podesta_email_00408.txt

podesta-emails 10,453 words email

P17 D6 V11 P22 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 Wednesday July 23, 2014 Morning Roundup:* *Headlines:* *The Hill: “Clinton message taking shape” <http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/213062-clinton-message-is-taking-shape>* “‘Hillary Clinton has made it clear that should she run for president, her forward-thinking agenda will be reflective of her life’s work — leveling the playing field and giving everyone a chance to succeed,’ said Adrienne Watson, a spokeswoman for Correct the Record, a pro-Clinton super-PAC. ‘She said very clearly, just this month, that the current disparity must be fixed so that hard work is rewarded and our system works for everyone.’” *Huffington Post opinion: Allida Black: “Blazing a Trail: Hillary Clinton, Advocate for Children and the Indigent” <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/allida-black/blazing-a-trail-hillary-clinton_b_5610884.html>* “If we are going to have a discussion about Hillary Clinton's legal career, then let's be sure the whole story is told - one that explains both her commitment and her pioneering advocacy for abused children and the indigent in need of counsel.” *KPCC-FM (C.A.): “Hillary Clinton on Gaza, ‘Hard Choices’ and being called a '20th century candidate'” <http://www.scpr.org/programs/airtalk/2014/07/22/38484/hillary-clinton-on-ukraine-gaza-and-the-hard-choic/>* Sec. Clinton: “Elections are about differences, as we know, but every election is about the future and certainly anyone who wishes to run for president has to make it clear how the experience that you've had in the past and what you believe and how you have acted on those beliefs will translate into positive results for the American people.” *Washington Post blog: Post Politics: “Hillary Clinton responds to Rubio: ‘Every election is about the future’” <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/07/22/hillary-clinton-responds-to-rubio-every-election-is-about-the-future/>* “Clinton sounded like a presidential candidate, vowing to take on issues like student loan debt, immigration and improving the lives of middle class Americans. But she reiterated that has not decided whether she will run in 2016.” *Associated Press: “Seeking The Limelight, Biden Courts Key Dem Groups” <http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_BIDEN?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT>* “Caught in Hillary Rodham Clinton's perpetual shadow, Joe Biden is working to boost his political profile among key Democratic voting blocs, a move that could help the vice president fashion himself as a more liberal alternative in the 2016 presidential race.” *Associated Press: “Pat Schroeder: Clinton Would Face ‘Subdued Sexism’” <http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TV_CRITICS_WATCH_PAT_SCHROEDER?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT>* “Former House Democrat Pat Schroeder predicts that Hillary Clinton would face "a lot of sexism" if she decides to run for president in 2016.” *Real Clear Politics: “Bachmann Says She Might Seek Presidency in 2016” <http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/07/22/bachmann_says_she_might_seek_presidency_in_2016_123419.html>* “The Minnesota congresswoman and 2012 Republican presidential candidate told RealClearPolitics on Tuesday that she is considering a second White House run.” *Politico Magazine: Daniel Halper: “My Battle With the Clintons” <http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/07/battle-with-the-clintons-109254.html?ml=m_po#.U8-V5vldV8E>* “In short, the Clinton team has been true to form so far. And I’m surprised by little of it.” *Washington Free Beacon: Daniel Halper: “Chasing Hillary” <http://freebeacon.com/politics/chasing-hillary/>* "But the real question being asked in Washington is not whether Hillary can be beaten as such, as it is whether any prominent Democrat has the guts to try to stop her." *Articles:* *The Hill: “Clinton message taking shape” <http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/213062-clinton-message-is-taking-shape>* By Alexandra Jaffe and Amie Parnes July 23, 2014, 6:00 a.m. EDT Hillary Clinton is sharpening her message months ahead of a likely bid for the White House. After a rocky first few months back in the spotlight where she struggled to offer crisp sound bites, Clinton is now test-driving various campaign themes. The former New York senator is signaling that this time around — unlike in 2008 — she will offer a concise and cohesive vision for the country. On Monday, she said during a Facebook question-and-answer session, “The next president should work to grow the economy, increase upward mobility, and decrease inequality.” That statement taps into key Democratic rallying points that appeal to independents as well as the liberal base pining for a potential Elizabeth Warren candidacy. She hasn’t offered much policy details, but there’s plenty of time for that. “We’ve reached a point in our life when we think you really shouldn’t run for office if you don’t have a clear idea of what you can do and a unique contribution you can make and you can outline that,” former President Bill Clinton told CNN this week. “Now that the book [tour] is done, she wants time to think about that and work through it. I think so much of politics is background noise, and we don’t need the background noise anymore.” But as necessary as it is for the former first lady to come up with a simple message — the lack of which, Clinton allies say, was perhaps a fatal flaw of her 2008 campaign — it’s also a difficult task. In essence, Clinton needs her own “hope and change” theme. Clinton allies say one is emerging. “Hillary Clinton has made it clear that should she run for president, her forward-thinking agenda will be reflective of her life’s work — leveling the playing field and giving everyone a chance to succeed,” said Adrienne Watson, a spokeswoman for Correct the Record, a pro-Clinton super-PAC. “She said very clearly, just this month, that the current disparity must be fixed so that hard work is rewarded and our system works for everyone.” The current themes are emerging after Clinton and her inner circle pieced together the missteps of the 2008 bid. A Democratic strategist said one of the biggest reasons Clinton lost to President Obama is because she didn’t demonstrate that she had a clear path for moving the country forward. Clinton, the operative said, acted as though she was the inevitable nominee. “At every campaign stop you heard Obama say, ‘I want to see the country do x, y and z and that’s why I’m running for president of the United States of America.’ She failed to do that. She relied too much on the sentiment that she was the best person for the job without really explaining why.” In her book, Hard Choices, the former secretary of State wrote that potential presidential candidates should consider it their responsibility to “renew the American Dream.” “Having lost in 2008, I know that nothing is guaranteed, nothing can be taken for granted. I also know that the most important questions anyone considering running must answer are not ‘Do you want to be President?’ or ‘Can you win?’” she wrote. “They are, ‘What’s your vision for America?’ And ‘Can you lead us there?’” Clinton announced her 2008 campaign by proclaiming, “I’m in, and I’m in to win.” It’s a challenge for Clinton to craft a fresh vision because her campaign will operate in the shadow of her husband’s presidency. She will be asked to answer what went well and what went wrong over those eight years. Speaking to talk show host Charlie Rose on PBS last week, Clinton offered the outlines of a potential campaign rationale. “You have to run a very specific campaign that talks about the changes you want to make in order to tackle growth, which is the hand maiden of inequality,” she said. She offered her husband’s economic policies as an example of what would work to reduce inequality, and implicitly knocked Republican economic theories, a hint at where her own platform would end up. “We still have people in positions of political leadership who argue that trickle-down economics, supply side economics work. There is no convincing evidence of that,” she said. “So what you need if you’re going to run for president or run for any important position is to be absolutely clear about what you will do and to make the case relentlessly about that.” A former senior aide to Clinton on her 2008 campaign dismissed concerns that she would be weighed down by her husband’s record, arguing she can easily distance herself from other policies by simply saying, “We live in a different world.” The ex-staffer said Clinton’s vision will also look “completely different” from 2008 because “we’re not in the same place.” “We were at war and voter polling indicated that people were still legitimately concerned with terrorism. That’s reality one. And reality two is that we won’t have someone like Mark Penn who came in and messed everything up with bad messaging,” the aide added. Penn was a senior strategist for Clinton’s 2008 campaign. Skepticism from the progressive base is a 2008 issue that Clinton will have to address head on. Calls from the left for Warren (D) to run in 2016 have grown ever louder as the freshman senator from Massachusetts has been hitting the trail for Democratic candidates this cycle and revving up the base with fiery, populist rhetoric. Clinton faces the challenge, said Mike Lux, a former Clinton White House aide, of deciding “strategically, politically, policy wise, how much distance to try to create between her and Wall Street,” which has traditionally been a strong backer of the Clintons. “I think good politicians — and I think Hillary is a good politician — are good at threading needles, and I think there’s probably a way to do it. But the danger when you’re trying to thread a needle is that you poke both sides, because you try to play it both ways,” Lux said. Lux added she might ultimately have to apologize for supporting some policies, such as the deregulation of the banks that contributed to the financial crisis, that have given progressives pause. But a former Hillary Clinton aide said if she runs, she would make a credible case on reducing inequality. “The totality of her record is very much about equality and fairness,” the ex-staffer said. A former Obama 2008 campaign aide said Clinton would pummel Warren, who has repeatedly said she’s not running. “Hillary has more than redeemed herself with many through her services as secretary of State,” the former Obama campaign aide said. “Her leadership skills as an executive are hardly in dispute now.” The ex-Obama staffer added, “Clinton has done so much more to co-opt the base groups in the past eight years. Yes, Warren will be the left-of-center darling, but I think she’s going to be outgunned by every metric. “I also think that the left-wing base have grown up a little,” the former Obama aide continued. “They realize that the shiny new object can only do so much in a polarized, gridlocked capital.” *Huffington Post opinion: Allida Black: “Blazing a Trail: Hillary Clinton, Advocate for Children and the Indigent” <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/allida-black/blazing-a-trail-hillary-clinton_b_5610884.html>* By Allida Black July 22, 2014, 7:08 p.m. EDT If we are going to have a discussion about Hillary Clinton's legal career, then let's be sure the whole story is told - one that explains both her commitment and her pioneering advocacy for abused children and the indigent in need of counsel. To tell this story, you need to return to the mid-1970s, when the nation had no common legal standard for abused and neglected children, the poor had little access to legal counsel, rape was concealed rather than prosecuted, and the nation, especially the South, offered few services to those survived the horror of rape. Hillary Rodham started law school in the fall of 1969. Child abuse was seen as family matter and was swept under the rug; and children had few protections under the law. A few bold lawyers tackled this and Hillary, the law student, stood with them. Soon Hillary was at the forefront of legal campaigns to protect children and represent those too poor to pay a lawyer. She helped shape legal aid clinics, researched child abuse and neglect, and represented those who had been assaulted or abused. As she wrote in Living History, her work on behalf of abuse victims "went hand-in-hand with my assignments at the New Haven Legal Services office," as both stemmed from her realization "that what I wanted to do with the law was to give a voice to [those] who were not being heard." The legal aid system was haphazard and undefined. Even though the 6th Amendment granted criminal defendants in federal cases the right "to have the assistance of counsel," it took until the 1930s for indigent defendants in federal cases to secure counsel, and another 30 years for the Supreme Court to apply that right to indigents charged in state felony cases. Even then the Court left many key questions about legal aid unanswered. The demand for legal aid lawyers swamped existing legal pools. Hillary spent her years after law school tackling both these challenges. In 1973, she went to work at the newly formed Children's Defense Fund, the country's leading child advocacy organization. After moving to Fayetteville, Arkansas, in 1974, she taught criminal procedure at the law school and ran its legal aid clinic. In early 1975, Hillary was appointed by a judge to represent an indigent man charged with rape. Hillary wrestled with the assignment, especially since a young child was involved. She asked to be removed from the case, but the court denied her request. I can only speculate on the gut-wrenching torment this must have given Hillary. She found herself torn between the two legal values she cherished. But in the end, she could not discount that her values and professional ethics mandated that all indigent defendants, not just those accused of nonviolent crimes, receive adequate counsel. But the record is clear how Hillary responded as soon as the trial ended. She helped launch the first rape crisis hotline in Arkansas and strove to give women the medical, legal, and social support they needed. This was a bold act. Rape Crisis Centers and hotlines were rare. Indeed, crisis centers in Washington, D.C. and Boston had only opened their doors in 1972 and 1973. In the South, only Memphis and Athens, Georgia followed suit. It wasn't long after that I first learned about Hillary. In 1975, I helped start the first rape crisis center in Atlanta. I was trying to navigate the legal issues related to child assault victims, but the law was so new, I was lost, so I asked for help. Everywhere I called, the experts would say, "Do you know Hillary Rodham? She's who you need to talk to." Less than four years after graduation, Hillary had already established herself as one of the country's leading advocates for abused and neglected children. Her groundbreaking articles in the Harvard Educational Review and Yale Law Review spurred urgently-needed legal reforms. While at home, her leadership of Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families gave voice to abused and neglected children. The same can be said for Hillary's cutting edge work to expand legal aid. As manager of the Fayetteville legal aid clinic, she saw how the legal standard used to determine whether a defendant qualified for aid was "an impossible standard to meet" and she "wanted to change the law." And indeed she did. In 1977, President Carter appointed Hillary to the Legal Services Corporation, a federal program charged with expanding access to legal aid. Hillary was the first woman to chair the corporation, and under her leadership, funding more than tripled from $90 million to $300 million. Hillary's early leadership in these two fundamental civic values is often overshadowed by her other political and diplomatic successes. It should not be. It shows us who she is, why she took the actions she did, and how she will continue to lead. *KPCC-FM (C.A.): “Hillary Clinton on Gaza, ‘Hard Choices’ and being called a '20th century candidate'” <http://www.scpr.org/programs/airtalk/2014/07/22/38484/hillary-clinton-on-ukraine-gaza-and-the-hard-choic/>* By AirTalk July 22, 2014, 10:38 a.m. EDT Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton responded on Tuesday to charges from Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) that she is a "20th century candidate" by defending the Obama administration's first term and saying that "every election is about the future." On Morning Edition Tuesday, Rubio said: "I think she's extremely vulnerable on her record. The truth of the matter is she was the Secretary of State during an administration that has had virtually no major successes on foreign policy. In fact, their failures on foreign policy are stark, and we'll remind them of them every single day, and she'll have to answer for that. And the other is I think she's just a 20th century candidate." Clinton is currently touring the U.S. promoting her new memoir "Hard Choices," in which she writes about the four years she served as the nation's top diplomat under President Barack Obama. We were lucky enough to snag some time with her to discuss a number of issues, including Rubio's comments on her potential candidacy. On Rubio's '20th century candidate' remark: "I wrote a whole book called 'Hard Choices' that details a lot of the important successes of the first term of President Obama (and maybe I should send a copy of it to my Republican friends). Secondly, elections are about differences, as we know, but every election is about the future and certainly anyone who wishes to run for president has to make it clear how the experience that you've had in the past and what you believe and how you have acted on those beliefs will translate into positive results for the American people. "I will be standing up and speaking out in favor of the changes that I think we need to make to improve life for middle-class Americans, to give every kid a chance to go to college without being bankrupted and disabled by student debt, to try and resolve our immigration challenges in a way that is keeping with our values, and so much else. I know that elections are about the future and I look forward in engaging in that kind of debate." On whether she'll run for president: "We have an election this November, which is a pretty consequential one, because it'll determine the control of the Senate, and obviously I strongly am committed to doing what I can to keep the Senate in Democratic hands. And so I think we all should be focused on that election and not look ahead to 2016. But by the end of the year, or early next year, people will start making decisions, and of course, I will be among them... "You certainly have to make the decision, when and how you go pubic with it, that's up to each individual, but from my perspective, I think it's incredibly important that we stay focused on these midterm elections — that historically have a lower turnout than presidential elections — because so much is at stake. After we've done everything we can for the 2014 elections, the Democratic Party, the country, we can turn our attention to the upcoming presidential race." On medical marijuana and federal enforcement: "Honestly, I don't think we've done enough research yet to say what the effects are and what they could be on different people with different physical or psychological issues, different ages — yes, medical first and foremost, we ought to be doing more to make sure that we know how marijuana would interact with other prescription drugs and the like. But we also have to know how even medical marijuana impacts our kids and our communities. But the states are the laboratories of democracy, and we're seeing states pass laws that enable their citizens to have access to medical marijuana under certain conditions, so we have the opportunity to try to study those. And then Colorado and Washington have proceeded to permit recreational use. And at the same time, we're seeing the beginnings of important criminal justice reforms. So I'm a big believer in acquiring evidence, and I think we should see what kind of results we get, both from medical marijuana and from recreational marijuana before we make any far-reaching conclusions... I think the feds should be attuned to the way marijuana is still used as a gateway drug and how the drug cartels from Latin America use marijuana to get footholds in states, so there can't be a total absence of law enforcement, but what I want to see, and I think we should be much more focused on this, is really doing good research so we know what it is we're approving." On teacher tenure and the Vergara decision: "I haven't read the Vergara decision, so I don't know the details, but I would make just a few points. First, I think everybody should agree that good teachers are at the heart of high-quality learning, and we need more cooperative partnerships between innovative unions, especially at the local level, and with local school districts, with parents, with teachers, and not the adversarial approach that I think has not worked to the benefit of our kids. And we have to get back to what really does work for kids, because these education debates are really toxic. ... Anything that stands truly in the way based on reliable evidence to the well-being and educational attainment of our most disadvantaged kids we should tackle systematically. But I think it's probably unwise to be making education decisions by judicial decision." On the conflict in Israel and Gaza: We obviously want to help bring an end to the conflict in Gaza, we also want to support Israel’s right to self-defense. And we want to ensure that lethal rockets don’t continue to make their way to Gaza under the control of Hamas. You may have heard that American airlines have just been ordered by the FAA not to fly into Ben Gurion Airport because a rocket just landed very close to Ben Gurion Airport. So that certainly is an issue that we have to be paying attention to. Similarly, with Ukraine, when an unarmed civilian commercial airplane is shot down by insurgents who have been armed and equipped by Russia, that raises a lot of issues for anybody in America who is flying these days, so you have to look at all of this in a thoughtful way, and you have to meet high bars to do anything that might lead to anything with military support. ...I’ve been on the phone many times with Prime Minister Netanyahu. I have a whole chapter in my book about negotiating the November 2012 cease fire that prevented a ground invasion by the Israelis into Gaza, because at that time Hamas was firing rockets into Israel…I would certainly be urging that he try to accomplish the military objectives — which I have to say Larry, are legitimate ones: To destroy the tunnels that are providing pathways into Israel by armed Hamas fighters and destroy the stockpiles of rockets that are getting more accurate and raining down now on the entire territory of Israel — and I would say, 'Mr. Prime Minister, please move as carefully and expeditiously as is possible to finish the military objectives, because although you do have a right to protect your country, we want to do everything we can to limit, if not eliminate, civilian casualties... I would urge the prime minister to accept any additional offers of cease fire, because Israel should demonstrate its willingness to end the military conflict, but of course, Hamas should be required to do the same." On the embassy attack in Benghazi: "I took general responsibility immediately, because I was responsible for the State Department and the people there, but as I write in a very thorough chapter in my book, I am not a security expert. I would not pretend to be one… Obviously it was a tragic event, and I immediately put together an independent review board and they found that there were problems in the assessment of security requests in the department… I think it’s important for Americans to realize that our facilities around the world are often attacked. We had a terrible attack with Ronald Reagan was president — 258 Americans killed in Beirut. There were attacks when my husband was president. We lost 12 Americans and many Africans in attacks on our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania… It’s a dangerous world out there and we do the best we can, but we don’t retreat. We don’t say, 'OK, it’s a dangerous world, therefore we can’t be out there, and we can’t be picking up information, and we can’t representing the United States.'" Guests: Hillary Rodham Clinton, author of the new memoir, Hard Choices (Simon & Schuster, 2014). She served as the United States Secretary of State from 2009 to 2013 and is former senator from New York from 2001 to 2009 Jonathan Wilcox, Republican Strategist; former speechwriter for Governor Pete Wilson Matt Rodriguez, Democratic strategist, Rodriguez Strategies; former senior Obama advisor in 2008 *Washington Post blog: Post Politics: “Hillary Clinton responds to Rubio: ‘Every election is about the future’” <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/07/22/hillary-clinton-responds-to-rubio-every-election-is-about-the-future/>* By Sean Sullivan July 22, 2014, 4:46 p.m. EDT Former secretary of state Hillary Rodham Clinton responded Tuesday to Sen. Marco Rubio's charge that she is a "20th century candidate," suggesting that all elections are about what's next. "I know that elections are about the future, and I would look forward in engaging in that kind of debate," Clinton said in an interview with "Airtalk" on Southern California public radio station KPCC. Clinton said that voters need to evaluate a candidate's record to determine how the candidate will behave in the future. "Every election is about the future. And certainly anyone who wishes to run for president has to make it clear how the experience that you've had in the past and what you believe and how you have acted on those beliefs will translate into positive results for the American people," Clinton said. "And I will be standing up and speaking out in favor of the changes that I think we need to make." Clinton sounded like a presidential candidate, vowing to take on issues like student loan debt, immigration and improving the lives of middle class Americans. But she reiterated that has not decided whether she will run in 2016. Rubio (R-Fla.), who is also a potential candidate, suggested in an interview broadcast earlier in the day that Clinton does not offer a forward-looking platform. "I just think she's a 20th century candidate," Rubio told NPR in an interview published Tuesday. "I think she does not offer an agenda for moving America forward in the 21st century -- at least not up to now." Rubio also criticized President Obama's foreign policy, insisting that Clinton has an "extremely vulnerable" record on that front. Clinton responded by pointing to the accomplishment she details in her book, "Hard Choices." "Maybe I should send a copy of it to my Republican friend," she quipped. *Associated Press: “Seeking The Limelight, Biden Courts Key Dem Groups” <http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_BIDEN?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT>* [No Writer Mentioned] July 22, 2014, 6:17 p.m. EDT Caught in Hillary Rodham Clinton's perpetual shadow, Joe Biden is working to boost his political profile among key Democratic voting blocs, a move that could help the vice president fashion himself as a more liberal alternative in the 2016 presidential race. Major speeches this week to the NAACP and the Urban League will give Biden prime opportunities to court African-American voters who twice helped deliver the White House to President Barack Obama. He'll do his part to help Democrats in the battleground state of Nevada at a campaign rally Wednesday. And last week, Biden wooed liberals at a pair of grassroots summits, basking in the adoration of activists who chanted "We love Joe." Biden knows he's not the first name that comes to mind as the Democratic Party's likeliest next presidential candidate. That distinction belongs to Clinton, who dominates in early primary polls and has well-funded political groups trying to draft her to run. But in recent days, Biden has emerged as a frequent headliner for left-leaning groups, keeping his name high on the list of Democrats who could challenge Clinton or pursue the nomination if she doesn't run. He's joined on that list by Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley, who are pitching populist themes that appeal to those in the party's liberal wing who insist Clinton doesn't have a lock on the nomination. "I don't take a back seat to anyone when it comes to fighting some of the toughest progressive battles the country has seen," Biden said last week in an energetic speech in Detroit to Netroots Nation. A day earlier, Biden was at Generation Progress in Washington, where he said he'd been on the "front lines" promoting liberal priorities such as income equality and climate change. He reminded listeners of his early backing for gay marriage, noting how he'd come out in support ahead of Obama. Left unsaid: He also beat Clinton to the cause. Biden hasn't announced whether he'll run in 2016, but he maintains close ties to early voting states like Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, and is fundraising aggressively for Democrats this year. He's also differentiated himself from Clinton by stressing his lack of personal wealth just as Clinton was getting flak for raking in massive speaking fees, declaring recently that he was once "the poorest man in Congress." Maria Cardona, a Democratic strategist, said if Biden is considering another run, putting himself in front of the Democratic base is exactly the right strategy. "Until somebody announces, this is anyone's game," Cardona said. "If the vice president knows that he's interested in this, it would be politically stupid for him not to be doing what he's doing." Biden's string of speeches comes as advocacy groups across the country are convening for their annual conventions, and it's not unusual for vice presidents to appear at such events. The vice president's office said Biden doesn't have any other speaking engagements scheduled for the foreseeable future. Biden's remarks Wednesday in Las Vegas to the NAACP, the nation's oldest civil rights organization, precede a Thursday speech at the National Urban League Conference in Ohio, another key presidential state. In between, Biden will rally for House candidate Erin Bilbray, who is running to unseat Rep. Joe Heck, R-Nev. Although Heck is outpacing Bilbray in fundraising, the race has attracted national attention from Democrats. *Associated Press: “Pat Schroeder: Clinton Would Face ‘Subdued Sexism’” <http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TV_CRITICS_WATCH_PAT_SCHROEDER?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT>* [No Writer Mentioned] July 22, 2014, 9:02 p.m. EDT Former House Democrat Pat Schroeder predicts that Hillary Clinton would face "a lot of sexism" if she decides to run for president in 2016. Schroeder served in the House from 1973 to 1997 as the first woman elected to Congress from Colorado. Now 73, she appears in "Makers: Women in Politics," a film airing this fall on PBS. She was asked about Clinton on Tuesday at a summer TV critics' meeting. "She's still going to have a lot of sexism," Schroeder said. "I can't believe there's people saying can she still be a grandmother and be a president. There are people making snide comments about her age. It's a little more subdued sexism, but it's very much there." Clinton, 66, has yet to announce whether she intends to run in 2016. The former first lady, U.S. senator and secretary of state will become a grandmother this year when her daughter Chelsea gives birth. Schroeder said she believes Clinton would bring a different approach to working with critics than President Obama. "She understands how mean they are and she understands she's got to come back at them with more force," Schroeder said. "Obama thought he could bring everyone together. That just isn't working in Washington right now." Schroeder ran for president but withdrew from contention in September 1987. While in Congress, she was the first woman to serve on the House Armed Services Committee. She balanced congressional work with motherhood early in her tenure and was known for her focus on work-family issues. *Real Clear Politics: “Bachmann Says She Might Seek Presidency in 2016” <http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/07/22/bachmann_says_she_might_seek_presidency_in_2016_123419.html>* By Scott Conroy July 22, 2014 Though set to retire from the U.S. House after her term expires at the end of this year, Michele Bachmann may not be done with electoral politics. The Minnesota congresswoman and 2012 Republican presidential candidate told RealClearPolitics on Tuesday that she is considering a second White House run. Bachmann made the revelation during an interview, in which she was asked for her view on whether any Republican women might seek the Oval Office in 2016. “The only thing that the media has speculated on is that it’s going to be various men that are running,” she replied. “They haven’t speculated, for instance, that I’m going to run. What if I decide to run? And there’s a chance I could run.” Bachmann entered the last presidential race in June 2011 as a long-shot contender but was able to use her sway with elements of the Tea Party and an effective media campaign to rise temporarily toward the front of the Republican pack in a deeply fluid race. The high point of her candidacy came in August 2011 when she won the Ames Straw Poll in Iowa. But Bachmann’s campaign soon withered amid a string of gaffes and controversial claims, staff defections, and a rise in the fortunes of other candidates in the race. She ended up finishing in sixth place in the Iowa caucuses less than five months after her Ames triumph, earning just 5 percent of the vote and dropping out the next day. The four-term congresswoman that she would “certainly” reap the benefits of having run once before, if she were to launch a second White House bid. “Like with anything else, practice makes perfect,” she said. “And I think if a person has gone through the process -- for instance, I had gone through 15 presidential debates -- it’s easy to see a person’s improvement going through that.” In November 2012, Bachmann barely managed to hold onto her 6th District seat, defeating hotel executive Jim Graves by 4,298 votes. Last May, she announced that she would not seek a fifth term in the House. Bachmann told RCP that if she decides to run for president again, she will make sure that she has a strong campaign infrastructure in place. “I haven’t made a decision one way or another if I’m going to run again, but I think the organization is probably the key,” she said. “To have an organization and people who surround you who are loyal, who are highly competent, who know how to be able to run the ball down the field in state after state -- because now I think the primary process will be very different this time. It will tighten up; it will be a much shorter run than it was before.” Bachmann said that she is looking at “a lot of different options” for her post-congressional life and that another presidential campaign is just one of them. If she were to run again, Bachmann could struggle to be seen as a credible candidate in what is expected to be a far stronger Republican field in 2016 than the one that she competed in four years earlier. But in the interview, Bachmann alluded to her fundraising prowess as a reason she should be taken seriously, calling herself “one of the top -- if not the top -- fundraisers in the history of the United States Congress.” “And it’s because people saw that I had an authentic voice, and I was fighting for them,” she said. “I wasn’t speaking to them like a politician. I was speaking like a real person who was fighting for what they believed in.” Asked to assess the relative strengths and weaknesses of Hillary Clinton’s potential candidacy, Bachmann said that the presumed 2016 Democratic frontrunner has “fatal problems” related to her tenure as secretary of state that should “disqualify her” from the nation’s highest office. Bachmann suggested that she would zero in on making her own 2016 decision soon after she wraps up her tenure in the House. “I think it’s important to have sufficient time to lay the necessary groundwork to have a really solid campaign and a campaign team put together,” she said. “And I think probably I would think about that decision earlier than I did last time.” *Wall Street Journal opinion: William A. Galston, Brookings Institution: “The Big 2016 Foreign Policy Debates” <http://online.wsj.com/articles/william-a-galston-the-big-2016-foreign-policy-debates-1406071181>* By William A. Galston July 22, 2014, 7:19 p.m. EDT These are tough times for internationalists, liberal and conservative alike. George W. Bush's overreach in Iraq undermined public support for the use of American power overseas, and Barack Obama has done nothing to rebuild it. Large majorities of Americans believe that our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan was a mistake. A July 21 Politico survey of likely voters in battleground states found that only 39% think that we have a responsibility to do something about the mess we left behind in Mesopotamia. The survey also found that by a margin of 3 to 1, Americans reject the sweeping vision Mr. Bush enunciated in his second inaugural address and would instead confine the use of American military power to direct threats to our national security. In the same poll, completed before the downing of the Malaysia Airlines 3786.KU -2.17% passenger plane, only 17% thought we should get more involved in the confrontation between Russia and Ukraine. The desire for some nation-building here at home is palpable and understandable. Nevertheless, the forthcoming presidential campaign is likely to feature an unusually spirited debate—within as well as between the parties—about America's role in the world. The outline of this debate among Republicans is easy to foresee. Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul has articulated a coherent message of government restraint abroad as well as at home and has proved adept at making a libertarian-leaning agenda more broadly acceptable to conservatives. The young adults who flocked to his father's rallies seem especially receptive to his critique of military intervention and NSA surveillance. Texas Gov. Rick Perry, whose political instincts seem to have improved since 2012, has publicly challenged Mr. Paul for his alleged isolationism, and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio has positioned himself as his generation's torchbearer for a muscular internationalism based on American leadership. Most Republican contenders are likely to side with their party's national-defense orthodoxy of recent decades. Still, Mr. Paul's self-confidence and political skills could carry him far in a divided field and might even gain him the nomination. That would be an earthquake within the Republican Party and present a tough choice for staunch hawks like John McCain and Lindsey Graham. Mr. McCain has publicly said as much. Although it may not occur, the Democrats are poised for a similar debate. The only significant difference between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton in 2008 was her vote for the Iraq war, which probably cost her the presidential nomination. Little has changed. During her tenure as secretary of state, Mrs. Clinton was among the administration's toughest voices during internal debates. She supported the use of American air power in Libya, and the Navy SEAL raid that killed Osama bin Laden. (Both Vice President Joe Biden and Defense Secretary Robert Gates opposed it.) Strong legal support from Mrs. Clinton's State Department for President Obama's expansive use of drones surprised many observers. She was an advocate for the 2009 surge of U.S. forces in Afghanistan and favored maintaining a residual American force in Iraq after the end of our combat missions. While not opposed to nuclear negotiations with Iran, she has expressed mistrust about Iranian intentions and has opposed a policy of "containing" a nuclear-armed Tehran if diplomacy fails. As president, it seems reasonable to conclude, Mrs. Clinton would make decisions about using American power based on prudential considerations, not instinctive aversion. For the record: Even though I opposed the Iraq war from the start, I believe that Hillary Clinton's judgment on defense and foreign policy issues has been right far more often than it was wrong and that she would serve our country well as commander in chief. But rank-and-file Democrats are no less dovish today than they were in 2008. Although attention has focused recently on the clash between "populist" and "Wall Street" Democrats, the potential for an intraparty debate on foreign policy seems just as real. While Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren has consistently denied her intention to run if Mrs. Clinton enters the race, Vice President Biden has made no such pledge. Estes Kefauver, the 1956 Democratic vice-presidential nominee, once remarked that the only known cure for persistent presidential ambition was "embalming fluid." Mr. Biden is well-positioned to wage a left-leaning campaign on foreign policy as well as economic issues. Although he voted for the Iraq-war authorization in 2002, he argued vehemently against the Bush administration's surge in 2007, proposing instead the quasi-partition of Iraq into autonomous Kurdish, Sunni and Shiite zones. As vice president, he argued just as hard against Gen. David Petraeus's proposal (backed by then-Secretary of State Clinton) for a massive military surge and nation-building policy in Afghanistan. And he has taken U.S. military action against Iran off the table, declaring that "war with Iran is not just a bad option. It would be a disaster." These issues matter, not just for the U.S., but for the world. During the Cold War, American retreat usually meant Soviet advance. Now it most often means anarchy. The question is whether the American people can be persuaded that they should care. *Politico Magazine: Daniel Halper: “My Battle With the Clintons” <http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/07/battle-with-the-clintons-109254.html?ml=m_po#.U8-V5vldV8E>* By Daniel Halper July 22, 2014 When I started to write Clinton, Inc: The Audacious Rebuilding of a Political Machine, I knew the reaction to expect. I was well aware that the former (and perhaps future) first family and its massive retinue of loyalty enforcers, professional defamers and assorted gadflies would rue my intent to examine the real Clintons—especially in my search for the real Chelsea Clinton, who until now has been a media-protected nonperson despite her aggressive public activities on her family’s behalf and despite raking in hundreds of thousands of dollars from her role as former first daughter. MSNBC’s David Shuster learned this the hard way when he was suspended from the network for saying, “But doesn’t it seem like Chelsea’s sort of being pimped out in some weird sort of way?” in a live TV hit on how the former first daughter was being used by her mother’s 2008 campaign. The Clintons hit the roof over the single relatively banal comment, as I report in my book, and lobbied the head of parent company GE to get Shuster off the air. I also had a feeling that some of the sources I spoke to, for and not-for attribution, including alleged Clinton mistresses who’ve stayed out of the press and remain loyal to Bill, would alert the Clintons to what I was doing and help them prepare a counterattack. But even if I hadn’t known it, many, many people in Washington, on the left and right, popped up to warn me of what to expect from the Clinton PR team. Other authors—legitimate ones with serious pedigrees—who’d written about the Clintons said they were threatened and verbally attacked. Of course, nearly everyone in Washington has seen the much-vaunted Clinton PR machine in action. It’s very predictable. Here’s how it works: 1) Media intimidation tactics: Following their usual method of operation, the first thing Team Clinton would do is attempt a media blackout. A producer with CNN said I’d never be able to get any airtime on her show because the Clintons punish networks that give space to their perceived enemies. So far, even claims in my book that were well sourced with on-the-record quotes—such as Bill Clinton offering counsel to John McCain in how to defeat Barack Obama in 2008—have been all but ignored by the mainstream media. 2) Defame and attack: There would be repeated efforts to turn me into a kook or right-wing hit man. Though they haven’t yet gone so far to label me a “crazed stalker” like they did with Monica Lewinsky, the reliable Clinton aide Nick Merrill has repeatedly deployed a classic Clinton spin line on my work—before it was even on sale, mind you, and presumably he hadn’t yet read it. “It’s sad to see Daniel Halper join the discredited and disgraced ranks” of other authors supposedly out to get them at all costs, he emailed the Huffington Post. Sadly, I received no credit from the Clintons or from Merrill for the praise of both Bill (that he’s a “political genius) and Hillary (that she’s “intensely likable”) in various parts of the book. Merrill also claimed I was just out “to make a buck.” Which I take it means that Bill and Hillary Clinton donated all the proceeds of their millions in book deals to charity? 3) The “old news” trick: A favorite gambit is to make any allegation unfavorable to the Clintons as old news. One of the best examples of this came from Clinton media minder Philippe Reines about a book by Jeff Gerth: “Is it possible to be quoted yawning?”Yawn. No biggie. You reporters are fools for even covering it. Daniel Halper is author of Clinton, Inc.: The Audacious Rebuilding of a Political Machine and online editor of The Weekly Standard. 4) The dark arts: Some prominent media personalities with experience covering the Clintons in the 1990s told me that their team would have no problem with, say, copying every page of someone’s manuscript, sending it out to reporters ahead of publication, and then depicting it as a right-wing smear job. Funny thing, that exact thing happened with my book, as POLITICO noted. At first, I resisted the temptation to conclude the Clintons were behind this, but now certain events have led me to believe the Clinton team has had copies of this book for some time. Why might they leak the book early? The best explanation is so that the book’s contents could come out well before publication and the Clintons can then rely on another standard mode of operation—denouncing any unfavorable allegations as “old news.” *** In short, the Clinton team has been true to form so far. And I’m surprised by little of it. What has surprised me, however, is what the Clintonistas are already doing to their own. In the introduction to my book, I describe what I was told about the Clinton operation. As I put it there, “Nearly everyone in Washington has a Clinton story, or two, or two hundred, but many are afraid to air them publicly or on the record, out of fear of retribution or attack from ruthless Clinton aides and their media allies. … Thus it is pretty clear why less powerful figures inside Clinton, Inc. insist on anonymity. The panic among Clintonites, past and present, is palpable.” It’s one thing to hear about it in the abstract. It’s quite another to see it in action. To wit: While I was still reporting on my book, James Carville’s office called, seemingly out of the blue, to grill me on whom I’d already spoken to. I obviously refused to indulge the questioner. Someone from Bill Clinton’s publisher went to mine, HarperCollins, asking questions about my book and what I might be planning. I write in my book that “Clintonites are known to scour through magazine articles and books to try to decipher blind quotes and tie them to a suspect.” I believed that was true. But now I know it is. This is in fact happening with my book as I write this, I’ve learned, and has been happening for days, if not weeks. Some are throwing other people to the wolves. Other Clintonites named in the book are heading for the hills. Some preposterously denied that they ever talked to me. Perhaps it’s buyer’s remorse—but more likely they know the Clinton code of omerta. I’ve found the task of covering the Clintons fascinating. They’re not exactly the people we see on television. Although many believe Hillary is the cold, calculating and cunning Clinton and Bill is the emotive and gregarious, the exact opposite seems to be a more accurate portrayal of who they really are. As for Chelsea? It would appear from tip to toe she’s daddy’s little girl—and the wizard behind the curtain. It’s been a wild ride, and I’ve really been intrigued by my encounters with some of the (many) kooky characters in Clinton, Inc. Maybe I’ll have to do a sequel. *Washington Free Beacon: Daniel Halper: “Chasing Hillary” <http://freebeacon.com/politics/chasing-hillary/>* By Daniel Halper July 23, 2014, 5:00 a.m. EDT [Subtitle:] Book: Biden, O’Malley, Schweitzer, Klobuchar, Emanuel, Cuomo, and Warren preparing to run if Hillary Clinton bows out Among Democrats who hope Hillary Clinton doesn’t run—and their number is larger than one might think—the complaints are familiar. Age and stamina are the obvious considerations. “Look at Obama’s hair color, just like George Bush’s,” says a prominent Washington insider. “Somebody who’s seventy shouldn’t be president. And I think that’s going to be an interesting issue against her, but who in the Democratic Party is going to have the guts to take on that machine?” A former Clinton campaign adviser is equally blunt. “This is gonna sound superficial”—which is an understatement—“but men do age better than women,” he says. “At seventy she’s not gonna be—it’s not gonna be great.” Democrats fear she is too radioactive. One of many prominent D.C. Democrats who will only comment on background out of fear of inciting Clintonian wrath complains that “she will lose the general because her negatives are so high.” Then there is the not-so-secret fact that she is not a very good candidate. Hillary is often compared to the kind of politician always better in concept than as an actual flesh-and-blood candidate. Many compare her unfavorably to Al Gore or John Kerry or even Mitt Romney, stiff policy wonks with difficulty making personal connections. Some will chalk this up to sexism—or at least the difference between men and women politicians. It is not that Hillary is not a good politician, they will say, but that American politics is not used to female candidates. “We are only now growing used to the style of women in politics. You know, they’re not backslappers, even if they are natural politicians,” says political adviser Bob Shrum, who helped lead Al Gore’s and John Kerry’s presidential campaigns. Hillary, he insists, has grown into a natural politician. But the real question being asked in Washington is not whether Hillary can be beaten as such, as it is whether any prominent Democrat has the guts to try to stop her. The most obvious primary challenger, of course, is the one most often discounted. Vice President Joe Biden will turn seventy-four in late 2016. Gaffe-prone and perennially underestimated, Biden is expected to quietly step aside for the Clintons, with whom he’s had a long and friendly relationship. Unless, of course, you ask Joe Biden. Maybe Obama has forgotten all the trash talk Hillary leveled against Obama back then—but Biden hasn’t. “You decide which makes more sense—entrust our country to someone who is ready on Day One . . . or to put America in the hands of someone with little national or international experience, who started running for president the day he arrived in the United States Senate,” Hillary Clinton told a reporter in 2007. “He was a part-time state senator for a few years, and then he came to the Senate and immediately started running for president,”1 she said in early 2007. And that was just the stuff she said on the record. After Hillary left the secretary of state’s office, the world went on, and so did the administration. If anything, it was hard to notice she was gone. Except for personnel: Obama was free to shift over his traveling campaign press secretary, Jen Psaki, the dashing redhead who had been so harsh to Hillary on the campaign trail in 2008 that she was not allowed near the State Department until Hillary was out of Foggy Bottom. And most of the Clinton loyalists who had come to the State Department four years earlier left to cool their heels in various positions out of government while Hillary cooled hers. On policy, John Kerry, some thought, did more for the administration in his first year than she did in her four years. He was able to carry out a key goal of President Obama’s, by beginning to work out the structure of what could be a landmark deal with Iran. And with respect to Syria, Kerry gained plaudits from pundits—and the dovish Obama—for his ability to wage hard-nosed diplomacy by publicly signaling that a deal brokered with the Russians could avert an American strike in the Middle East country. Hillary didn’t accomplish any of that. Instead, she claimed credit for the miles she flew, as if that mattered. A former high-ranking official in the Clinton administration recently spoke to his friend Biden about Hillary’s 2016 maneuvering. “You going to step aside for her?” he asked. “No,” the vice president replied confidently. “Fuck no.” Traditionally Biden’s stance might pose problems for Hillary. After all, vice presidents tend to win the nominations of their parties. But Biden has a major drawback. He lacks the support, even the quiet support, of the president he serves. None of this has stopped the vice president from making plans, however. Biden has run for president twice before—in 1988, when he was forced to drop out over plagiarism charges, and again in 2008, when he was barely an asterisk against Obama and Clinton. And he still has the bug, fiercely jealous of the tendency in the press to write him off in favor of endless stories about Hillary’s maneuverings. “And let me not forget Joe Biden, because he will call me this after- noon and remind me,” Democrat Donna Brazile once half joked during a Sunday talk show appearance where she discussed the Clinton campaign in waiting. She isn’t the only one. The vice president or his senior aides at his behest will call reporters, pundits, anyone he feels is not giving his candidacy the credibility it deserves. He wants respect. Though stranger things have happened in politics—like a one-term senator defeating the Clintons in 2008—few give Biden much chance of a surprise victory. One former Senate colleague says Biden could never be president. “He makes people like him, but lack of discipline is his weakness,” the senator says. “She’s far more disciplined and calculating.” “If you take a look at every important thing that’s come out of the White House, Biden’s had his finger on it,” says a Clinton aide. “So, people underestimate Biden, and part of being a VP is being derided to a certain extent.” Still, he adds, “He can’t beat Hillary in ’16 because she starts with eighteen million votes. Everyone that voted for her in ’08 wants her to run again.” Shrum agrees. “I think [Biden] will recognize that reality,” he says. Allies of the vice president of course disagree with this assessment. Biden also knows there is a chance that the Clintons are bluffing. Signaling that she’s running for president to get attention, speaking fees, book deals, but not really ready to hop in. Biden, too, is gambling on her health. So are some Republicans. “I must admit I’m completely befuddled,” admits Bush strategist Karl Rove. “My brain says yes, she’s the front- runner. My gut tells me we don’t know everything about the health issue.” But if Hillary is bluffing, she’s doing an excellent job. Leaving nothing to chance, the undeclared candidate has gone out of her way to take swipes at Biden—something she wouldn’t likely do if her 2016 effort is just a feint. At a private event in Georgia in 2013, for example, she was asked a question about the bin Laden raid. “She took 25 minutes to answer,” a Republican state legislator present at the gathering told the Atlanta newspaper. “Time and time again . . . Clinton mentioned the vice president’s opposition to the raid, while characterizing herself and Leon Panetta, then director of the Central Intelligence Agency, as the action’s most fierce advocates, the paper reported.” Dr. Jill Biden, the vice president’s wife, is said to be actively “counting down the days” until she can return to “normal” life. Some close to the Bidens speculate that she would “kill him if he decided to run for president.” Especially a race she doesn’t think he can win. That appears to be the only thing holding back a potential Biden 2016 run. Among those not so secretly preparing the ground in case of a Hillary demurral: Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota; Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel; and New York governor Andrew Cuomo. But they seem to believe, as one Democratic strategist put it, that “Hillary gets the first right of refusal.” Observers believe the more potent threat is the little-known but aggressive governor of Maryland, Martin O’Malley. O’Malley would be fifty-four years old on Inauguration Day 2017—fifteen years younger than Hillary Clinton. He is a handsome man with impeccable liberal credentials, and “a fucking political animal,” according to Maryland politicos who know him. Political consultants in Maryland say O’Malley is someone who could do serious damage to Hillary Clinton in the primary. One listed his assets in a race against the frontrunner: “He is mean. He has a long history of negative campaigning. He’s a good fundraiser.” In other words he’s a younger Bill Clinton. “He’s very Bill Clinton-esque,” another consultant says. “He’s very good shaking hands and politicking.” He’s even rumored to have women issues like the former president, though none have ever been proven. Former Vermont governor Howard Dean, who might have been expected to support O’Malley in a primary challenge, especially considering his implicit criticisms of the Clintons when Dean ran for president himself in 2004, has fallen under the Clinton sway. The once-maverick liberal firebrand has become increasingly establishment—in fact, he chaired the Democratic National Committee during the Obama-Hillary race. “I will support her against any other foreseeable Democratic candidate,” Dean told me. But he held open at least a little wiggle room. “I like Martin O’Malley a lot.” Disclosing that he had a recent conversation with O’Malley—“I’m not going to tell you what the conversation was,” he snapped—he adds, “I think O’Malley is very serious” about running for president in 2016. By setting himself up as Obama’s true heir, O’Malley is poised to run to Hillary’s left. He’s been an enthusiastic backer of Obamacare and vowed to lead the nation in sign-ups for the controversial program. Major Democrats know that he’s going to be a problem for her. So they’re trying to find a way to give him something to do. He’s tested the New Hampshire waters, according to CNN, where he played a video summary of his career starting as mayor of Baltimore, which said, “Martin O’Malley formulated an assault on hopelessness.” And it claimed that he transformed Baltimore while curbing crime and took his good governance to the Maryland State House in Annapolis. It was a three-and-a-half-minute-long campaign “video befitting a national political convention-style rollout,” said CNN. And of course it was released in New Hampshire, traditionally the first state in the nation to hold a primary. As a Maryland Republican says, “He’s running, unless they buy him off.” The most obvious payoff, of course, would be the vice presidency. A former Clinton aide envisions a scenario in which Hillary offers him the job to keep him out of the race, or to have him run as a “puppet” opposition candidate. “He’s good looking, Irish Catholic, and young,” the aide reasons. “She’s gonna need some youth, so Martin is the logical pick.” Brian Schweitzer, a former Democratic governor from Montana, is another wild card. He’s positioning himself as an anti-corporatist, gun- toting populist who’s not shy about bringing up Hillary’s support for both the war in Iraq and the war in Afghanistan. He’s already done that in Iowa, the state to hold the first caucus in the nation—and one where Hillary got tripped up in 2008 when she lost the contest there to Obama. Antiwar rhetoric is a political weapon that’s previously proven to be lethal on the political left—after all, it’s not at all dissimilar from the public positions that Barack Obama was able to use to undercut the candidacy of Hillary Clinton in the 2008 Democratic primary. Schweitzer might not be known yet, but that doesn’t mean he can’t level the primary field just by appearing in many debates (and performing well) before a nationally broadcast audience. The same is true for Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts. Her very candidacy would undercut Hillary’s bid to be the first female president and her liberal credentials are superb. Before being a U.S. senator she was the brains in the Obama administration behind the establishment of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. She is no pragmatist. She is purely an ideologue—which can be very helpful for riling up the base in a party primary. Then of course there is the possibility of California Gov. Jerry Brown, who ran a stronger than expected primary campaign against Bill Clinton in 1992. Brown, a popular and well-known figure on the political left, has refused to rule out a run. But at seventy-six, and with a personal life that long has been the subject of a whispering campaign, Brown is an unlikely threat. He most likely seems to be basking in the attention that comes from having his name mentioned. *Calendar:* *Sec. Clinton's upcoming appearances as reported online. Not an official schedule.* · ~ July 23-27 – Boston, MA: Sec. Clinton speaks at the Ameriprise Financial Conference (Politico <http://www.politico.com/story/2014/07/george-w-bush-hillary-clinton-substitute-speaker-109010.html> ) · July 23 – Oakland, CA: Sec. Clinton helps launch new Too Small To Fail effort in Oakland (Twitter <https://twitter.com/danmericaCNN/status/491357078083371008>) · July 29 – Saratoga Springs, NY: Sec. Clinton makes “Hard Choices” book tour stop at Northshire Bookstore (Glens Falls Post-Star <http://poststar.com/news/local/clinton-to-sign-books-in-spa-city/article_a89caca2-0b57-11e4-95a6-0019bb2963f4.html> ) · August 9 – Water Mill, NY: Sec. Clinton fundraises for the Clinton Foundation at the home of George and Joan Hornig (WSJ <http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/06/17/for-50000-best-dinner-seats-with-the-clintons-in-the-hamptons/> ) · August 28 – San Francisco, CA: Sec. Clinton keynotes Nexenta’s OpenSDx Summit (BusinessWire <http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20140702005709/en/Secretary-State-Hillary-Rodham-Clinton-Deliver-Keynote#.U7QoafldV8E> ) · September 4 – Las Vegas, NV: Sec. Clinton speaks at the National Clean Energy Summit (Solar Novis Today <http://www.solarnovus.com/hillary-rodham-clinto-to-deliver-keynote-at-national-clean-energy-summit-7-0_N7646.html> ) · October 2 – Miami Beach, FL: Sec. Clinton keynotes the CREW Network Convention & Marketplace (CREW Network <http://events.crewnetwork.org/2014convention/>) · October 13 – Las Vegas, NV: Sec. Clinton keynotes the UNLV Foundation Annual Dinner (UNLV <http://www.unlv.edu/event/unlv-foundation-annual-dinner?delta=0>) · ~ October 13-16 – San Francisco, CA: Sec. Clinton keynotes salesforce.com Dreamforce conference (salesforce.com <http://www.salesforce.com/dreamforce/DF14/keynotes.jsp>)