Correct The Record Monday July 28, 2014 Afternoon Roundup

podesta-emails 6,220 words email

P17 V11 P22 D6 V14

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- mQQBBGBjDtIBH6DJa80zDBgR+VqlYGaXu5bEJg9HEgAtJeCLuThdhXfl5Zs32RyB I1QjIlttvngepHQozmglBDmi2FZ4S+wWhZv10bZCoyXPIPwwq6TylwPv8+buxuff B6tYil3VAB9XKGPyPjKrlXn1fz76VMpuTOs7OGYR8xDidw9EHfBvmb+sQyrU1FOW aPHxba5lK6hAo/KYFpTnimsmsz0Cvo1sZAV/EFIkfagiGTL2J/NhINfGPScpj8LB bYelVN/NU4c6Ws1ivWbfcGvqU4lymoJgJo/l9HiV6X2bdVyuB24O3xeyhTnD7laf epykwxODVfAt4qLC3J478MSSmTXS8zMumaQMNR1tUUYtHCJC0xAKbsFukzbfoRDv m2zFCCVxeYHvByxstuzg0SurlPyuiFiy2cENek5+W8Sjt95nEiQ4suBldswpz1Kv n71t7vd7zst49xxExB+tD+vmY7GXIds43Rb05dqksQuo2yCeuCbY5RBiMHX3d4nU 041jHBsv5wY24j0N6bpAsm/s0T0Mt7IO6UaN33I712oPlclTweYTAesW3jDpeQ7A ioi0CMjWZnRpUxorcFmzL/Cc/fPqgAtnAL5GIUuEOqUf8AlKmzsKcnKZ7L2d8mxG QqN16nlAiUuUpchQNMr+tAa1L5S1uK/fu6thVlSSk7KMQyJfVpwLy6068a1WmNj4 yxo9HaSeQNXh3cui+61qb9wlrkwlaiouw9+bpCmR0V8+XpWma/D/TEz9tg5vkfNo eG4t+FUQ7QgrrvIkDNFcRyTUO9cJHB+kcp2NgCcpCwan3wnuzKka9AWFAitpoAwx L6BX0L8kg/LzRPhkQnMOrj/tuu9hZrui4woqURhWLiYi2aZe7WCkuoqR/qMGP6qP EQRcvndTWkQo6K9BdCH4ZjRqcGbY1wFt/qgAxhi+uSo2IWiM1fRI4eRCGifpBtYK Dw44W9uPAu4cgVnAUzESEeW0bft5XXxAqpvyMBIdv3YqfVfOElZdKbteEu4YuOao FLpbk4ajCxO4Fzc9AugJ8iQOAoaekJWA7TjWJ6CbJe8w3thpznP0w6jNG8ZleZ6a jHckyGlx5wzQTRLVT5+wK6edFlxKmSd93jkLWWCbrc0Dsa39OkSTDmZPoZgKGRhp Yc0C4jePYreTGI6p7/H3AFv84o0fjHt5fn4GpT1Xgfg+1X/wmIv7iNQtljCjAqhD 6XN+QiOAYAloAym8lOm9zOoCDv1TSDpmeyeP0rNV95OozsmFAUaKSUcUFBUfq9FL uyr+rJZQw2DPfq2wE75PtOyJiZH7zljCh12fp5yrNx6L7HSqwwuG7vGO4f0ltYOZ dPKzaEhCOO7o108RexdNABEBAAG0Rldpa2lMZWFrcyBFZGl0b3JpYWwgT2ZmaWNl IEhpZ2ggU2VjdXJpdHkgQ29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbiBLZXkgKDIwMjEtMjAyNCmJBDEE EwEKACcFAmBjDtICGwMFCQWjmoAFCwkIBwMFFQoJCAsFFgIDAQACHgECF4AACgkQ nG3NFyg+RUzRbh+eMSKgMYOdoz70u4RKTvev4KyqCAlwji+1RomnW7qsAK+l1s6b ugOhOs8zYv2ZSy6lv5JgWITRZogvB69JP94+Juphol6LIImC9X3P/bcBLw7VCdNA mP0XQ4OlleLZWXUEW9EqR4QyM0RkPMoxXObfRgtGHKIkjZYXyGhUOd7MxRM8DBzN yieFf3CjZNADQnNBk/ZWRdJrpq8J1W0dNKI7IUW2yCyfdgnPAkX/lyIqw4ht5UxF VGrva3PoepPir0TeKP3M0BMxpsxYSVOdwcsnkMzMlQ7TOJlsEdtKQwxjV6a1vH+t k4TpR4aG8fS7ZtGzxcxPylhndiiRVwdYitr5nKeBP69aWH9uLcpIzplXm4DcusUc Bo8KHz+qlIjs03k8hRfqYhUGB96nK6TJ0xS7tN83WUFQXk29fWkXjQSp1Z5dNCcT sWQBTxWxwYyEI8iGErH2xnok3HTyMItdCGEVBBhGOs1uCHX3W3yW2CooWLC/8Pia qgss3V7m4SHSfl4pDeZJcAPiH3Fm00wlGUslVSziatXW3499f2QdSyNDw6Qc+chK hUFflmAaavtpTqXPk+Lzvtw5SSW+iRGmEQICKzD2chpy05mW5v6QUy+G29nchGDD rrfpId2Gy1VoyBx8FAto4+6BOWVijrOj9Boz7098huotDQgNoEnidvVdsqP+P1RR QJekr97idAV28i7iEOLd99d6qI5xRqc3/QsV+y2ZnnyKB10uQNVPLgUkQljqN0wP XmdVer+0X+aeTHUd1d64fcc6M0cpYefNNRCsTsgbnWD+x0rjS9RMo+Uosy41+IxJ 6qIBhNrMK6fEmQoZG3qTRPYYrDoaJdDJERN2E5yLxP2SPI0rWNjMSoPEA/gk5L91 m6bToM/0VkEJNJkpxU5fq5834s3PleW39ZdpI0HpBDGeEypo/t9oGDY3Pd7JrMOF zOTohxTyu4w2Ql7jgs+7KbO9PH0Fx5dTDmDq66jKIkkC7DI0QtMQclnmWWtn14BS KTSZoZekWESVYhORwmPEf32EPiC9t8zDRglXzPGmJAPISSQz+Cc9o1ipoSIkoCCh 2MWoSbn3KFA53vgsYd0vS/+Nw5aUksSleorFns2yFgp/w5Ygv0D007k6u3DqyRLB W5y6tJLvbC1ME7jCBoLW6nFEVxgDo727pqOpMVjGGx5zcEokPIRDMkW/lXjw+fTy c6misESDCAWbgzniG/iyt77Kz711unpOhw5aemI9LpOq17AiIbjzSZYt6b1Aq7Wr aB+C1yws2ivIl9ZYK911A1m69yuUg0DPK+uyL7Z86XC7hI8B0IY1MM/MbmFiDo6H dkfwUckE74sxxeJrFZKkBbkEAQRgYw7SAR+gvktRnaUrj/84Pu0oYVe49nPEcy/7 5Fs6LvAwAj+JcAQPW3uy7D7fuGFEQguasfRrhWY5R87+g5ria6qQT2/Sf19Tpngs d0Dd9DJ1MMTaA1pc5F7PQgoOVKo68fDXfjr76n1NchfCzQbozS1HoM8ys3WnKAw+ Neae9oymp2t9FB3B+To4nsvsOM9KM06ZfBILO9NtzbWhzaAyWwSrMOFFJfpyxZAQ 8VbucNDHkPJjhxuafreC9q2f316RlwdS+XjDggRY6xD77fHtzYea04UWuZidc5zL VpsuZR1nObXOgE+4s8LU5p6fo7jL0CRxvfFnDhSQg2Z617flsdjYAJ2JR4apg3Es G46xWl8xf7t227/0nXaCIMJI7g09FeOOsfCmBaf/ebfiXXnQbK2zCbbDYXbrYgw6 ESkSTt940lHtynnVmQBvZqSXY93MeKjSaQk1VKyobngqaDAIIzHxNCR941McGD7F qHHM2YMTgi6XXaDThNC6u5msI1l/24PPvrxkJxjPSGsNlCbXL2wqaDgrP6LvCP9O uooR9dVRxaZXcKQjeVGxrcRtoTSSyZimfjEercwi9RKHt42O5akPsXaOzeVjmvD9 EB5jrKBe/aAOHgHJEIgJhUNARJ9+dXm7GofpvtN/5RE6qlx11QGvoENHIgawGjGX Jy5oyRBS+e+KHcgVqbmV9bvIXdwiC4BDGxkXtjc75hTaGhnDpu69+Cq016cfsh+0 XaRnHRdh0SZfcYdEqqjn9CTILfNuiEpZm6hYOlrfgYQe1I13rgrnSV+EfVCOLF4L P9ejcf3eCvNhIhEjsBNEUDOFAA6J5+YqZvFYtjk3efpM2jCg6XTLZWaI8kCuADMu yrQxGrM8yIGvBndrlmmljUqlc8/Nq9rcLVFDsVqb9wOZjrCIJ7GEUD6bRuolmRPE SLrpP5mDS+wetdhLn5ME1e9JeVkiSVSFIGsumZTNUaT0a90L4yNj5gBE40dvFplW 7TLeNE/ewDQk5LiIrfWuTUn3CqpjIOXxsZFLjieNgofX1nSeLjy3tnJwuTYQlVJO 3CbqH1k6cOIvE9XShnnuxmiSoav4uZIXnLZFQRT9v8UPIuedp7TO8Vjl0xRTajCL PdTk21e7fYriax62IssYcsbbo5G5auEdPO04H/+v/hxmRsGIr3XYvSi4ZWXKASxy a/jHFu9zEqmy0EBzFzpmSx+FrzpMKPkoU7RbxzMgZwIYEBk66Hh6gxllL0JmWjV0 iqmJMtOERE4NgYgumQT3dTxKuFtywmFxBTe80BhGlfUbjBtiSrULq59np4ztwlRT wDEAVDoZbN57aEXhQ8jjF2RlHtqGXhFMrg9fALHaRQARAQABiQQZBBgBCgAPBQJg Yw7SAhsMBQkFo5qAAAoJEJxtzRcoPkVMdigfoK4oBYoxVoWUBCUekCg/alVGyEHa ekvFmd3LYSKX/WklAY7cAgL/1UlLIFXbq9jpGXJUmLZBkzXkOylF9FIXNNTFAmBM 3TRjfPv91D8EhrHJW0SlECN+riBLtfIQV9Y1BUlQthxFPtB1G1fGrv4XR9Y4TsRj VSo78cNMQY6/89Kc00ip7tdLeFUHtKcJs+5EfDQgagf8pSfF/TWnYZOMN2mAPRRf fh3SkFXeuM7PU/X0B6FJNXefGJbmfJBOXFbaSRnkacTOE9caftRKN1LHBAr8/RPk pc9p6y9RBc/+6rLuLRZpn2W3m3kwzb4scDtHHFXXQBNC1ytrqdwxU7kcaJEPOFfC XIdKfXw9AQll620qPFmVIPH5qfoZzjk4iTH06Yiq7PI4OgDis6bZKHKyyzFisOkh DXiTuuDnzgcu0U4gzL+bkxJ2QRdiyZdKJJMswbm5JDpX6PLsrzPmN314lKIHQx3t NNXkbfHL/PxuoUtWLKg7/I3PNnOgNnDqCgqpHJuhU1AZeIkvewHsYu+urT67tnpJ AK1Z4CgRxpgbYA4YEV1rWVAPHX1u1okcg85rc5FHK8zh46zQY1wzUTWubAcxqp9K 1IqjXDDkMgIX2Z2fOA1plJSwugUCbFjn4sbT0t0YuiEFMPMB42ZCjcCyA1yysfAd DYAmSer1bq47tyTFQwP+2ZnvW/9p3yJ4oYWzwMzadR3T0K4sgXRC2Us9nPL9k2K5 TRwZ07wE2CyMpUv+hZ4ja13A/1ynJZDZGKys+pmBNrO6abxTGohM8LIWjS+YBPIq trxh8jxzgLazKvMGmaA6KaOGwS8vhfPfxZsu2TJaRPrZMa/HpZ2aEHwxXRy4nm9G Kx1eFNJO6Ues5T7KlRtl8gflI5wZCCD/4T5rto3SfG0s0jr3iAVb3NCn9Q73kiph PSwHuRxcm+hWNszjJg3/W+Fr8fdXAh5i0JzMNscuFAQNHgfhLigenq+BpCnZzXya 01kqX24AdoSIbH++vvgE0Bjj6mzuRrH5VJ1Qg9nQ+yMjBWZADljtp3CARUbNkiIg tUJ8IJHCGVwXZBqY4qeJc3h/RiwWM2UIFfBZ+E06QPznmVLSkwvvop3zkr4eYNez cIKUju8vRdW6sxaaxC/GECDlP0Wo6lH0uChpE3NJ1daoXIeymajmYxNt+drz7+pd jMqjDtNA2rgUrjptUgJK8ZLdOQ4WCrPY5pP9ZXAO7+mK7S3u9CTywSJmQpypd8hv 8Bu8jKZdoxOJXxj8CphK951eNOLYxTOxBUNB8J2lgKbmLIyPvBvbS1l1lCM5oHlw WXGlp70pspj3kaX4mOiFaWMKHhOLb+er8yh8jspM184= =5a6T -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- *[image: Inline image 1]* *Correct The Record Monday July 28, 2014 Afternoon Roundup:* *Tweets:* *Correct The Record* @CorrectRecord: .@neeratanden advised @HillaryClinton "while still upholding [her] responsibilities as a mom" http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/working-mother-washington-powerhouse-good-luck-20140725 … <http://t.co/4WaYrMtQHv> [7/28/14, 10:20 a.m. EDT <https://twitter.com/CorrectRecord/status/493762982229573632>] *Correct The Record* @CorrectRecord: "Working Mother, Washington Powerhouse? Good Luck." @neeratanden on her career, family, & working for @HillaryClinton http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/working-mother-washington-powerhouse-good-luck-20140725 … <http://t.co/4WaYrMtQHv> [7/28/14, 9:45 a.m. EDT <https://twitter.com/CorrectRecord/status/493754078191964161>] *Correct The Record* @CorrectRecord: .@HillaryClinton told @charlierose her mother's resilience inspired her #HRC365 #NationalParentsDay http://www.charlierose.com/watch/60419259 <http://t.co/cVQm24EF6R> [7/27/14, 3:01 p.m. EDT <https://twitter.com/CorrectRecord/status/493471181497204736>] *Headlines:* *Wall Street Journal blog: Washington Wire: “A Closer Look at Hillary Clinton’s Approach to China” <http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/07/28/a-closer-look-at-hillary-clintons-approach-to-china/>* “The clarity of her thinking, respect for China and awareness of how assertive it can be—and the stakes for the U.S.–bode well for how she would handle Beijing as president.” *Slate blog: Weigel: “Poll: Hillary Clinton Does Better With White Voters Than Any Democrat Since 1976” <http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2014/07/28/poll_hillary_clinton_does_better_with_white_voters_than_any_democrat_since.html>* “Obama, who won only 39 percent of the white vote in 2012, is swooning because he's lost even more of it. But Clinton's grabbing 46 percent of the white vote.” *Associated Press: “Clinton: U.S. Needs Orderly Process for Border Kids” <http://bigstory.ap.org/article/clinton-us-needs-orderly-process-border-kids>* “Hillary Rodham Clinton says she supports creating a refugee screening process for Central American children in their home countries to discourage dangerous trips to the U.S. and opposes changing a 2008 immigration law under review by Congress.” *Mediaite: “Jorge Ramos Asks Hillary Clinton: Do You Have a ‘Latino Problem?’” <http://www.mediaite.com/tv/jorge-ramos-asks-hillary-clinton-do-you-have-a-latino-problem/>* “In a preview of a longer interview that will air on Fusion’s America with Jorge Ramos Tuesday night, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton weighed in on the current debate over undocumented minors flooding over the border from Central America, telling the host that without further action from Congress, ‘more kids are going come.’” *Huffington Post: “Hillary Clinton: 'I Don't Agree' On Changing Trafficking Laws To Address Border Crisis” <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/28/hillary-clinton-border-crisis_n_5626584.html?utm_hp_ref=politics>* “Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Friday that she opposes changes to a 2008 law meant to help unaccompanied children and teenagers who crossed the border illegally, and instead endorsed the idea of screening minors in their native countries before they make a dangerous trek to the U.S.” *CNN: “Hillary Clinton defends Obama against conservative barbs” <http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/07/27/hillary-clinton-defends-obama-against-conservative-barbs/>* “As conservatives throw arrows aimed at the President's handling of multiple world crises, Clinton defended her former adversary-turned-boss-turned-friend.” *The Week: Speed Reads: “Hillary Clinton tacks right: praises Bush, criticizes Obama, cozies up to Wall Street” <http://theweek.com/speedreads/index/265454/speedreads-hillary-clinton-tacks-right-praises-bush-criticizes-obama-cozies-up-to-wall-street>* “Clinton distanced herself from President Obama's foreign policy, suggesting that he has not made it clear how D.C. ‘intend[s] to lead and manage’ international affairs.” *Washington Post blog: Post Politics: “‘Holograms’ brought back Tupac. Now they want to take Washington.” <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/07/28/holograms-brought-back-tupac-now-they-want-to-take-washington/>* “‘Let's take New Hampshire and Clinton,’ explained Taylor, referencing the early nominating state. She could appear remotely via hologram in areas her schedule prevents her from traveling to, if she runs for president, fielding questions in a kind of virtual town hall meeting, he suggested.” *Financial Times column: Gideon Rachman: “A Clinton in power will not bring back the good times” <http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/6c64ec6e-163c-11e4-93ec-00144feabdc0.html#axzz38mIVsdG9>* “Mr Clinton had his strengths as president – intelligence, shrewdness, empathy – but he was, above all, lucky in his timing. He came to power at a golden moment for the US in both economics and in geopolitics.” *Associated Press: “Analysis: Clinton Impeachment Shadows GOP Lawsuit” <http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_IMPEACHMENT_STAKES_ANALYSIS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT>* “The last time Republicans unleashed impeachment proceedings against a Democratic president, they lost five House seats in an election they seemed primed to win handily.” *Articles:* *Wall Street Journal blog: Washington Wire: “A Closer Look at Hillary Clinton’s Approach to China” <http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/07/28/a-closer-look-at-hillary-clintons-approach-to-china/>* By Michael O’Hanlon, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and co-author of “Strategic Reassurance and Resolve: U.S.-China Relations in the 21st Century.” July 28, 2014, 9:53 a.m. EDT Lost amid the clamor over Hillary Clinton’s book tour are some of her views on China, where–despite challenges from Ukraine to the Middle East–her legacy as secretary of state is arguably the most consequential. Mrs. Clinton was a key part of the “pivot to Asia,” a process that arguably began with visits to Beijing and Hanoi in 2010 during which she pushed back against China’s assertiveness in the South China Sea. She accelerated the effort with a ForeignPolicy.com article in October 2011, and President Barack Obama traveled to Asia the next month. Personally, I wish Mrs. Clinton would drop the term “pivot”–as it overstates the shift in U.S. defense and foreign-policy resources that can or should be directed toward the Asia-Pacific region–in favor of “rebalance.” But her policy thinking toward China has been clear. And while John Kerry has made trips to Asia since becoming secretary of state, he has not conveyed the sense of focus on the region and its problems and possibilities that Mrs. Clinton developed. Why haven’t her ideas about China drawn more attention? The book’s style may be one reason: It’s written more as a log of her time in office than a reflection on the major issues of the day. Accordingly, more pages are devoted to U.S. efforts to free the blind dissident lawyer Chen Guangcheng after he took refuge in the U.S. Embassy in Beijing than to the much broader issue of China’s rise in strategic terms. Mrs. Clinton’s commitment to human rights is an important component of her thinking about China—and part of what makes her so good on China policy matters–but the long account about Mr. Chen also could distract from her larger observations about how to handle Beijing. And those larger observations are hard-hitting. “In November 2009, President Obama received a noticeably lukewarm reception during his visit to China,” she writes. “Many observers wondered whether we were seeing a new phase in the relationship, with an ascendant and assertive China no longer hiding its resources and enhanced military capabilities, moving away from ‘hide and bide’ and toward ‘show and tell.’ ” Mrs. Clinton then recounts the history of Chinese military provocations in recent years, including Beijing’s harassment of the U.S.S. Impeccable in 2009; its declaration of its claims in the South China Sea as a core interest in early 2010; and its complaints in May 2010 that the U.S. was supposedly seeking to encircle China. During a regional security meeting in July 2010, Mrs. Clinton advocated a multilateral approach to resolving disputes, which prompted the Chinese foreign minister to remind listeners–in bullying fashion–that “China is a big country. Bigger than any other countries here.” There is a firmness in Hillary Clinton’s thinking about China that provides a good guide to policy and that is less well articulated by the current Obama team. She makes issues easy to understand. The clarity of her thinking, respect for China and awareness of how assertive it can be—and the stakes for the U.S.–bode well for how she would handle Beijing as president. Too bad this kind of analysis has been lost in the fuss over peripheral matters with the book’s rollout. *Slate blog: Weigel: “Poll: Hillary Clinton Does Better With White Voters Than Any Democrat Since 1976” <http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2014/07/28/poll_hillary_clinton_does_better_with_white_voters_than_any_democrat_since.html>* By David Weigel July 28, 2014, 12:23 p.m. EDT Long ago, before the God of Narratives decided that Hillary Clinton was an out-of-touch elitist, she was seen as a fearsome 2016 contender. As the theory went, she could outpoll Barack Obama with white voters while winning non-white voters. The new CNN poll suggests that this is still mostly true. In a fun, cheeky trial heat, CNN's pollster asked voters who they'd support in a 2012 election do-over: Mitt Romney or Barack Obama? Romney won in a rout, the poor guy: [POLL] Next, the pollster asked voters to take sides in a hypothetical and inhumanely boring Clinton v. Romney race. Clinton won easy, 55-42. It doesn't take true genius to figure out where those new Democratic votes came from. [POLL] Would you look at that? Obama, who won only 39 percent of the white vote in 2012, is swooning because he's lost even more of it. But Clinton's grabbing 46 percent of the white vote. That's better than Obama did in 2008 (43 percent), better than John Kerry did in 2004 (41 percent), better than Al Gore did in 2000 (42 percent). It's even better than her husband did in 1996 (43 percent), though that result -- like the 1992 result -- is skewed by the presence of Ross Perot. You have to go back to 1976 to find a Democrat who polled better than 46 percent with whites. And when Jimmy Carter narrowly defeated Gerald Ford, the electorate was 89 percent white overall. In 2016, it's likely to be closer to 70 percent white. In 2016, a Democrat who wins only 40 percent of the white vote and holds close to Barack Obama's totals with non-whites can win easily. Special bonus reason for Democratic gloating: In the theoretical Romney race, Clinton wins 62 percent of voters who make less than $50,000. Yes, even after the scandal of her speaking fees. *Associated Press: “Clinton: U.S. Needs Orderly Process for Border Kids” <http://bigstory.ap.org/article/clinton-us-needs-orderly-process-border-kids>* By Ken Thomas July 28, 2014, 1:19 p.m. EDT Hillary Rodham Clinton says she supports creating a refugee screening process for Central American children in their home countries to discourage dangerous trips to the U.S. and opposes changing a 2008 immigration law under review by Congress. The potential 2016 Democratic presidential candidate says in an interview with Fusion's Jorge Ramos that Congress should provide more money to help immigration officials determine whether children should be considered migrants or refugees. Some of the children should be sent back, Clinton says, but the U.S. needs a "sensible, orderly process" to care for the tens of thousands of children crossing the border, mostly from El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala. "A lot of people are understandably, as I am, upset about what's happened to these kids but if we don't have a procedure, it's not going to stop," Clinton said in the interview airingTuesday. Clinton's comments were her most extensive on the ongoing border crisis. She said in a CNN forum in June that the children should be reunited with their families but the U.S. needed to make clear that "just because your child gets across the border doesn't mean your child gets to stay." Congress is seeking ways to reduce the influx of the children this week. Republicans have supported changing a 2008 law so that migrant youths can be sent home more quickly. Clinton cautioned some children would face "terrible danger" if they returned and a better process is needed to screen the children. The White House is considering a pilot program that would give refugee status to young people from Honduras, which could be expanded to Guatemala and El Salvador. It involves screening youths in their home countries to determine whether they qualify for refugee status. *Mediaite: “Jorge Ramos Asks Hillary Clinton: Do You Have a ‘Latino Problem?’” <http://www.mediaite.com/tv/jorge-ramos-asks-hillary-clinton-do-you-have-a-latino-problem/>* By Matt Wilstein July 28, 2014, 12:47 p.m. EDT In a preview of a longer interview that will air on Fusion’s America with Jorge Ramos Tuesday night, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton weighed in on the current debate over undocumented minors flooding over the border from Central America, telling the host that without further action from Congress, “more kids are going come.” But first, she addressed her possible “Latino problem.” “Do you think you have a Latino problem?” Jorge Ramos asked Clinton. “I hope not!” she replied, laughing enthusiastically, before Ramos’ deadpan demeanor caused her to turn more serious. “I never have before, so I hope not,” she added. “Obviously, we have a lot of problems that we have to address.” Ramos explained that he was asking because Clinton recently said of the Central American children during her CNN town hall interview that we as a country need to “send them back.” “Well, that was sort of a short circuit of what I have said overall,” Clinton said, explaining that she was referring more to “migrant children” than “refugee children.” While both deserve “as much love” as we can give them, she said there should be separate “procedures” for each group. Ramos grilled Clinton on her stance, asking her specifically who she would deport. If children don’t have a legitimate case for asylum or an existing family connection in the U.S., then Clinton said they “should be returned to their families.” “We send kids back all the time,” she said, seemingly admitted that some of those children who are sent back to their home countries could be in danger. “That’s why we need a process to determine who falls into [the refugee] category.” She argued that the U.S. should help set up a screening process in places like Honduras and Guatemala that determines whether children are in need of asylum before they even make the dangerous journey across the border. “If we don’t have a procedure, it’s not going to stop, more kids are going to come,” Clinton said. Watch video below, via Fusion: [VIDEO] *Huffington Post: “Hillary Clinton: 'I Don't Agree' On Changing Trafficking Laws To Address Border Crisis” <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/28/hillary-clinton-border-crisis_n_5626584.html?utm_hp_ref=politics>* By Elise Foley July 28, 2014, 10:14 a.m. EDT Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Friday that she opposes changes to a 2008 law meant to help unaccompanied children and teenagers who crossed the border illegally, and instead endorsed the idea of screening minors in their native countries before they make a dangerous trek to the U.S. "We should be setting up a system in Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador to screen kids. Before they get in the hands of coyotes, or they get on the 'Beast,' or they're raped. Terrible things happen to them," she told Fusion's Jorge Ramos, referring to the "Beast," a series of freight trains that minors from Central America are riding to get through Mexico to the U.S. Border patrol agents have apprehended more than 57,500 unaccompanied minors crossing the border illegally since the beginning of October, straining the country's system of caring for, screening and possibly deporting the children and teenagers. "If we don't have a procedure, it's not going to stop," Clinton said. "More kids are going to come." She differed from President Barack Obama and many Republicans on whether to change the 2008 trafficking law that keeps unaccompanied minors from countries other than Mexico and Canada from being quickly deported. While Obama initially said he wanted Congress to change the 2008 law, he did not propose legislative changes in his $3.7 billion funding request earlier this month, angering Republicans who say he flip-flopped on the issue. The administration has, however, continued to back changing the law at a later date. "I don't agree that we should change the law," Clinton said. "That's why I'm advocating an appropriate procedure, well funded by the Congress, which they are resisting doing, so that we can make individual decisions." Clinton said the U.S. could instead screen minors in their native countries to determine whether they would be eligible for refugee status or some other type of relief. Clinton said in June that unaccompanied minors "should be sent back as soon as it can be determined who responsible adults in their families are." Pressed on that point by Ramos, Clinton stood by her statement that some minors should be deported. "Some of them should be sent back," she said, adding that those without a legitimate claim for asylum or some type of family connection should be deported and returned to their families. *CNN: “Hillary Clinton defends Obama against conservative barbs” <http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/07/27/hillary-clinton-defends-obama-against-conservative-barbs/>* By Shannon Travis July 27, 2014, 2:09 p.m. EDT Washington (CNN) – If you wanted a friend to defend your reputation against serious sideswipes, who better to do it than one of the most recognizable women in the world, with years of experience beating back barbs? Enter Hillary Clinton in defense of President Barack Obama. As conservatives throw arrows aimed at the President's handling of multiple world crises, Clinton defended her former adversary-turned-boss-turned-friend. The former secretary of state – and prospective presidential candidate - sat down with CNN's Fareed Zakaria for a wide-ranging interview taped Friday and aired Sunday on "CNN's Fareed Zakaria GPS." Some conservatives accuse Obama of not being tough enough on Russian President Vladimir Putin. Is the President appropriately handling the Ukranian crisis, Clinton was asked? "I think that he is facing some of the same challenges that American presidents face when dealing with threats within Europe," Clinton said. "The United States, obviously, has a great interest in helping to maintain peace and security in Europe and we have a formal alliance, NATO, to do so. But much of what we can do and what the President is calling for requires the full participation of our European friends and allies." Clinton continued: claiming Putin "bears responsibility" for the downing of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17, calling for more sanctions, urging Europe to "stand up to" Putin despite its reliance on energy from Russia, and stressing the need for Europe and the United States to assist Ukraine. And she wasn't done offering supportive words for the President. Later in the hourlong interview, Clinton was asked about one specific criticism. "Charles Krauthammer, the conservative critic, has said, 'The world is going to hell and President Obama is playing golf,'” Zakaria said. "Is he playing too much golf while all these crises are popping up?" Clinton was unequivocal. "No," she said. "I think that's an unfair comment to make." "I know from my own experience with the President, where we worked so closely together, and as I write in the book, you know, went from being adversaries to partners to friends, that he is constantly working and thinking. But he also wants to do what will make a difference, not just perform. He wants to be sure that we know what the consequences, both intended and unintended, are. “When it comes to the Middle East, this is always a very difficult issue for any American president," she said. "I think the President is doing what he can do to try to get a cease-fire and then see whether we can sort out some, you know, longer-term resolution." *The Week: Speed Reads: “Hillary Clinton tacks right: praises Bush, criticizes Obama, cozies up to Wall Street” <http://theweek.com/speedreads/index/265454/speedreads-hillary-clinton-tacks-right-praises-bush-criticizes-obama-cozies-up-to-wall-street>* By Bonnie Kristian July 28, 2014, 11:50 a.m. EDT Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, an expected contender in the 2016 presidential election, has positioned herself to appeal to more moderate or even neoconservative audiences in recent days. Speaking to CNN on Sunday, she praised President George W. Bush's AIDS relief programs in Sub-Saharan Africa, saying his initiatives there make her "proud to be an American." In the same interview, Clinton distanced herself from President Obama's foreign policy, suggesting that he has not made it clear how D.C. "intend[s] to lead and manage" international affairs. Clinton advocated a more interventionist approach, arguing that, "We have to go back out and sell ourselves" as guarantors of worldwide stability. Currently, the U.S. military has as many as 900 bases worldwide, and has ground troops or drones active in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, and Yemen. Meanwhile, despite objections from supporters within her own party, Clinton has repeatedly spoken to audiences at large Wall Street banks like Goldman Sachs and Ameriprise Financial. "The problem is these speeches give the impression that she's still in the Wall Street wing of the party," said Charles Chamberlain of the left-wing Democracy For America PAC. If Clinton is elected President in 2016, the White House will have been in the hands of just three families — the Bushes, Clintons, and Obamas — for 32 years by the time her first term is complete. *Washington Post blog: Post Politics: “‘Holograms’ brought back Tupac. Now they want to take Washington.” <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/07/28/holograms-brought-back-tupac-now-they-want-to-take-washington/>* By Sean Sullivan July 28, 2014, 11:25 a.m. EDT Resurrect Tupac for a live performance? Been there. Help elect a prime minister in the world's second most populous country? Done that. Next stop? Washington. Holographic technology is coming to the nation's capital. The hope is to do for political campaigns, government agencies and trade groups what it's done for the entertainment industry and elected officials overseas in recent years: Increasingly become more necessity and less novelty. Hologram USA, a company specializing in the technology, will announce Monday that it has hired the Northern Virginia-based firm U.S. Government Relations International. USGRI will try to convince would-be clients that Hologram USA's lifelike three-dimensional images that can be broadcast live across the country are vital communications tools. "A general or a politician or a head of corporate can project themselves physically in a life-size projection that is completely believable at a matter of a few feet," said Alki David, who heads up Hologram USA. That's what Narendra Modi did in his winning campaign for prime minster of India this year. Hologram USA helped Modi reach out to the country's hundreds of millions of voters by enabling him to appear live in holographic form via satellite at political rallies. For many of the eager crowds who gathered to hear Modi speak, it was the next best thing to a stump speech in the flesh. Hologram USA wants to eventually do the same thing for Rand Paul or Hillary Rodham Clinton -- David says he's a fan of both -- or anyone else who runs for office and is looking to improve its voter communication efforts. David, who comes from a wealthy Greek shipping family, owns the North American license to the patent for technology created by Uwe Maass, an engineer born in Germany. The technology is a modern twist on a 19th century illusion technique called Pepper's Ghost that involves reflecting images off of glass. Maass's version uses foil. (David refers to it as technically not a hologram, but "hologram-like" technology.) David has partnered with Maass and Giovanni Palma, who belong to a separate company called up Musion Das Hologram. Jeffrey Taylor, a managing partner at USGRI and former congressional aide, envisions the technology increasing interaction between voters and presidential candidates, who simply can't appear physically in every city, even in crucial swing states. "Let's take New Hampshire and Clinton," explained Taylor, referencing the early nominating state. She could appear remotely via hologram in areas her schedule prevents her from traveling to, if she runs for president, fielding questions in a kind of virtual town hall meeting, he suggested. "You would actually have an interactive, three-dimensional image and a monitor in front of her [to field questions] when the lady at a coffee klatsch says, 'What are your views on energy?' " said Taylor. He added: "The only thing you cant do is shake her hand." But that's a challenge advocates of the technology will encounter, experts say. Retail politics is a big part of campaigning. Voters want to see candidates in person at the state fair or the local parade. Technology, no matter how advanced, is never going to offer a perfect replacement. For hologram technology to take a foothold in campaigns, "it has to complement" the human element, said Zac Moffatt, Mitt Romney's 2012 digital director. Another challenge is competition from other, less expensive social media and communication tools. For example, Clinton recently held a live chat on Facebook and one on Twitter that was streamed live on YouTube. The question when it comes holographic technology, in Moffatt's view: "Is the impact on the voter or constituent exponentially greater than Skype of Google Hangout or other [voter contact] methodologies?" David pegs the cost of of a robust national effort in the U.S. at about $6 million a month. That's beyond the budgets of most congressional campaigns and is a sizable investment even for White House hopefuls. But David argues that weighed against the cost of barnstorming the country and advancing and staffing events, it will eventually look like a bargain. The perpetual desire to build buzz in politics could spur demand for David's company. The Republican and Democratic presidential nominating conventions routinely try to outdo one another with bells and whistles designed to attract earned media attention. Few technological advances are buzzier now than holograms. The 2012 Coachella music festival featured a performance by a holographic recreation of late rapper Tupac Shakur. It went viral online. This year's Billboard Music brought back Michael Jackson. (The performance triggered competing lawsuits between David and another company over patent rights.) The increasing desire to micro-target voters in campaigns could also boost the appeal of holographic technology. "With advancements in artificial intelligence, you could soon have holograms of presidential candidates at your door, interacting with you and asking and answering questions," wrote David Plouffe in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed. Plouffe managed President Obama's 2008 campaign. Beyond the campaign trail, David and Taylor see other reasons to bring the technology to Washington. Military simulations and briefings could be improved, they say. It could also enable the White House to communicate with more Americans by bringing the president into a "sixth grade classroom in Missouri," without all the costs of travel and security, for example, said Taylor. It was technology that brought Taylor and David together. Taylor reached out after seeing David in a TV interview. They connected through LinkedIn, the social networking site. To David, who says he is already in talks with Democrats and Republicans he declined to name, the technology's best selling point is the awe it in inspires when people experience it for the first time. "I think that as much as we can write about it and evangelize it and imagine it and see it online, you don't get the impact of what it's really like until you see it," he said. *Financial Times column: Gideon Rachman: “A Clinton in power will not bring back the good times” <http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/6c64ec6e-163c-11e4-93ec-00144feabdc0.html#axzz38mIVsdG9>* By Gideon Rachman July 28, 2014, 4:23 p.m. [Subtitle:] Bill Clinton became president at a golden moment for the US Back in 1992 I was watching from the balcony of Madison Square Garden as Bill Clinton accepted the Democratic party nomination for the presidency. On stage with him was his wife, Hillary, and their young daughter, Chelsea. The music that blared from the loudspeakers as the Clintons took their bow was Fleetwood Mac singing “Don’t stop thinking abouttomorrow”. It was a quintessentially American message – optimistic and forward-looking. By contrast, if and when Hillary Clinton bids for the presidency in 2016, her unofficial campaign anthem might as well be “Yesterday”. The most powerful appeal of the Clinton name is nostalgia for the good old days of the 1990s, when all America’s troubles seemed so far away. Opinion polls show that Mr Clinton is now easily the most well-regarded president of the past 25 years. Mrs Clinton has her own formidable résumé – as a senator and as secretary of state. But a large part of her appeal still lies in the warm glow of the Clinton brand. As Maureen Dowd of The New York Times, a long-time chronicler of the foibles of the Clintons, pointed out in a recent column, even their bitter enemies seem to be succumbing to nostalgia. Ms Dowd quoted Bill O’Reilly, the conservative television star: “With Hillary you get Bill. And Bill knows what’s going on.” But while Mr Clinton may yet return to the White House as First Man, the Clinton years are never coming back. Mr Clinton had his strengths as president – intelligence, shrewdness, empathy – but he was, above all, lucky in his timing. He came to power at a golden moment for the US in both economics and in geopolitics. The Soviet Union had collapsed in 1991, just a year before Mr Clinton was first elected. Throughout his eight years as president, there was no serious competitor to the US for the role of global superpower. The Japanese, who had haunted the dreams of Americans in the 1980s, entered a prolonged slump at the start of the 1990s, from which they have yet to pull out. China had been knocked sideways by the student uprising of 1989 and its violent suppression. The Chinese economy grew rapidly in the 1990s but it was still only 12 per cent the size of the US economy by the time Mr Clinton left office. The name Osama bin Laden had yet to impinge on the public consciousness. Al-Qaeda struck New York and Washington nine months after Mr Clinton left the Oval office. The foreign-policy preoccupations of the Clinton years presented themselves as moral dilemmas – such as Bosnia or Rwanda – rather than as threats to national security. Mr Clinton’s economic inheritance was similarly golden. The frightening deficits of the Reagan years disappeared in the 1990s, partly because of sensible fiscal decisions taken by President George HW Bush. By the time Mr Clinton took office, the US economy was already recovering strongly. He was the lucky beneficiary of a surge in American productivity, following the transformation of the workplace by computers. With unemployment at just 4 per cent and inflation under control, there was exuberant talk of a “New Economy”. Given this fortunate combination of circumstances, is it any wonder that the president had time for dalliances in the Oval Office? Now compare Mr Clinton’s inheritance, with the America that faced Barack Obama. The collapse of Lehman Brothers, just two months before the 2008 presidential election, meant that Mr Obama and his team took office facing an acute financial and economic crisis – which continues to overshadow his presidency, six years after the event. (Despite that, Mr Obama was able to push through the comprehensive healthcare reform that had eluded Mr Clinton and his wife, who was placed in charge of the first effort to secure universal coverage.) The international picture that Mr Obama faced was similarly bleak. The “unipolar moment” Mr Clinton enjoyed was already drawing to a close by the time Mr Obama came to power. The US was struggling to extricate itself from draining wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. When Mr Obama leaves office in January 2017, perhaps to give way to President Hillary Clinton, China will – at least measured in terms of purchasing power – already have displaced the US as the world’s largest economy. Conservative commentators, such as Mr O’Reilly, often blame these setbacks on Mr Obama’s “weakness” or failures of leadership. In truth, he was dealt a much weaker hand than any of his recent predecessors. The nostalgia for the Clinton years also extends to matters of style. Mr Obama, once praised for his cool, is now condemned for his “coldness”. Mr Clinton, once attacked for his ill-discipline, is now lauded for his humanity. It is true that Mr Clinton brought a warmth to the presidency that Mr Obama lacks. On the other hand, Mr Obama has conducted himself with a dignity that eluded Mr Clinton. As Mrs Clinton prepares to run for the ultimate prize – with the publication of a worthy book and numerous television appearances – she will be hoping that Americans remember the good bits of the Clinton years and forget the icky parts. The real contrast between the Obama and the Clinton presidencies, however, is not between personalities but between eras. It would be nice to believe that another Clinton in the White House could somehow magically recreate the golden economic and geopolitical circumstances of the 1990s. But, as Fleetwood Mac once put it: “Yesterday’s gone, yesterday’s gone.” *Associated Press: “Analysis: Clinton Impeachment Shadows GOP Lawsuit” <http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_IMPEACHMENT_STAKES_ANALYSIS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT>* By David Espo July 28, 2014, 11:43 a.m. EDT The last time Republicans unleashed impeachment proceedings against a Democratic president, they lost five House seats in an election they seemed primed to win handily. Memories of Bill Clinton and the campaign of 1998 may help explain why Speaker John Boehner and the current GOP leadership want no part of such talk now, although conservatives increasingly clamor for it. And also why President Barack Obama's White House seems almost eager to stir the impeachment pot three months before midterm elections. Republicans have already "opened the door for impeachment" with their plans to sue the president over allegedly failing to carry out the health care law, White House aide Dan Pfeiffer told reporters. In something of a dare last week, he also said any further action Obama takes on his own on immigration will "up the likelihood" of a GOP-led move to remove Obama from office. House Democrats' campaign committee used reports of tea party Republicans meeting to discuss impeachment in an emailed fundraising plea sent Sunday. They warned "the fate of Obama's presidency is at stake." Pfeiffer and Democratic fundraisers aren't privy to the inner workings of the House Republican leadership. Boehner, who is, insists at every public opportunity that the lawsuit is one thing, impeachment is another - and not on the table. The planned suit results from a dispute over the balance of powers between the president and Congress, he said last month, and the House "must act as an institution to defend the constitutional principles at stake." Republicans dispute suggestions by Democrats that the suit's true purpose is to release pressure from the party's more extreme supporters for impeachment. One Republican committee chairman, Rep. Pete Sessions of Texas, said in a brief interview that Clinton deserved to be impeached, but Obama does not. The 42nd president "broke the law," he said of formal allegations that accused Clinton of lying under oath to a grand jury and obstructing justice in connection with his relationship with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. Contrasting the former president with the current one, Sessions said: "Breaking the law is different from not fully enforcing the law." At least one senior Republican isn't as definitive. Interviewed on Sunday on Fox, Louisiana Rep. Steve Scalise, newly elected to the GOP leadership, repeatedly declined to rule out impeaching Obama. For his part, Sessions spoke a few hours after he opened a meeting of the House Rules Committee with what could well have been a case for impeachment: sweeping allegations that went far beyond the boundaries of the planned lawsuit. "The president has unilaterally waived work requirements for welfare recipients," the Texas Republican said. The chief executive "ended accountability provisions in No Child Left Behind," an education law dating to the George W. Bush era, he said. The president "refused to inform the Congress of the transfer of what is known as the Taliban five," Sessions went on. "And ignored the statutory requirements of the Affordable Care Act," he said, using the formal name for the 4-year-old health care law. However compelling the complaints, no judge will ever rule on most of them. Three months before the November elections, Republicans intend to limit their lawsuit to a narrower claim, that he has failed to faithfully carry out the health care law that, according to polls, remains poorly received by the public. "In 2013, the president changed the health care law without a vote of Congress, effectively creating his own law by literally waiving the employer mandate and the penalties for failing to comply with it," Boehner said in a statement last month. "No president should have the power to make laws on his or her own." Republican officials say they decided to narrow the focus of the court case after being advised by lawyers that their chances of succeeding would be stronger. None of this seems likely to satisfy the political right, as 2008 vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin recently made clear. "It's time to impeach; and on behalf of America we should vehemently oppose any politician on the left or right who would hesitate in voting for articles of impeachment," she wrote. Yet her opinion is not widely shared among non-Republicans, and Democrats quickly sought to use calls like the one from Palin to raise campaign funds. In a CNN survey last week, more than half of all Republicans said they favor Obama's impeachment, but that level that fell to one-third of the overall electorate. Among independents, 63 percent opposed it. A lawsuit is also generally unpopular, but less so than impeachment would be, the poll indicated. When it came to the lawsuit, 41 percent of the country backed it. Support was 75 percent among Republicans, while independents opposed it by 43-55. As a junior member of the leadership in 1998, Boehner had a seat at the table when Republicans decided to inject Clinton's impeachment into that year's elections. Republicans held their majority, but Democrats gained five seats, a rarity in midterm elections for the party in power in the White House. Clinton was impeached in a post-election session of the House, later acquitted in the Senate and remained in office. Then-Speaker Newt Gingrich fared worse. Under pressure from his rank and file, the Republican gave up his post and left Congress soon after the election debacle. In the upheaval, Boehner lost his leadership post for a decade.