Morgan asked Carney how the administration plans to restore faith among the American people that may have been damaged in the wake of the Benghazi emails and IRS revelations.

Carney replied he completely denied the premise of Morgan’s question, stating “you’re concocting scandals here that don’t exist”:

PIERS MORGAN: Final question, Jay Carney. Obviously the president made a big deal when he came into office of being not like previous administrations and was going to be much more transparent. The charge today after this week is that you have had that reputation for transparency pretty heavily dented. Do you accept that and just on a general picture, how are you going to move on now and restore perhaps faith that some Americans have lost this week in your openness and honesty?

JAY CARNEY: Well, I’m not sure, again, you’re concocting scandals here that don’t exist, especially with regard to the Benghazi affair that was contrived by Republicans and I think has fallen apart largely this week. The fact of the matter is that this administration has a record on transparency that outdoes any previous administration, and we are committed to that. The president is committed to that.

Full interview:

MATTHEWS: Yes, but outrage is good. The words are good. Getting rid of that guy, Miller, is good, because it was appropriate for him to retire, resign. But is he going to be satisfied, this president, with one head? Or doesn’t he — you know the public relations here. If the American people are filling out their taxes next year, know that the IRS is still packed with the same people, it’s a problem, isn’t it? Or is it?

CARNEY: Well, Chris, I mean, if you’re suggesting that I should randomly fire people now — we need to get all of the facts –

MATTHEWS: No, will he be happy if he doesn’t fire people?

CARNEY: We need to get all of the facts, and he has made clear that people who are responsible for failures will be held accountable. He will demand it. We need all the facts. We have the IG’s report. We need more facts.

Bloomberg’s Hans Nichols challenged Carney on the point, asking how the White House Press Secretary could be so sure that no individuals in the White House knew or were culpable to the IRS’ conduct:

HANS NICHOLS: You just said categorically that no one from the White House or on the president’s political team was involved, that’s a pretty unequivocal answer. And yet the bulk of this press conference saying you don’t have all the facts, it’s a wait and see approach.

JAY CARNEY: What I can tell you is that –

HANS NICHOLS: What gives you that confidence?

JAY CARNEY: I can tell you that as I think I said yesterday, the White House counsel was alerted about this — alerted about this IG review and the general topic of it just a few weeks ago. And prior, I mean, I –

HANS NICHOLS: How do you compare from being categorically certain that anybody from the team — or the political team was involved.

JAY CARNEY: I have no reason to believe.

HANS NICHOLS: So you’re doing this on good faith, this is just an assumption?

JAY CARNEY: Well, I can tell you that I am not aware of anyone here knowing about it. It would be, obviously –

HANS NICHOLS: So it’s not your direct knowledge of being aware of anyone here.

JAY CARNEY: You know, you can ask me if, you know, somebody –

HANS NICHOLS: You’ve asserted something categorically and I’m trying to understand how do you know that –

JAY CARNEY: I am certainly not aware of and am confident that no one here was involved in this. We found out about it just a few weeks ago and when I say, “we,” I didn’t, the president didn’t, the White House counsel’s office only found out about the review being conducted and coming to conclusion by the Inspector General.

HANS NICHOLS: So what gives you the confidence?

JAY CARNEY: I can say I feel confident, but I don’t have any –

HANS NICHOLS: But do you have any facts?

JAY CARNEY: You’re asking me to prove a negative, Hans.

HANS NICHOLS: Well, you’ve made the assertion. You’ve asserted that you’re confident, you’re the one that actually put the, you know, put it out there.

JAY CARNEY: Again, you heard the president express his views. And we’re going to wait and see what the facts are based on the independent Inspector General view. And then we will make judgments about those facts and what next steps might be taken and by whom and what actions might be taken. But I’m not going to get into any more details about it, because it would be inappropriate to do so.

Nichols’ objections reflected the concerns of former White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer, who reacted incredulously to Carney’s categorical denial on Twitter:

How can Jay say w certainty no one at WH, or on political staff, spoke w IRS?Has he interviewed everyone? Who did he ask?

— Ari Fleischer (@AriFleischer) May 14, 2013

Minutes later, as Carney was challenged by Nichols, Fleischer chastised Carney for prematurely issuing the complete denial:

Now Jay is walking back what he said about no 1 at WH was aware of IRS actions. He should never have given the earlier answer.

— Ari Fleischer (@AriFleischer) May 14, 2013

Carney told reporters that the counsel’s office was told of the examination into the targeting of conservative groups during the week of April 22, but not given details about the review’s findings. President Obama, Carney said, was not told about the review and learned of it only after news reports emerged Friday, just what Obama said earlier Monday.

“We have never — we don’t have access to, nor should we, the IG’s report or any draft versions of it,” Carney said.

Obama condemned Monday the alleged actions of IRS agents in Cincinnati, who singled out conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status on the basis of certain political goals or phrases in their applications.

“I have argued from the beginning, the administration’s strategy has always been stringing it out over time and count on the mainstream media being uninterested in the story, and that’s worked up until now,” Krauthammer said “It echoes what Hillary Clinton said at her hearings: What difference does it make at this point? Well, because if you wait that long, the evidence will fade.”

Reports have surfaced this week that Benghazi government witnesses were intimidated or threatened by unnamed Obama administration officials, and Victoria Toensing, an attorney for one State Department witness, said the administration is stonewalling the investigation.

Carney repeated Obama’s claim to have no knowledge of any attempts to block Switnesses from testifying about the terrorist attack at his daily briefing. President Obama said the same Tuesday at his news conference, a claim Krauthammer called “slightly incredible” on the “Special Report” panel that night.

Krauthammer said Wednesday he thinks the administration wil not get away with burying Benghazi when so many are willing to testify and clear the air.

“I think the fact that there are people in the State Department that want to testify and now that it’s out in the open, at least the accusation is that the administration is threatening them … they are going to be allowed to go out and testify,” he said. “There is stuff that happened there that contradicts the official story, and that is when the story of the unraveling of this will begin.”

Carney called the “broader array” of investments in alternative energy “positive and necessary” even though the government’s misadventures in venture capitalism have cost taxpayers billions of dollars.

“I think that the necessity that we have as a nation to move forward on investments in alternative energy, to make sure that we develop the industries of the future in this country … as opposed to importing alternative energy in a manner that we for so long imported fossil fuel energy, is absolutely the right thing to do, and this president’s committed to it,” Carney said. “The fact is the broader array of investments have been positive and necessary, and the overall need to invest in alternative technologies in the energy field is essential for our energy independence in the future and our national security interests.”

Carney dismissed the documents warning the Energy Department about Fisker as a “false controversy,” but history shows this was yet another in a long line of green energy flops championed by this administration.

The Washington Free Beacon reported Fisker’s long-range luxury car, called the Karma, cost more than $100,000 but was saddled with a failing grade from Consumer Reports, faced multiple technical problems, and was temporarily halted after Fisker’s battery manufacturer, A123 Systems, went bankrupt:

Fisker was one of several companies to receive millions in direct loans from the Department of Energy under the Alternative Technology Vehicle Manufacturing loan program.

The department approved a $529 million dollar loan to Fisker to support the development of two different electric cars, the Karma and Nina. Only a portion of the loan was delivered after the company failed to meet development milestones.

It is now facing a lawsuit from workers arguing they did not receive the legally mandated forewarning of their firing.

The best-known example of a green energy failure was Solyndra, the solar panel firm that received a $535-million loan in 2009 and went under two years later. Critics slammed the lost investment as a prime example of crony capitalism by the Obama administration.

Solopower, a California-based solar panel company which received hundreds of million dollars in federal and state incentives, was reported last month to be struggling with production delays and layoffs.

Obama earlier touted A123 Systems, a battery maker that received more than $250 million in taxpayer funding, as a successful example of public investment in green energy, but it went bankrupt last fall.

Abound Solar and First Solar also have floundered despite huge funding from taxpayers.

WOLF BLITZER: If they’re watching you in North Korea right now, and I know personally that they do get CNN International in North Korea, what message would the president have to share with the leaders of North Korea right now?

JAY CARNEY: That it is in the interests of North Korea, in the interest of the people of that country that there be stability on the Korean peninsula. And it is in the interest of the people of North Korea that the regime fulfill its international obligations, and cease pursuing the nuclear weapons, and cease violations of its obligations regarding missile development and testing. If it chooses that path, North Korea will have an opportunity to rejoin the community of nations, and to increase economic development and opportunity in its country. But the obligations are what they are, and the United States is not alone, the United States is a part of a broad international consensus with regard to what North Korea must do in order to get right with the world.

Despite widespread doubts about the viability of Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s (D., Calif.) proposed assault weapons ban, Carney said the White House will continue to actively support the amendment:

WOLF BLITZER: And the president’s press secretary Jay Carney is joining us from the White House right now. Jay, it looks like you guys and others who support growing gun control are not getting very far as far as banning assault type weapons. Have you basically given up on that part of gun control?

JAY CARNEY: Absolutely not, Wolf. Every element of the legislative package the president put forward and that he supports in Congress is something that he wants to see voted on and passed by Congress. All of this is tough. Every element is tough. Any of these proposals whether a ban on military assault weapons or limiting the size of ammunition clips or instituting a universal babground system are all difficult. If they weren’t they would have been done before. He remains optimistic that there can be a bipartisan effort to take these necessary, common sense measures to reduce gun violence. What he insists on and what you heard him say last night in Connecticut in front of the families of many Newtown victims is that senators do not block filibuster or use other procedural measures to prevent a vote, an up or down vote on these common sense ideas. That would be a shame. It would be shameful.