have seen is information come out in drips and in drags, sometimes coming out sideways once the information is out, the administration comes in and tries to correct the record. But by that time, it is too late or we have moved on and a general impression has taken hold not only among the mac and public, but also around the world, that somehow we are out there willy nilly just sucking in information on everybody and doing what we please with it. And that is not the case. Our laws specifically prohibit us from surveilling u. S. Persons without a warrant and their are safeguards that are put in place to make sure that that basic principle is abided by. The instinctive bias but Intelligence Community to keep everything close and probably with a fair criticism is my assumption that, if we had checks and balances from the courts and congress, that traditional set of checks and balances would be enough to give people assurances that these programs will run properly. That assumption i think proved to be undermined by what happened after the leaks. I think people have questions about this program. So as a consequence, i think it is important for us to go ahead and answer these questions. What i will be pushing is, rather than have a trunk come out here and a leg come out here and a tale come out there, lets just put the whole elephant out there so people know exactly what they are looking at. Lets examine what is working, what is not. Are there additional reductions that can be put in place and this move additional protections that can be put in place and move forward. Theres no question that mr. Snowden unleashed a much more rapid and passionate response than would have been the case if i had simply appointed this review board to go through and i sat down with congress and we had worked this thing through. It would have been less exciting. It would not have generated as much press, i actually think we would have gone to the same place. And we would have done so without putting at risk our National Security and some very vital ways a weekend get some intelligence we need to secure the country. I would like to ask you about this debate that is playing itself out in editorial pages about the choice you will eventually make for the next Federal Reserve chairman. There is the perception among democrats that Larry Summers has the inside track and perh