podesta_email_00056.txt

podesta-emails 5,314 words email

P22 D3 V9 P19 D6

-----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----- *​**Correct The Record Wednesday February 11, 2015 Afternoon Roundup:* *Tweets:* *Correct The Record* @CorrectRecord: .@HillaryClinton <https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton> fought to prevent voter intimidation #HRC365 <https://twitter.com/hashtag/HRC365?src=hash> https://www.congress.gov/bill/109th-congress/senate-bill/4069/cosponsors … <https://t.co/YS6qi1QtJZ> [2/11/15, 12:21 p.m. EST <https://twitter.com/CorrectRecord/status/565561184540045312>] *Pres. Bill Clinton* @billclinton: Tweeting is easier than birdie-ing! Welcome @BHaasGolf <https://twitter.com/BHaasGolf>! [2/10/15, 11:07 p.m. EST <https://twitter.com/billclinton/status/565361358955630592>] *Headlines:* *BuzzFeed: “Full Transcript Of BuzzFeed News’ Interview With President Barack Obama” <http://www.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeednews/full-transcript-of-buzzfeed-news-interview-with-president#.fm0xxr6N3>* Pres. Obama: “Hillary Clinton I know much better than I know Jeb Bush, and I think she’d be an outstanding president.” *Washington Post blog: The Fix: “This terrible poll shows Elizabeth Warren beating Hillary Clinton” <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/02/11/this-terrible-poll-shows-elizabeth-warren-beating-hillary-clinton/>* “How do you get results so far afield of any polling we've seen to date? You say a bunch of positive/liberal-friendly things about Warren before you ask the head-to-head question.” *The Hill blog: Briefing Room: “Paul: 'I blame' Clinton for ISIS conflict” <http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/232463-paul-i-blame-clinton-for-isis-conflict>* “Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) on Wednesday accused former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of helping to spur unrest in the Middle East that led to the current battle against militants from the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.” *Washington Post column: Ruth Marcus: “Brian Williams needs to go” <http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/brian-williams-needs-to-go/2015/02/10/5b3d13be-b14e-11e4-827f-93f454140e2b_story.html?hpid=z5>* “Clinton’s sniper-fire statement is, no doubt, a blot on her record. It is not a disqualifying blot. Journalists come to the job with only their credibility to offer. We expect less from politicians in terms of total truth-telling. Spin is part of the business model. You could legitimately decide that Clinton’s sniper story is disqualifying, but you must then deal with Ronald Reagan witnessing the liberation of Nazi death camps. Either way, the untenable nature of Williams’s position becomes even clearer. Imagine that Clinton’s sniper story becomes a campaign issue. How does Williams, in the anchor chair, comfortably report that news, even after six months away?” *Articles:* *BuzzFeed: “Full Transcript Of BuzzFeed News’ Interview With President Barack Obama” <http://www.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeednews/full-transcript-of-buzzfeed-news-interview-with-president#.fm0xxr6N3>* [Interview by Ben Smith] February 11, 2015, 12:13 a.m. EST [Subtitle:] BuzzFeed Editor-in-Chief Ben Smith sat down with President Barack Obama. Twenty-two minutes, eighteen questions. FULL TRANSCRIPT: *BuzzFeed News: So, eight years ago, today actually, you announced your campaign in Springfield. I read that speech last night and I was struck by how much it’s a generational call to your generation, I guess to some degree mine. You use the word “generation” 13 times in the speech. Now, two of the leading candidates for the next presidential nomination are of the previous generation, and I wonder if you find that at all disappointing?* President Obama: Well, they’re both obviously highly qualified candidates. Hillary Clinton I know much better than I know Jeb Bush, and I think she’d be an outstanding president. My understanding is that everybody else is younger than me, which— *Wasn’t that the idea?* Obama: —I guess matches up with my gray hair. But, you know ultimately what people are going to be looking for in the next president is what they always look for in a president and that is somebody who is attuned to the hopes and dreams of the American people at a particular moment in time. When I ran in 2008, I think what people understood was that the middle class had been left behind for a pretty long stretch of time. We had been involved in very costly wars that didn’t seem to have necessarily made us safer and they were looking for change and, you know, I suspect that the next candidates are going to be grappling with some of the issues that I talked about at the State of the Union: How can we make sure that we have broad-based prosperity now that we’re out of crisis? How do we deal with terrorism in a way that’s smart and effective? How do we address long-term issues like climate change that sometimes are really hard to do politically? So I think it will be a fascinating debate. *You were elected with this new coalition of young people, people of color, women, and I wonder, is that a coalition that the next Democratic nominee — Hillary Clinton or not — inherits?* Obama: I don’t think any president inherits a coalition. I think any candidate has to win over people based on what they stand for, what their message is, what their vision is for the future. I think what’s true is that I’ve done very well among younger Americans, and that’s always been something I’ve been very proud of: our ability to reach out to get people involved who traditionally have not always gotten involved or have been skeptical about politics. I think the fact that we got a lot of support from African-Americans or Latinos or Asian-Americans is just reflective of the shifts in the country. I think it’s also important to remember that I won Iowa, which doesn’t have one of the most diverse populations in the country. I think there’s been, you know, talk that there’s a need to reach out more to older Americans or middle America or white working-class families that Democrats haven’t done as well on, but that hasn’t been unique to me, that’s been going on for a while. *Do you think that’s right, that there is a need to reach out to them more?* Obama: I absolutely do. I think that one of the biggest challenges in our politics is always how do we get all of us to recognize what we have in common. And there’s so many forces that push us apart. Race is just one of them. You’ve got the rural-urban divide. You have states that are traditionally very Republican versus very Democrat. North-South. But one of the great things about being president is you travel around and it turns out everybody’s struggling with the same things, everybody’s hoping for the same things. People’s values are pretty common, and what I said during the State of the Union is something I still believe, which is that we are more unified than our politics would let on, and the question — particularly during presidential elections — is can we get our politics to give voice to those common things? *If I can move on to the Affordable Care Act. We reported yesterday that the office supply store Staples is — I’m sure this is an issue you’ve heard about before — is telling its workers that it will fire them if they work more than 25 hours a week. A manager had told a worker we talked to that “Obama’s responsible for this policy,” and they’re putting these notices on the wall of their break room saying that. I wonder what you’d say to the CEO of Staples, Ronald Sargent, about that policy?* Obama: What I would say is that millions of people are benefiting from the Affordable Care Act. Satisfaction is high. The typical premium is less than 100 bucks. *But this is a specific consequence…* Obama: No, I’m gonna answer the question. And that there is no reason for an employer who is not currently providing health care to their workers to discourage them from either getting health insurance on the job or being able to avail themselves of the Affordable Care Act. I haven’t looked at Staples stock lately or what the compensation of the CEO is, but I suspect that they could well afford to treat their workers favorably and give them some basic financial security, and if they can’t, then they should be willing to allow those workers to get the Affordable Care Act without cutting wages. This is the same argument that I’ve made with respect to something like paid sick leave. We have 43 million Americans who, if they get sick or their child gets sick, are looking at either losing their paycheck or going to the job sick or leaving their child at home sick. It’s one thing when you’ve got a mom-and-pop store who can’t afford to provide paid sick leave or health insurance or minimum wage to workers — even though a large percentage of those small businesses do it because they know it’s the right thing to do — but when I hear large corporations that make billions of dollars in profits trying to blame our interest in providing health insurance as an excuse for cutting back workers’ wages, shame on them. *Moving on to Russia. You started this presidency with a very productive relationship with President Medvedev and the relations are now probably at their worst since the Cold War. How much of that do you ascribe to Vladimir Putin’s character?* Obama: You know, I don’t want to psychoanalyze Mr. Putin. I will say that he has a foot very much in the Soviet past. That’s how he came of age. He ran the KGB. Those were his formative experiences. So I think he looks at problems through this Cold War lens, and, as a consequence, I think he’s missed some opportunities for Russia to diversify its economy, to strengthen its relationship with its neighbors, to represent something different than the old Soviet-style aggression. You know, I continue to hold out the prospect of Russia taking a diplomatic offering from what they’ve done in Ukraine. I think, to their credit, they’ve been able to compartmentalize and continue to work with us on issues like Iran’s nuclear program. But, if you look at what’s happened to the Russian economy, even before oil prices collapsed, it is not an economy that’s built for the 21st century. Unfortunately, those forces for modernization inside of Russia, I think, have been sidelined. That’s bad for Russia and, over time, it’s bad for the United States, because if Russia is doing badly, the concern is that they revert to old expansionist ideas that really shouldn’t have any application in the 21st century. *We asked our readers [for] questions and we got a lot of questions about weed. One guy, Shawn Gould from Wilmington, it’s a familiar situation. He has a felony marijuana possession conviction, so he can’t get a job. He said he can’t get a job at Boston Market. A kind of problem that disproportionately affects young black men like him. This is obviously a policy challenge you’ve spent your whole career — one of them — thinking about, but you’ve been president for six years. What do you say to him?* Obama: We have tried to begin a process of reforming how we deal with nonviolent drug offenses, starting with Eric Holder, our attorney general, providing different criteria for evaluation for U.S. attorneys, suggesting to them they don’t always just have to charge the maximum in order for them to do a good job. In fact, sometimes it’s more appropriate to look at whether a charge against a nonviolent drug offender is the right charge. We are reaching out to judges and lawyers — both prosecutors and defense bar — to look at how we can begin to more systematically change sentencing when it comes to nonviolent drug offenses. We’ve revamped the pardoning office in the Justice Department because, traditionally, we weren’t reaching a lot of nonviolent offenders who, if they received a pardon, perhaps would be in a better position to get employed. Overall — and the final thing is our office of drug prevention policy, one of the things we’re trying to do is move off just an enforcement/incarceration strategy more to a public health, treatment strategy. When you look at the progress we’ve made in reducing teen smoking, for example, or promoting seatbelt use: It’s not because we criminalize things, alone — although in the case of seatbelts, obviously, you can get a ticket — a lot of it just had to do with public education. The same is true on drug abuse. Unfortunately, we’ve short-changed that side and the consequences have been particularly devastating in certain segments of the community that need to be addressed. *I want to move to the big LGBT news of yesterday, but first we had a very specific question from a reader who worked for you, a federal lawyer who’s transgender named Emily Prince. Federal policy bars discrimination against transgender people under health care plans covered under the ACA, but federal worker plans largely don’t cover gender reassignment surgery. Should they?* Obama: You know, I haven’t looked at that policy. My general view is that transgender persons, just like gays and lesbians, are deserving of equal treatment under the law. And that’s a basic principle. As you mentioned, my sense is that the Supreme Court is about to make a shift, one that I welcome, which is to recognize that — having hit a critical mass of states that have recognized same-sex marriage — it doesn’t make sense for us to now have this patchwork system and that it’s time to recognize that, under the equal protection clause of the United States, same-sex couples should have the same rights as anybody else. *There are a few officials in Alabama, starting with Judge Roy Moore, but also a number of probate judges, who are resisting that. Do you see shades of George Wallace in the schoolhouse door?* Obama: Well, I… look, I won’t… I won’t say it’s a perfect analogy, but there’s a core principle here that’s at stake, which is we have a supremacy clause in our constitution. When federal law is in conflict with state law, federal law wins out. My understanding — my recollection is that Judge Moore had a similar problem with a federal court ruling that you couldn’t put a huge Ten Commandments statue in the middle of your courthouse and, ultimately, federal law was obeyed, and I think that the same thing will end up happening here. *Is there anything you’d say to him?* Obama: You know, I think that the courts at the federal level will have something to say to him. *David Axelrod wrote in his book that you hated and weren’t good at, he said, “bullshitting” about your position on marriage in ‘08. Why did you feel you had to do it?* Obama: Well, you know, I think David is mixing up my personal feelings with my position on the issue. I always felt that same-sex couples should be able to enjoy the same rights, legally, as anybody else, and so it was frustrating to me not to, I think, be able to square that with what were a whole bunch of religious sensitivities out there. So my thinking at the time was that civil unions — which I always supported — was a sufficient way of squaring the circle. That, OK, we won’t call it “marriage,” we’ll call it “civil unions,” same-sex couples will have the same rights as anybody else, but the word “marriage” with its religious connotations historically would be preserved for marriages between men and women. Where my evolution took place was not in my attitude toward same-sex couples, it was in understanding the pain and the sense of stigma that was being placed on same-sex couples who are friends of mine, where they’d say, “You know what, if you’re not calling it marriage, it doesn’t feel like the same thing. Even if you gave me the same rights, the fact that I’m being treated differently or the love that we feel is somehow segmented off, that hurts.” It was because of those conversations that I ended up shifting positions, that civil unions, in fact, were not sufficient rather than marriage. But I think the notion that somehow I was always in favor of marriage per se isn’t quite accurate. What I was in favor of is making sure that… *Despite that old questionnaire?* Obama: Well, yeah. The old questionnaire, you know, is an example of struggling with what was a real issue at the time, which is how do you make sure that people’s rights are enjoyed and these religious sensitivities were taken into account? You know, these are the kinds of things you learn as you… move forward in public life: that sometimes you can’t split the difference. That sometimes you just have to be very clear that this is what’s right. And what I’m very proud of is to see how rapidly the country has shifted and maybe the small part that I’ve played, but certainly my Justice Department and others have played, in this administration in getting to where we need to be. *I have sort of an organizing question about that, which is if you talk to people who were involved in your initial coalition — you have labor union activists, civil rights activists, environmentalists, and LGBT rights activists — it’s the LGBT rights activists right now who feel most totally fulfilled by your administration, by what you’ve done. I wonder, did they do something right? Did they push you harder? Or was it just their moment and it really wasn’t about what they did?* Obama: Yeah, I, you know, I think it was a matter of… It was an idea whose time had come. I also think that, unlike sometimes issues of race or even in some cases economic status, I think that there are a lot of people, including Supreme Court justices, who have somebody in their family or somebody that they know who’s gay and, as more and more people came out of the closet and they said, “Well, gosh, well, I love that person.” It changed— *So you don’t give the organized community credit as much as the cultural change?* Obama: Well, no no no. I mean, I think the organized community did an excellent job. But, look, the immigrants’ rights organizations have done an excellent job, the civil rights organizations have done an excellent job. I think that a lot of it had to do with the willingness of people to recognize the regard they had for the LGBT communities or people in their families. But part of it is also, frankly, that an issue like nondiscrimination for the LGBT community is a little bit easier than the issues of inner-city poverty, right? You not discriminating against a gay person may require you to undergo some change of mind, but it doesn’t require you to potentially — calling on the government to provide more support for impoverished children so that they’ve got day care that’s high quality. *We’ve just got a couple more minutes and there are a couple national security questions I wanted to get in in that time. First, lot of complicated parts in this surveillance debate, but there’s one thing you could do with the stroke of the pen, which is ending the bulk collection of metadata. Why haven’t you?* Obama: Well, what we’ve done is called on Congress to create a program that preserves what we need in order to fight against potential terror attacks on the homeland while addressing the concerns of privacy critics and libertarians. *But why not stop the program now?* Obama: Well, because I’m still hopeful that we can actually get a bill passed… You know, there is bipartisan support for the bill, and, as has been true in a lot of instances, including on immigration, my preference is always to actually get legislation passed because it’s a little longer lasting. *And finally I wanted to ask you about Kayla Mueller. She was confirmed dead today, and I wondered both if you had any reaction to her murder and, really, how do you tell a family that the United States government is not going to do all it can or we have a policy of not doing all we can in these situations?* Obama: Well, first of all, my immediate reaction is heartbreak. I’ve been in touch with Kayla’s family. She was an outstanding young woman and a great spirit, and I think that spirit will live on. I think the more people learn about her, the more they appreciate what she stood for and how it stands in contrast with the barbaric organization that held her captive. But I don’t think it’s accurate then to say that the United States government hasn’t done everything that we could. We devoted enormous resources — and always devote enormous resources — to freeing captives or hostages anywhere in the world, and I deployed an entire operation at significant risk to rescue not only her, but the other individuals that had been held, and probably missed them by a day or two precisely because we had that commitment. The one thing that we have held to is a policy of not paying ransoms with an organization like ISIL. And the reason is that once we start doing that, not only are we financing their slaughter of innocent people and strengthening their organization, but we’re actually making Americans even greater targets for future kidnappings… You know, it’s as tough as anything that I do, having conversation with parents who understandably want — by any means necessary — for their children to be safe, and we will do everything we can, short of providing an incentive for future Americans to be caught. *And I understand the policy review underway, you’re ruling out ransoms. Is anything even being considered there?* Obama: Just as a general rule, what we don’t want to do is make other American citizens riper targets for the actions of organizations like this. *Washington Post blog: The Fix: “This terrible poll shows Elizabeth Warren beating Hillary Clinton” <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/02/11/this-terrible-poll-shows-elizabeth-warren-beating-hillary-clinton/>* By Aaron Blake February 11, 2015, 12:04 p.m. EST MoveOn.org wants Elizabeth Warren to run for president -- so much so that it has commissioned a poll with the very clear purpose of making Warren's potential candidacy look as good as possible. Mission accomplished. The just-released poll from YouGov shows Warren ahead of Clinton 31 percent to 24 percent in Iowa and 30-27 in New Hampshire. How do you get results so far afield of any polling we've seen to date? You say a bunch of positive/liberal-friendly things about Warren before you ask the head-to-head question. In fairness to MoveOn, the group discloses up-front that this is what's known as an "informed ballot" -- i.e. information is shared about candidates before the head-to-head question is asked. MoveOn emphasizes that no negative information is shared about the other candidates (including Clinton), which is a trick often used in such polling. What MoveOn doesn't disclose is that the only candidate for whom positive information is shared is Warren. And there is a lot of positive information -- 10 statements, in fact. A sampling: · "Elizabeth Warren wants to extend the same low interest rates that the federal government gives big Wall Street banks to college students who receive government loans for their education." · "The absolute last thing we should do (to Social Security) is allow the program to begin to be dismantled inch by inch. We should be talking about expanding Social Security benefits -- not cutting them." · "No one should be above the law. If you steal a hundred bucks on Main Street, you’re probably going to jail. If you steal a billion bucks on Wall Street, you darn well better go to jail too." · "People feel like the system is rigged against them. And here’s the painful part: they’re right.... Oil companies guzzle down billions in profits. Billionaires pay lower tax rates than their secretaries." · "Sen. Warren says, 'I came out of a hardworking, middle-class family. I came from an America that created opportunities for people like me, and I now see an America where the government works for people who already have money and power.... We need to remind politicians that they don’t work for the big banks -- they work for us.'" · The takeaway here: If Warren runs for president and is somehow able to run a campaign in which she is the only candidate allowed to share positive information about herself, then she might -- emphasis on might -- have a chance of beating Clinton. If anything, this poll should discourage Warren from changing her mind and running. Here's the poll, in case you want to explore: [POLL] *The Hill blog: Briefing Room: “Paul: 'I blame' Clinton for ISIS conflict” <http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/232463-paul-i-blame-clinton-for-isis-conflict>* By Ben Kamisar February 11, 2015, 12:30 p.m. EST Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) on Wednesday accused former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of helping to spur unrest in the Middle East that led to the current battle against militants from the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria. “One of the people I blame for a lot of this, frankly, is Hillary Clinton,” he said on Fox News’s “America’s Newsroom.” “The disaster that is Libya is now a breeding ground for terrorists and also a breeding ground for armament. I really do blame Hillary Clinton’s war in Libya for creating a lot of the chaos that is now spreading throughout the Middle East.” Paul has repeatedly needled Clinton ahead of the two politicians’ potential 2016 bids, this time when host Bill Hemmer asked for his take on President Obama’s proposed authorization to fight ISIS, sent to Congress Wednesday. The proposal includes vague language that limits the president from “enduring offensive ground combat” but would allow him to authorize limited ground operations and have soldiers target ISIS forces and their associates. But the plan hasn’t been welcomed with open arms on Capitol Hill. Some Democratic lawmakers told The Hill that the language may still be too broad, while Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said in a statement that he’s concerned the president’s language isn’t broad enough to give “our military commanders the flexibility and authorities they need.” While Paul said “the president has to do much more” to combat ISIS, and that America should consider directly arming Kurdish fighters on the ground, he admitted that there has been some improvement. “They have been pushed back,” he said about ISIS. “I don’t think they are gaining ground." But he pivoted back to Clinton and said that her push to arm rebels in Syria fighting against President Bashar Assad helped bring weapons into “the hands of ISIS," and criticized her for unrest in Libya. “I think Hillary’s war in Libya and then Hillary’s admonition, the president’s admonition, and frankly some Republicans' admonition to get involved in the Syrian civil war has actually now created a bigger problem, which is ISIS,” he said. *Washington Post column: Ruth Marcus: “Brian Williams needs to go” <http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/brian-williams-needs-to-go/2015/02/10/5b3d13be-b14e-11e4-827f-93f454140e2b_story.html?hpid=z5>* By Ruth Marcus February 10, 2015, 7:27 p.m. EST Indecision may not be the best quality in a columnist, but in the case of NBC News anchor Brian Williams, that’s what I find in myself: I doubt that the six-month suspension the network announced Tuesday night is enough, and I think he needs to step down. My hesitation over asserting that Williams cannot continue in the anchor chair has two components. The first is simple human compassion. Williams seems like a nice guy, with an endearing capacity for poking fun at himself. Those who are enjoying his predicament must be more certain about their own infallibility than I am about mine. Kicking people when they’re up is a lot more sporting than when they’re in a fetal crouch. A six-month suspension is pretty severe. The second, which gives me far more pause and necessitates the antiquated practice of trial before sentencing, is the essential mystery of memory. We may sincerely believe what did not actually happen. For years my friend Amanda Bennett told the story of attending the wrong wedding, only to realize her mistake when a bride she didn’t know walked down the aisle. One day Amanda recounted this tale, only to be informed, by the friend to whom the wedding escapade had actually happened , that it wasn’t her story at all. Amanda had somehow appropriated it as her own. It was too good not to retell. Amanda is smart and tough and an experienced journalist — a former big-city newspaper editor. Her reporting in this instance was sincere but faulty, in the service not of self-promotion but of self-deprecation. Science supports this possibility. False memories take root. Fragments of experience recombine and emerge as falsehoods — not deliberate lies but untrue nonetheless. This is why the entire context matters so much in Williams’s case: Is his tale of being in a helicopter under fire another example of shifting, faulty memory, or is it part of a pattern of puffery, including Hurricane Katrina? The latter would undercut the likelihood that the helicopter story was a moment of memory gone haywire. Assume, though, that the evidence tends in the direction of deliberate misstatement. How should we think about the appropriate consequence? Not every journalistic transgression deserves the career equivalent of a death penalty. A single episode of plagiarism, for example, should be judged in the context of an entire career — punished severely but, in certain cases, with a sanction short of dismisssal. In Williams’s case, some thoughtful observers argued that his transgression did not rise to the level of firing (or resignation) because it did not go to the essence of his job — “not a fundamental part of his primary responsibilities,” as the New York Times’ David Carr put it. This analysis misperceives the role of news anchor — as NBC itself recognized: “As Managing Editor and Anchor of ‘Nightly News,’ Brian has a responsibility to be truthful and to uphold the high standards of the news division at all times,” Deborah Turness, the president of NBC News, said in a statement. To the extent that the job is more than merely reading words off a teleprompter, it is to be the institutional voice of trust and reason, reassuring in a crisis, the ultimate reliable narrator. When issues of trustworthiness become a distraction, the anchor loses his credibility, and therefore his perch. Some discussion of Williams’s fate has involved his central role at NBC and whether the network could “afford” to lose its most recognizable franchise. This is the network version of “too big to fail” — that Williams is too important to can. I see it the opposite way: Williams’s elevated status subjects him to a higher standard of behavior, and more rigorous consequences. The face of NBC News cannot afford to be so scarred. Thinking about Williams requires grappling with the consequence of Hillary Clinton’s untrue story of coming under sniper fire in Bosnia. If I am correct in concluding that Williams should not continue in the anchor role at NBC, must I then believe that Clinton is unqualified to be president? If I distinguish between the two, is that because of pro-Clinton, pro-Democrat bias? Would I judge more harshly were a Republican candidate involved? Here, I can only offer my best effort to analyze the two cases objectively. Clinton’s sniper-fire statement is, no doubt, a blot on her record. It is not a disqualifying blot. Journalists come to the job with only their credibility to offer. We expect less from politicians in terms of total truth-telling. Spin is part of the business model. You could legitimately decide that Clinton’s sniper story is disqualifying, but you must then deal with Ronald Reagan witnessing the liberation of Nazi death camps. Either way, the untenable nature of Williams’s position becomes even clearer. Imagine that Clinton’s sniper story becomes a campaign issue. How does Williams, in the anchor chair, comfortably report that news, even after six months away?