President Obama’s Press Conference Today

Filed in National by on November 14, 2012

President Obama will be conducting his first Press Conference with the White House Press Corps since March 6, 2012. As every reporter talking about this will remind you. It is scheduled to start today at 1:30 EST. There’s lots to cover — the Fiscal Cliff, new cabinet appointments, an immigration policy that seems to be coming out of mothballs, *compromise* (and *bipartisanship*), 2013 agenda, Joe Biden’s appearance on Parks and Recreation tomorrow night and the ever popular saga of General Petraeus’ mistresses and wannabes. Feel free to use this thread to live blog what you see or hear from the President today.

Where can you see or hear the President’s Press Conference:
The White House will live stream the event.

CSPAN, as always, will live stream this event.

WDEL will carry this live (I think!)

WHYY (NPR) will carry this live.

Tags:

About the Author ()

Comments (10)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. cassandra_m says:

    Jessica Yellin asks if he will cave again — and the answer is pretty clear that the Bush tax cuts for income over $250K is done.

  2. john kowalko says:

    Thank you Mr. President for calling out and smacking down two examples of baldfaced immorality (Senators McCain and Graham) in defense of a true patriot, Ambassador Rice.
    Well done sir and an aside to Lidsey and John. You have both earned every ounce of disrespect that all true Americans must have for you. Your statements regarding the Ambassador are an exercise in repugnant thought cloaked in some kind of obvious political excuse that brings your ability to serve into question.

  3. Tom McKenney says:

    I still have visions of Graham marching in with a smug grin during impeachment hearings. McCain is just a bitter old man as he should be. He sold his soul to the right to get the nomination and still lost. Congress received the same briefing as the president. That they are using the Libya killings as a pure political ploy is disgusting.

  4. cassandra_m says:

    McCain — the man who thought Sarah Palin was ready to be second in command — is in no position to comment on anyone else’s qualifications or trustworthiness.

  5. Rustydils says:

    However, the problem with rice is that either one of two things happened. One, she did not think it was a terrorist attack in Libia, or two, she did think it was a terrorist attack. In case one, she was not lying on those sunday talk shows, she was simply uninformed, or very naive. If you believe the second case, then she was lying (most likely on the president’ S behalf). Either way, she can no longer be trusted to do her job, or any other job relating to national securiry.

  6. pandora says:

    I absolutely refuse to indulge this type of Republican nonsense anymore.

  7. john kowalko says:

    Here’s a third option. Learn how to spell Libya then give us a call and you can get back in the discussion. No cheating it’s not an open book test. Maybe you can present a third Fox News nutcase option. Ambassador Rice is a Muslim terrorist born in Kenya who was a member of the same sleeper cell as the President. Present that theory at any Trump casino and get some free slot plays for sure. In any case neither McCain nor Graham can be considered honest or patriotic or trusted to do their jobs. And that’s a fact.

  8. Mayan2012 says:

    Come out of the closet Lindsey. You’re not fooling anyone. Graham and McCain are truly repulsive. They never met a war they didn’t love. Thank God their other BFF will soon be history…Leiberman!!!!

  9. Liberal Elite says:

    @Rusty “Either way, she can no longer be trusted to do her job…”

    Great use of logic there. Where ever did you learn your critical thinking skills?

    The President’s explanation is quite logical… She had NOTHING to do with the Benghazi situation and she was simply repeating excerpts from the CIA briefing she received. Haven’t you figured out yet that the Benghazi compound was a CIA operation? And maybe there were even prisoners there?

  10. Dave says:

    I don’t know enough about Rice to opine about her abilities to be Sec State. What I do understand though is that she was no more or less in the loop than anyone else in Washington regarding Benghazi and could only rely upon information she was given. If someone thinks she was part of a conspiracy, I can’t fathom what she would have conspired about. In the end, it’s not up to me to trust or distrust her. It’s up to the President. She serves as his pleasure and if he determines she is qualified and he has confidence in her, then my, nor anyone else’s, opinion means a hill of beans.