podesta_email_00189.txt

podesta-emails 74,053 words email

P22 P17 V11 P20 P23

-----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----- *H4A News Clips* *June 12, 2015* *LAST NIGHTS EVENING NEWS* There was no 2016 coverage on any network news program. Instead, news networks continued their coverage of the escaped prisoners. They also discussed new developments related to ISIS and the Middle East, including the US soldier who was killed, as well as U.S. strategy in the region. *LAST NIGHTS EVENING NEWS......................................................................... **1* *SOCIAL MEDIA................................................................................................. **4* *Hilary Rosen (6/11/15, 9:13 am)* - on the @usairways shuttle to NYC. Not a #HillaryClinton staffer in sight. #CheapTranspoIsANewThing...................................................................................................... 5 *Buzzfeed News (6/11/15, 9:52 am)* - JUST IN: @CNBC reporting that @rupertmurdoch is preparing to step down as CEO from 21st Century Fox *http://www.cnbc.com/id/102730161 <http://www.cnbc.com/id/102730161>*.............................................. 5 *Eli Stokols (6/11/15, 10:10 am)* - Jeb says absent fathers "limit the possibility of young people to live lives of purpose and meaning."............................................................................................................... 5 *Benjy Sarlin (6/11/15, 10:17 am)* - Asked Jeb Bush about 1995 book bemoaning lack of "shame" towards single motherhood. He said he'd "evolved" but restated importance of issue........................................... 5 *WSJ (6/11/15, 4:08 pm)* - Breaking: Twitter CEO Dick Costolo is stepping down July 1 *http://wsj.com <http://wsj.com>* 5 *Bernie Sanders (6/11/15, 5:01 pm)* - It's time to declare once and for all: #BlackLivesMatter — on the streets and on the job. Read my piece in @Medium: *http://bernie.to/dream <http://bernie.to/dream>*.................................................. 5 *David Drucker (6/11/15, 5:30 pm)* - .@tedcruz tells @hughhewitt that his super PACs have BANKED $37 million, Interview broadcast this evening................................................................................................. 5 *LAUNCH PREVIEW STORIES............................................................................ **5* *Story of Hillary Clinton’s Mother Forms Emotional Core of Campaign* // NYT // Amy Chozick - June 12, 2015 5 *Hillary Clinton Plans to Show Her Roots in Rally Speech* // WSJ // Laura Meckler – June 11, 2015.. 8 *With stories of mother's struggle, Clinton seeks reintroduction in first major campaign speech* // AP // Lisa Lerer & Ken Thomas............................................................................................................................ 9 *Clinton's launch speech to focus on her mother's life* // Politico // Annie Karni – June 11, 2015...... 11 *Inside the relaunch of Hillary Clinton* // Politico Magazine // Glenn Thrush - June 12, 2015.......... 13 *Hillary Clinton: "It is your time"* // VOX // Jonathan Allen – June 11, 2015................................... 15 *Why is Hillary Clinton running for president? She'll answer that at a New York rally* // LA Times // Evan Halper – June 11, 2015............................................................................................................................. 16 *Clinton plans personal kick-off speech, but Democrats want aggressive agenda* // WaPo // Philip Rucker & Anne Gearan – June 11, 2015.............................................................................................................. 18 *Hillary's rally and rationale: More Rodham, less Clinton* // CNN // Jeff Zeleny & Dan Merica – June 11, 2015 21 *Hillary Clinton Will Evoke Roosevelt and Try to Ease Fears on Trust in New York Speech* // NYT // Amy Chozick – June 11, 2015............................................................................................................................ 23 *Hillary Clinton Plans to Re-Introduce Herself to Voters* // CBS News // Stephanie Condon – June 11, 2015 26 *Hillary Clinton gets personal* // MSNBC // Alex Seitz-Wald – June 11, 2015................................. 27 *Hillary Clinton Will Push Personal Story at Campaign Launch* // TIME // Sam Frizell – June 11, 2015 30 *At Launch Rally, Hillary Clinton to Tell Americans 'It Is Your Time'* // Bloomberg News // Jennifer Epstein – June 11, 2015............................................................................................................................. 31 *Hillary Relaunch to Have 'Airport Style Security'* // The Weekly Standard // Daniel Halper.......... 34 *HRC NATIONAL COVERAGE............................................................................ **35* *Hillary Clinton and Wishful-Thinking Politics* // NYT // Brendan Nyhan – June 11, 2015.............. 35 *Virginia Is Latest Front in Democrats’ Voting Rights Battle* // NYT // Maggie Haberman – June 11, 2015 36 *These 9 words prove that Bill Clinton still doesn’t get it on the Clinton Foundation* // WaPo // Chris Cillizza – June 11, 2015............................................................................................................................ 37 *She won’t back down. Or go away.* // WaPo // Kent Babb – June 11, 2015.................................... 38 *Clinton’s Donor Dominance Not Absolute* // WSJ // Peter Nicholas & Laura Meckler – June 11, 2015 45 *Inside Hillary's house-party strategy* // Politico // Annie Karni – June 11, 2015............................ 47 *The Real Felony: Denying Prisoners the Right to Vote* // The Daily Beast // Barrett Holmes Pitner – June 12, 2015................................................................................................................................................ 50 *Hillary Rally Vs. the Gun Show at Iowa State Fair* // The Weekly Standard // Jeryl Bier – June 11, 2015 52 *Hillary Clinton's Truth-O-Meter record* // Politifact // Lauren // Carroll – June 11, 2015............... 53 *Change she can believe in: Clinton bets voters want more of the same, only better* // LA Times // David Lauter – June 11, 2015............................................................................................................................ 55 *Hillary Clinton's big bet: Stress toughness, tenacity, Democratic agenda* // LA Times // David Lauter – June 11, 2015......................................................................................................................................... 59 *Centrist Dems wary of Hillary’s move to the left* // The Hill // Alexander Bolton – June 11, 2015... 62 *Hillary Clinton's Economic Inequality Whisperer* // National Journal // Eric Garcia – June 12, 2015 64 *THE LEGACY TRAP* // National Journal // Ronald Brownstein – June 12, 2015............................ 66 *POLITICAL INSIDERS POLL* // National Journal // Sarah Mimms – June 12, 2015....................... 68 *What Hillary Clinton Can Learn from Michelle Kwan's Figure Skating Career* // The New Republic // Elspeth Reeve – June 11, 2015............................................................................................................... 70 *With boost from Clinton, efforts to expand voting access advance* // MSNBC // Zachary Toth – June 11, 2015 71 *De Blasio says he will not endorse Hillary Clinton until she clearly opposes Trans-Pacific Partnership* // NY Daily News // Jennifer Fermino – June 11, 2015.................................................................................. 73 *Dem operative Woodhouse says NYT retracted charges of illegality in Clinton email story* // Politifact // Jon Greenberg – June 11, 2015......................................................................................................... 75 *Bill Clinton’s Labor Secretary Urges Hillary Clinton to Oppose TPP at Kickoff* // The Observer // Jullian Jorgensen – June 11, 2015.......................................................................................................................... 77 *Bill Clinton brushes aside foundation criticism* // CNN // Dan Merica – June 11, 2015.................. 78 *'Conversation' with Hillary Clinton? That'll be $2,700* // Daily Mail // AFP - June 12 2015............ 80 *Duggan's power now rivals Putin, Bill Clinton jokes* // Detroit News Washington Bureau – June 11, 2015 82 *Speech inflation: Why Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and others get massive speaking fees* // Fortune // Ben Geier – June 11, 2015......................................................................................................................... 83 *Clinton rally coincides with gun show at fairgounds* // The Des Moines Register // Josh Hafner – June 11, 2015................................................................................................................................................ 84 *Hillary Clinton Supports Women's Rights, Gay Rights in "Living History" Instagram Video* // E! Entertainment – June 11, 2015............................................................................................................................ 86 *Lady Gaga and Tony Bennett to sing for Hillary* // NY Post // Emily Smith – June 9, 2015............ 86 *Quote Of The Day* // The Skimm – June 11, 2015........................................................................ 87 *OTHER DEMOCRATS NATIONAL COVERAGE................................................. **87* *O’MALLEY................................................................................................... **87* *O'Malley: I haven't seen video of pool party brutality* // CNN // Alexandra Jaffe & Betsy Klein – June 11, 2015................................................................................................................................................ 87 *O’Malley touts progressive values, experience, results* // Quad City Times // James Lynch – June 11, 2015 88 *SANDERS.................................................................................................... **89* *Bernie Sanders Demands Hillary Clinton Take Trade Stance ‘Right Now’* // NYT // Alan Rappeport – June 11, 2015......................................................................................................................................... 89 *Rival Challenges Clinton to Say Where She Stands on Trade* // AP // Ken Thomas – June 11, 2015 90 *Bernie Sanders insists his momentum is no fluke* // Politico // Jonathan Topaz – June 10, 2015... 91 *Bernie Sanders: Hillary Clinton's Silence on Trade Deal 'Offensive'* // Bloomberg // Sahil Kapur – June 11, 2015................................................................................................................................................ 93 *Sanders Explains Obama’s Biggest Mistake And What Clinton Is Doing Wrong* // Buzzfeed // Evan McMorris-Santoro – June 11, 2015............................................................................................................. 95 *Bernie Sanders hires Elizabeth Warren 'draft' director for progressive campaign* // The Guardian // Ben Jacobs – June 11, 2015............................................................................................................................ 97 *Youth Unemployment and Dr. King’s Dream* // Medium // Bernie Sanders – June 11, 2015.......... 98 *Sanders hires key Iowa staff members* // The Quad City Times // Ed Tibbetts – June 11, 2015.... 100 *Sanders pushes paid vacation legislation* // Burlington Free Press // Nicole Gaudiano – June 11, 2015 101 *OTHER...................................................................................................... **102* *Bayh won’t seek Indiana Senate seat* // The Hill // Jonathan Easley – June 11, 2015.................. 102 *GOP............................................................................................................... **103* *BUSH......................................................................................................... **103* *Wall Street lining up for Jeb Bush campaign fundraiser in New York // WaPo* // Matea Gold – June 11, 2015 103 *Jeb Bush’s legally nonexistent campaign has had a lot of problems* // WaPo // Max Ehrenfreund – June 11, 2015............................................................................................................................................... 104 *In Europe, Jeb Bush sounds like Barack Obama* // Politico // Eli Stokols – June 11, 2015............ 105 *Sean Hannity scores first Jeb Bush interview* // Politico // Hadas Gold – June 11, 2015.............. 107 *Jeb Bush: 'Putin has changed' since brother George saw his 'soul'* // CNN // Tom LoBianco & Dana Bash – June 11, 2015................................................................................................................................... 108 *Jeb Bush says view on unwed births ‘hasn’t changed at all’* // MSNBC // Benjy Sarlin – June 11, 2015 111 *Jeb Hated Easy Divorce. So Did Hillary.* // The Daily Beast // Betsy Woodruff – June 11, 2015.... 112 *RUBIO........................................................................................................ **114* *Marco Rubio, like a lot of Americans, is terrible with money* // WaPo // Jonnelle Marte – June 11, 2015 114 *Rubio And Five U.S. Congressmen Voted For Florida's 'Scarlet Letter' Adoption Bill* // HuffPo // Laura Bassett – June 11, 2015........................................................................................................................... 116 *Is the GOP heartland ready to embrace Marco Rubio?* // LA Times // Lisa Mascaro – June 11, 2015 117 *Liberals defend Marco Rubio against blistering New York Times attacks* // Fox News – June 11, 2015 120 *PAUL.......................................................................................................... **121* *How Rand Paul Has Already Changed the 2016 Race* // TIME // Joe Klein – June 11, 2015.......... 121 *Rand Paul Signs on to Amendment Barring Ground Troops Against ISIS* // Bloomberg // David Weigel – June 11, 2015........................................................................................................................................ 122 *WALKER................................................................................................... **123* *Scott Walker Says Supporters Have Suggested Walker-Rubio 2016 Ticket* // Bloomberg // John McCormick – June 11, 2015................................................................................................................................... 123 *CRUZ.......................................................................................................... **125* *Ted Cruz under fire for Tennessee campaign chairman* // Politico // Adam Lerner – June 11, 2015 125 *Ted Cruz fights GOP approach on Obamacare subsidies* // Politico // Manu Raju – June 11, 2015 126 *Cruz ramps up attack on ObamaCare* // The Hill // Sarah Ferris – June 11, 2015......................... 127 *CHRISTIE.................................................................................................. **128* *Chris Christie Lays Out Education Plan* // NYT // Nick Corasaniti – June 11, 2015....................... 128 *Top Chris Christie Aide Goes to His Political Action Committee* // NYT // Maggie Haberman – June 11, 2015 130 *Christie: Debt-free college is 'wrong'* // Politico // Allie Grasgreen – June 11, 2015...................... 131 *Christie slams rival for 'scaring' voters* // The Des Moines Register // Jennifer Jacobs – June 11, 2015 131 *GRAHAM................................................................................................... **132* *Sen. Mark Kirk calls Lindsey Graham a 'bro with no ho'* // Politico // Nick Gass – June 11, 2015... 132 *Lindsey Graham Introduces Abortion Bill* // RealClearPolitics // Andrew Desiderio – June 11, 2015 133 *SANTORUM............................................................................................... **134* *Rick Santorum, moderate Republican?* // CNN // Alexandra Jaffe – June 11, 2015...................... 134 *Rick Santorum Says Economic 'Stagnation' Will Help Him Win in 2016* // Bloomberg News // Mark Niquette – June 11, 2015........................................................................................................................... 136 *Rick Santorum signs ATR tax pledge* // The Washington Times // David Sherfinski – June 11, 2015 136 *KASICH...................................................................................................... **137* *Is John Kasich Too Cranky To Be President?* // NBC News // Perry Bacon – June 11, 2015........... 137 *CARSON..................................................................................................... **139* *Ben Carson doesn’t want to talk about ‘the gay issue’* // MSNBC // Adam Howard – June 11, 2015 139 *Ben Carson’s hot mess of a campaign: A predictably dysfunctional mish-mash of fire-breathing rhetoric and insane policy ideas* // Salon // Simon Maloy – June 11, 2015...................................................... 140 *Ben Carson: ‘The people are frustrated — they’re waking up’* // The Washington Times // David Sherfinski – June 11, 2015................................................................................................................................... 141 *FIORINA.................................................................................................... **142* *Fiorina's campaign-trail attacks leave out her own ties to Clinton* // LA Times // Joseph Tanfani – June 11, 2015............................................................................................................................................... 142 *Carly Fiorina blasts media focus on her Hillary Clinton trolling* // The Washington Examiner // Ashe Schow – June 11, 2015........................................................................................................................... 144 *OTHER...................................................................................................... **145* *Fox News Adds G.O.P. Candidate Forum Amid Criticism of Debate Plans* // NYT // Maggie Haberman 145 *The Koch brothers and the Republican Party go to war — with each other* // Yahoo News // Jon Ward – June 11, 2015........................................................................................................................................ 145 *'16 At 30 Thousand* // NBC // Carrie Dann & Andrew Rafferty – June 11,..................................... 152 2015........................................................................................................................................ 152 *With Clinton bound for Sioux City, GOP piles on* // Sioux City Journal // Bret Hayworth – June 11, 2015 153 *Republicans release anti-Hillary Clinton ad ahead of her Charleston visit next week* // The Post & Carrier // Schuyler Kropf – June 11, 2015................................................................................................. 153 *Romney Hosting GOP Hopefuls at Utah Retreat* // RealClearPolitics // Courtney Such – June 11, 2015 154 *TOP NEWS..................................................................................................... **155* *DOMESTIC................................................................................................. **155* *Trade Fight Goes to the Wire* // WSJ // Siobhan Hughes, Kristina Peterson & William Mauldin – June 11, 2015............................................................................................................................................... 155 *Democrats block cyber bill, leaving measure in limbo* // Politico // Tal Kopan – June 11, 2015.... 158 *Dennis Hastert pleads not guilty on all counts* // CNN // Chris Frates, Bill Kirkos and Tom LoBianco – June 11, 2015........................................................................................................................................ 160 *INTERNATIONAL...................................................................................... **161* *Obama Looks at Adding Bases and Troops in Iraq, to Fight ISIS* // NYT //Peter Baker, Helene Cooper & Michael r. Gordon – June 11, 2015............................................................................................................. 161 *OPINIONS/EDITORIALS/BLOGS................................................................... **164* *Republicans must stop derailing the Benghazi committee* // WaPo // Elijah Cummings – June 11, 2015 164 *The Battle for the 2016 Middle Ground* // WSJ // Daniel Arbess – June 11, 2015......................... 166 *How Bill Clinton and Teneo duped the State Dept. ethics dummies* // Leader & Times // Dick Morris – June 11, 2015........................................................................................................................................ 167 *SOCIAL MEDIA* *Hilary Rosen (6/11/15, 9:13 am)* <https://twitter.com/hilaryr/status/608985338644697088>* - on the @usairways shuttle to NYC. Not a #HillaryClinton staffer in sight. #CheapTranspoIsANewThing* *Buzzfeed News (6/11/15, 9:52 am)* <https://twitter.com/BuzzFeedNews/status/608995282068623362>* - JUST IN: @CNBC reporting that @rupertmurdoch is preparing to step down as CEO from 21st Century Fox **http://www.cnbc.com/id/102730161* <http://www.cnbc.com/id/102730161> *Eli Stokols (6/11/15, 10:10 am)* <https://twitter.com/EliStokols/status/608999833639227392>* - Jeb says absent fathers "limit the possibility of young people to live lives of purpose and meaning."* *Benjy Sarlin (6/11/15, 10:17 am)* <https://twitter.com/BenjySarlin/status/609001507984449537>* - Asked Jeb Bush about 1995 book bemoaning lack of "shame" towards single motherhood. He said he'd "evolved" but restated importance of issue* *WSJ (6/11/15, 4:08 pm)* <https://twitter.com/WSJ/status/609089952115249153>* - Breaking: Twitter CEO Dick Costolo is stepping down July 1 * *http://wsj.com* <http://wsj.com> *Bernie Sanders (6/11/15, 5:01 pm)* <https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/609103144681897985>* - It's time to declare once and for all: #BlackLivesMatter* * —* * on the streets and on the job. Read my piece in @Medium: **http://bernie.to/dream* <http://bernie.to/dream> *David Drucker (6/11/15, 5:30 pm)* <https://twitter.com/DavidMDrucker/status/609110550270894082>* - .@tedcruz tells @hughhewitt that his super PACs have BANKED $37 million, Interview broadcast this evening.* *LAUNCH PREVIEW STORIES* *Story of Hillary Clinton’s Mother Forms Emotional Core of Campaign* <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/13/us/politics/story-of-hillary-clintons-mother-forms-emotional-core-of-campaign.html>* // NYT // Amy Chozick - June 12, 2015* Dorothy Howell was 8 years old when her parents sent her away. It was 1927. Her mother and father, who fought violently in the Chicago boardinghouse where the family lived, divorced. Neither was willing to take care of Dorothy or her little sister. So they put the girls on a train to California to live with their grandparents. It did not go well. Her grandmother favored black Victorian dresses and punished the girls for inexplicable infractions, like playing in the yard. (Dorothy was not allowed to leave her room for a year, other than for school, after she went trick-or-treating one Halloween.) Unable to bear it, Dorothy left her grandparents’ home at 14, and became a housekeeper for $3 a week, always hoping to return to Chicago and reconnect with her mother. But when she finally did, a few years later, her mother spurned her again. It took a long time for Hillary Rodham Clinton to fully understand the story of her mother’s devastating childhood. But now, four years after her death, Dorothy’s story is forming the emotional foundation of her daughter’s campaign for president, and will be a central theme in her big kickoff speech on Saturday. Sharing that story is a shift for Mrs. Clinton, who in her 2008 campaign was fiercely protective of her mother’s privacy and eager to project an image of strength as she sought to become the first female commander in chief. And in this campaign, her mother’s story may help address one of Mrs. Clinton’s central challenges: convincing voters who feel they already know everything about her that there is, indeed, more to know, and that she is motivated by more than ambition. “I think for Hillary it’s about learning, and her mother’s story is just one of the big motivators of who she is,” said Ann Lewis, a former senior adviser to Mrs. Clinton. “She couldn’t go back and do more for her mother, but she could do more for other children who need protection or who need a better chance.” At the rally on Saturday on New York’s Roosevelt Island, the biggest public event so far of her 2016 campaign, Mrs. Clinton will explain how her mother’s experience shaped her life and inspired her to be an advocate for children and families at the Children’s Defense Fund, and as a first lady, senator and secretary of state. Given the closeness of their relationship, it is striking that Mrs. Rodham has been such a limited part of Mrs. Clinton’s biography. Dorothy Rodham and her husband, Hugh, moved to Little Rock, Ark., in 1987 to help Mrs. Clinton take care of Chelsea when she was working full time as a lawyer at Rose Law Firm. After Mr. Rodham died in 1993, Mrs. Rodham spent more time at the White House, accompanying the first lady and Chelsea on trips to India, China, Paris and Hawaii. She avoided the spotlight but enjoyed her time in Washington, with movie nights, trips to the zoo and margaritas at the Cactus Cantina. At the 1996 convention, Mrs. Rodham vouched for her son-in-law, saying in a brief video, “Everybody knows there is only one person in the world who can really tell the truth about a man, and that’s his mother-in-law.” But she also berated Mr. Clinton in the midst of the Monica Lewinsky scandal and encouraged Mrs. Clinton to forge her own political career, said several people who worked in the White House at the time. After Mrs. Clinton was elected to the Senate from New York in 2000, Mrs. Rodham moved to Washington to be closer to her daughter. At one point, mother and daughter shared a two-bedroom apartment while the Clintons’ townhouse in Northwest Washington was being renovated to make a larger, private space to accommodate Mrs. Rodham. “Hillary would get home after a long day in the Senate and they’d just sit there and talk about their days,” said Patti Solis Doyle, who worked for Mrs. Clinton from 1991 until 2008 and was campaign manager for much of her first presidential run. When she was secretary of state, Mrs. Clinton would return from a trip and plop down on the couch with her mom to hear about the latest twist in “Dancing With the Stars,” her mother’s favorite television show. Mrs. Clinton plans to spend time talking about her mother in a series of campaign events in early nominating states next week. She wants to highlight not only her mother’s background, but also the people, like teachers, who were kind to Dorothy as a child as a way to pivot to Mrs. Clinton’s philosophy that government and communities need to do their part to lift the middle class. In her 2014 book, “Hard Choices,’’ Mrs. Clinton described how one teacher in elementary school, realizing that Dorothy was too poor to buy milk at lunchtime, would buy two cartons herself every day and then say, “Dorothy, I can’t drink this other carton of milk. Would you like it?’ ” The woman who hired her as a teenage housekeeper took an interest in her, urging her to finish high school and giving her clothes. Mrs. Clinton has said these seemingly small gestures showed her mother the presence of goodness in the world, and later made her a caring mother and grandmother. Talking so extensively about Mrs. Rodham signals an evolution for Mrs. Clinton, from a deeply private, reluctant politician to a 67-year-old candidate who, according to her friends and aides, is running the campaign she wants to run. Mrs. Clinton has spent weeks writing Saturday’s speech, with the help of Dan Schwerin, a longtime aide and director of speechwriting for the campaign. A sympathetic tale of her mother’s struggles could help Mrs. Clinton convince a struggling middle class that she understands their problems, aides said. A CNN poll released on June 2 showed that 47 percent of voters thought that Mrs. Clinton “cares about people like you,” down from 53 percent last July. Mrs. Clinton’s campaign aides have publicly shrugged off such polls as evidence that voters distrust Washington and politics in general, but privately they are strategizing about how to reframe the conversation. The idea of incorporating Mrs. Rodham’s story was floated during the 2008 Democratic primaries, when Mrs. Clinton’s advisers tested how Dorothy Rodham resonated with focus groups in Iowa; the response was overwhelmingly positive. But back then Mrs. Clinton was uneasy talking about her mother. “It would be uncomfortable for any of us to talk about the struggles of any of our family members in such a public way, especially when your family members are living,” Ms. Doyle said. “And Dorothy was a very private person.” Mrs. Clinton was also fiercely private. When her husband first ran for president in 1992, Mrs. Clinton vehemently shielded Chelsea and her parents from the spotlight. She lost her temper when aides proposed a video of Chelsea, to show that Bill Clinton was a good family man, to be broadcast at the 1992 Democratic National Convention. Mrs. Rodham died in 2011 at the age of 92. Her daughter has said that one of her mother’s heartbreaks was that she was never able to attend college. After she graduated from high school in California, her mother lured her back to Chicago with a promise that her new husband would pay for tuition. Dorothy dreamed of attending Northwestern University. But it turned out that her mother had lied, and actually wanted her back in Chicago only as a housekeeper. Eventually she found secretarial work. “I’d hoped so hard that my mother would love me that I had to take the chance and find out,” Mrs. Rodham once said. “When she didn’t, I had nowhere else to go.” *Hillary Clinton Plans to Show Her Roots in Rally Speech* <http://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-clinton-plans-to-show-her-roots-in-rally-speech-1434066559>* // WSJ // Laura Meckler – June 11, 2015* Hillary Clinton plans to show how her policy prescriptions are rooted in her family’s personal history during the first rally of her presidential campaign, on Saturday. Mrs. Clinton’s speech, to supporters gathering on New York City’s Roosevelt Island, will portray her as a fighter who learned to navigate life’s challenges from her mother, who was abandoned by her own parents but went on to create a stable, middle-class upbringing for her children. Aides said Mrs. Clinton will cite her mother’s example in explaining that all children need someone in their corner. The story of Mrs. Clinton’s mother is meant to address what campaign aides say is the central question in the election-which candidate voters can count on to fight for them. “She’s not a quitter, and you can count on her to grind it out and get the job done,” said Jennifer Palmieri, the Clinton campaign communications director, said of Mrs. Clinton. “We think it’s important people understand where that conviction comes from.” Mrs. Clinton will use Saturday’s rally, before an expected crowd of thousands, in a sense to reintroduce herself to voters. After a long period in public life, Mrs. Clinton is known for controversies ranging from the so-called Whitewater scandal, an Arkansas land deal gone bad, during her husband’s terms in the White House to recent issues surrounding her use of a personal email account and server for her government work as secretary of state. Mrs. Clinton will focus on other aspects of her biography-such as her work as a young lawyer on behalf of children-to show that she consistently fights for those needing help. On Thursday, the Republican National Committee released a TV ad ahead of the Saturday speech saying that Mrs. Clinton has lost public trust. “Hillary Clinton’s latest campaign reset won’t change a thing,” RNC Chairman Reince Priebus said in a statement. “Most people don’t think she’s trustworthy, and she’s still out-of-touch with everyday Americans.” From New York, she’ll travel to Iowa for a house party to be simulcast across the state and an organizing event in Des Moines. Visits to the other early voting states of New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada will follow.The Saturday rally marks a new phase of Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign. A candidate for two months, Mrs. Clinton so far has appeared at small events, such as round table policy discussions. For the first time in the race, Mrs. Clinton’s husband, former President Bill Clinton, and their daughter, Chelsea, will appear with her on stage. Each day of next week will have a biographical theme, Ms. Palmieri said. The campaign is also producing a biographical video highlighting Mrs. Clinton’s work, starting with her advocacy for children as a young attorney. Aides said that Mrs. Clinton’s approach in reintroducing herself to voters will address concerns expressed in some polls that voters don't find her honest and trustworthy. “We think the question on voters’ minds is who can you trust to fight for you?” Ms. Palmieri said. No new policy details are expected in Saturday’s speech, though Mrs. Clinton will mention many of her priorities if elected. They include addressing college affordability and wage stagnation and expanding early childhood education, all topics she’s mentioned on the campaign trail already. So far, Mrs. Clinton has expansively discussed her views on social policy such as immigration, voting rights and gay rights, but she offered few details of her economic plan, such as how to approach Wall Street regulation, how much to raise the minimum wage and whether she would advance a pending Pacific rim trade deal. Aides said Saturday’s speech was the not the right venue to flesh out policy details and that more policy details will come in speeches beginning next month. Despite Mrs. Clinton’s long experience in the public eye, her advisers say many people still don’t know important parts of her personal history, including the story of her mother, Dorothy Rodham. Mrs. Rodham’s parents divorced, and neither one wanted their two daughters, Mrs. Clinton wrote in her book “Hard Choices,” where said her mother’s childhood had been marked by “trauma and abandonment.” The Rodham girls were sent to live with grandparents, who Mrs. Clinton described as severe and unloving. After high school, young Dorothy Rodham moved to Chicago in hopes of reconnecting with her mother but was spurned again. Mrs. Clinton wrote that she learned from her mother to face adversity through perseverance and to “never quit.’’ *With stories of mother's struggle, Clinton seeks reintroduction in first major campaign speech* <http://www.newser.com/article/4e9c2155b6424ee4be46e472bd8b17ca/with-stories-of-mothers-struggle-clinton-seeks-reintroduction-in-first-major-campaign-speech.html>* // AP // Lisa Lerer & Ken Thomas* Hillary Rodham Clinton, one of the best-known figures in American politics, will seek to reintroduce herself to voters on Saturday by telling the story of her mother's childhood struggles, pitching her 2016 presidential campaign as a fight on behalf of such everyday Americans. In the first major speech of her bid for the Democratic nomination, Clinton plans to pay tribute to the hard work of Americans who she'll argue helped the country emerge from the Great Recession, saying they deserve to be rewarded for their sacrifices. "It is your time," Clinton will say, according to aides who described the speech she'll deliver from New York City's Roosevelt Island. While Republicans have already spent months seeking to make the 2016 election a referendum on Clinton, her speech aims to present the decision facing voters as more than just an assessment of her career as a former first lady, New York senator and secretary of state. Instead, her campaign wants to cast the race as a choice about the economic future of the middle class. Among her campaign aides, Clinton refers to the election as a "job interview" and the question before voters as a "hiring decision." "We think the question is: Can I count on you to be that person who is going to fight for me?" said Jennifer Palmieri, the Clinton campaign's communications director. The speech, Palmieri said, will showcase Clinton's differences with a large, and what she will describe as a monolithic, Republican presidential field. Her remarks also represent an effort by her campaign to cast off the shadow of scandal that has dogged her over the past several months. Clinton has seen her personal approval ratings drop amid questions about her wealth, use of a private email account and server as secretary of state, and the financial dealings of her family charity. The emphasis on her late mother, Dorothy Rodham, is a change in course from Clinton's failed White House bid in 2008, when her campaign focused on her experience and toughness, presenting her as an American version of the late British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. Rodham died in 2011 after a life that has been described as Dickensian. Abandoned at a young age by her parents, she was sent as an 8-year-old with her 3-year-old sister on a four-day journey to live with strict, unloving grandparents in California. At the age of 14, she left their house to work for three dollars per week as a mother's helper. She eventually arrived in Chicago, where she married Hugh Rodham, a traveling salesman, and raised Clinton and her two brothers. In her nearly four decades of public life, Clinton has often cited her mother as an inspiration, recounting how she pushed her daughter to stand-up for herself. One of her earliest memories, Clinton has said, is her mother telling her to challenge a neighborhood bully. "I said, just go out there and show them you're not afraid," Rodham said in a rare 2004 interview with Oprah Winfrey. "And if she does hit you again, which she kept doing, hit her back." While Rodham largely stayed out of the public eye, Clinton has long credited her mother with giving her a love of learning and a sense of compassion. "She has empathy for other people's unfortunate circumstances," Rodham said of her daughter in a 2007 campaign ad. "I've always admired that because that isn't always true of people." Clinton will be joined by her husband, former president Bill Clinton, and daughter, Chelsea, at Saturday's rally, marking the first time the family has been seen together in public since Clinton announced her intention to again run for the White House in early April. After the speech, she'll embark on a tour of early voting states, with events focused on her relationship with her mother, work as a young lawyer on behalf of poor children, and her father's background as a veteran and small businessman. In the coming weeks, her campaign will begin rolling out specific policy initiatives on issues including college affordability, jobs and the economy. Those policies, campaign aides argue, will help build Democratic enthusiasm for her bid, despite the lack of a serious primary challenge. "They're a great organizing tool," said Marlon Marshall, Clinton's head of early state strategy. *Clinton's launch speech to focus on her mother's life* <http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/clintons-launch-speech-to-focus-on-her-mothers-life-118907.html>* // Politico // Annie Karni – June 11, 2015* After nearly two and a half decades in the glare of the public spotlight, Hillary Clinton will reintroduce herself on Saturday by highlighting her personal journey marked heavily by the deprivations faced by her own mother. Starting with the story of her mother’s abusive and traumatic childhood, Clinton will explain the role her family played in making her an advocate for other people, campaign officials told POLITICO, previewing the highly touted speech on New York’s Roosevelt Island that will set the tone for the rest of her campaign. (Chelsea and Bill Clinton will attend, but Bill Clinton will have no speaking role.) That personal focus will be driven home by the release, shortly afterwards, of a biographical video about Clinton’s career as a fighter for the middle-class, dating back to her work for the Children’s Defense Fund after graduating from law school. While Clinton has often spoken in recent months about her pride in becoming a grandmother, it is another matriarch, Dorothy Rodham, who will be the binding theme in her remarks Saturday. Dorothy Rodham’s dysfunctional and abusive parents shipped her off to live with her grandparents in California when she was 8. But the grandparents proved no more capable of caring for a young child. By age 14, Rodham had fled from her grandparents home to live with a family working as a housekeeper earning $3 a week. It was there that Rodham for the first time saw what a functional family acted like, Clinton will say. And it is her mother’s surrogate family, she will say, who first motivated her to be a champion for everyday Americans who need an outside advocate to help them achieve a better life. “Her story is wanting to be an advocate for other people. Where does it all come from? That’s where it all comes from,” said communications director Jennifer Palmieri, referring to Dorothy Rodham’s story. “We think that’s an important thing for people to understand. Some people know it, we think a lot of people don’t.” In her memoir, “Living History,” Clinton wrote of her mother’s tragic childhood: “I thought often of my own mother’s neglect and mistreatment at the hands of her parents and grandparents, and how other caring adults filled the emotional void to help her.” That is the theme she will strike Saturday. It’s been decades since Clinton lived a life that could be relatable to any of the voters she seeks to represent. Hillary and Bill Clinton together earned more than $30 million since 2014 alone, according to a recent financial disclosure. But the focus on her mother’s childhood and her own middle-class upbringing in suburban Chicago allows Clinton to draw on personal stories relatable to the “everyday Americans” she seeks to represent. She is also expected to strike an economic populist message in explaining her vision for the country. She will state that prosperity should not be reserved for CEOs and hedge fund managers, but should be available to everyday Americans, according to campaign officials. Her message to middle-class families struggling to make it: “It is your time.” Clinton is not expected to roll out and detailed policy proposals in the speech, which campaign officials described as the “foundational document” of her campaign. Those detailed policy proposals will begin to be rolled out in July, with her platform on student loans, and continue into the fall. But Clinton will outline some of the fights she wants to take on, including: college affordability, early childhood education, national security and wages, Palmieri said. And she will say frame the race as a clear choice for Americans, between Clinton’s ideas and the Republicans’ top-down economic policies, like lower taxes for the rich and fewer regulations for corporations. On social policies, she will frame the Republican field as out of touch with where the country has moved. “The question of the campaign is, who is the candidate in the race who understands what my life is like, what the problems are, has solutions and is going to hang in and fight for me everyday and get things done,” Palmieri said. “There’s not any candidate that’s better qualified than her to be that fighter for people.” Clinton, Palmieri said, is still in the process of editing her own speech, and has spent a lot of time figuring out how best to frame her first big-picture pitch to voters. Campaign officials said despite the fact that Clinton has been on the national stage for over two decades, it was important to her and to them to tell her family story again. “We’re starting from scratch here,” Palmieri said. “We’re going through all the paces and explaining why you’re motivated to have been an advocate in the first place. we think it’s an important part of the process.” Wonk Warrior *Inside the relaunch of Hillary Clinton* <http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/06/hillary-clinton-2016-wonk-warrior-118910.html#ixzz3cqIu3GIg>* // Politico Magazine // Glenn Thrush - June 12, 2015* Hillary Clinton hasn’t always been a profile in political courage, but she’s had her moments. One of them came in late December 2006, a month before Clinton announced her first run for the presidency, as she huddled with her team to discuss policy proposals to differentiate her from two rivals flanking her on the left, Barack Obama and John Edwards. The conversation, which included former Clinton White House aides like Gene Sperling and Neera Tanden, who still have the candidate’s ear today, bogged down on the biggest, nastiest policy fight of her life, health care. Several of Clinton’s top advisers, the ’90s debacle fresh in everyone’s mind, counseled her to avoid proposing an individual mandate, the politically unpopular requirement that the uninsured buy insurance or face penalties. When it came to the widely unpopular individual mandate, however, she was adamant about plowing ahead, according to a former aide who related the story. “If I run for president, I’m going to run on universal health care,” Clinton told the group—and authorized attacks on her Democratic opponent Obama for opposing a mandate (he would eventually embrace it as president, much to Clinton’s amusement). “What’s the point of running if I’m not going to run on universal health care?” she asked her team. Eight years later, on the eve of Clinton’s formal campaign kickoff in New York this weekend, the “what’s the point of running?” question looms over the presumptive Democratic front-runner and her campaign. Over the past few months, even some of Clinton’s most fervent and loyal supporters have fretted to me, over and over, that she hasn’t yet articulated a compelling rationale for her second race for the White House beyond the sense that it’s finally her turn and her political view that she’s facing a relatively weak Republican field. Clinton is no Teddy Kennedy, who suffered the most infamous case of lockjaw in political history when asked why he wanted to be president during the 1980 campaign; Her problem is that she’s far more interested in the how than the why of the presidency, and views her greatest assets as a willingness to engage all participants in a debate and a workmanlike capacity to hammer out policy solutions. Clinton’s big speech will be a rare opportunity to change that narrative. It will be held at New York’s Roosevelt Island—a none-to-subtle signal that she’s aligning herself with FDR, the boldest of Democratic presidents and the one who established the deepest personal connection with voters—something Clinton has struggled to do throughout her three-decade career. And she’ll do so with a broad progressive agenda, her advisers told me, studded with policy proposals to be unveiled in greater depth in a series of speeches this summer, starting with an ambitious plan to cut student debt and lower tuition and a program to coax corporations into paying their workers more. Clinton’s staff believes this is where the campaign will be won or lost—it will signal to voters, and to ideologically driven Obama donors, that she’s every bit as committed to their cause as Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders—or the Hillary Clinton of 1993 for that matter. This isn’t some pro forma exercise for Clinton, who started her professional career working on child welfare programs and sits, poolside, with briefing books when she’s on vacation. Policy is what Hillary Clinton lives for, and her team is committed to portray her as a wonk warrior, which has the added virtue of being true. In 2008, the candidate emphasized her inevitability and her toughness (she was obsessed with the idea that male voters would view a woman as a weak potential commander-in-chief), but for 2016, she’s building her strategy around a series of domestic policy rollouts. How she’s doing this is equally telling: Advisers told me it was an elaborate, even West Wing-style policy process, with concentric circles of advisers and pollsters who are cooking up a comprehensive economic policy, some of which will be for public consumption, some of which will be employed if she’s elected. Over the past year, Clinton has quietly met with a rotating—and sharp-elbowed—cast of Democratic economic experts, pollsters, staffers and advocates to craft a just-so economic program to attack wage stagnation and economic inequality. The very explicit goal has been political: to invent a program for Clinton that captures the popular imagination—and, to no small extent, redefines a candidate with a trustworthiness problem. “We’re talking about three- and four-hour meetings, briefing papers, weeks of back-and-forth,” says Clinton’s communications director Jennifer Palmieri, who says the candidate will unveil pieces of her agenda, one by one, in a series of events starting in July and stretching to the fall. “This is the foundational work of the election. She’s a wonk. This is stuff she loves to do.” What’s emerging—and her staff maintains she’s made no big decisions on the stickiest subjects, such as whether to propose tax increases and Wall Street regulation—are classic Clinton thread-the-needle proposals, albeit with a slightly sharper needle, pointing unmistakably to the left. Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz had a one-on-one meeting with Clinton last December to discuss his aggressive progressive agenda, pushing for deep tax cuts against the wealthy and pay cuts for CEOs. She already knew the subject inside out, he told me, and probed him for details on how some of his proposals could be implemented. Like most of the economists and advocates she’s met with recently, Stiglitz left satisfied he’d gotten a fair hearing, but with no concrete commitment. “I would be surprised at this point that she would want to make it clear where she is going on the specifics, so I wouldn’t expect to hear that from her anytime soon,” said Stiglitz, who worked on Bill Clinton’s economic team—then went on to become one of the country’s most influential champions of economic equality. “My sense was that she was very responsive to the overall agenda. … It’s important for her to get elected, but we want to make sure that she understands that we have to deal with the failure of the system overall, and not just make small changes.” The goal, according to a dozen people close to the process who spoke to POLITICO, is to find the “sweet spot”—bold solutions that aren’t too bold. She has tasked her small in-house policy team led by former State Department aide Jake Sullivan with a pragmatic mission: Attack the biggest problems—higher education debt, a tax system that encourages short-term gain over long-tern investments, out-of-control CEO pay, crumbling infrastructure, the non-job-security “gig” economy, women’s pay equity—in a way that satisfies a restive left wing of the party. But do it without needlessly alienating general election voters, or potential donors. “She wants to do just enough,” is how one New York-based Clinton donor who speaks to both Clintons regularly put it. *** As important—and complex—as the health care debate was seven years ago when Clinton last ran for president, it’s dwarfed today by the sheer magnitude of the structural problems in the American economy, a sapping of dynamism and middle-income purchasing power that has given consumers (and voters) a permanent sense of the blahs, even as big banks and corporations book record profits. *Hillary Clinton: "It is your time"* <http://www.vox.com/2015/6/11/8768601/Hillary-Clinton-rally-Roosevelt>* // VOX // Jonathan Allen – June 11, 2015* Trying to shed an image of elitism, Hillary Clinton will deliver a concise message for the masses during her first big campaign rally Saturday: "It is your time." The 2016 Democratic presidential frontrunner is scheduled to speak at Four Freedoms Park on New York's Roosevelt Island, a site that offers the symbolism of linking herself to Franklin Roosevelt, the well-to-do president whose New Deal social programs provided work and financial security for Americans during and after the Great Depression. The Clinton campaign on Thursday released a basic sketch of the themes of her speech, which is being billed as the formal announcement of a campaign that began two months ago. Since then, she has focused on raising money and meeting with voters in small groups in early primary states. Now Clinton is ready to articulate her motivation for seeking the presidency, her vision for the country, and the contrast she will draw with her Republican rivals for the job, according to her campaign. The last point, which will be driven by a populist argument that Republican policies benefit those in the top economic strata, connects to Clinton's main theme: She wants to be the champion for what she calls "everyday Americans." Her mother's example She will also lean heavily on the story of her late mother to explain her rationale for public service and seeking the presidency, a choice that appears to reflect her desire to talk more about her personal life — and about her gender — in this campaign than she did in her failed 2008 bid. "She is a well-known figure, but when you're asking the American people to support you as president, even if it is for the second time, there is no skipping of steps. If you want to understand Hillary Clinton, and what has motivated her career of fighting for kids and families, her mother is a big part of the story," Clinton campaign communications director Jennifer Palmieri said in a statement. "The example she learned from her mother's story is critical to knowing what motivated Hillary Clinton to first get involved in public service, and why people can count on her to fight for them and their families now." Her campaign also revealed that she will use a video to show biographical highlights of her career. Clinton advisers have said the speech will provide the basic architecture for specific policies she intends to detail over the course of the summer, but her campaign did not offer any insight into what exactly she will say about her platform on Saturday. *Why is Hillary Clinton running for president? She'll answer that at a New York rally* <http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-clinton-speech-preview-20150611-story.html>* // LA Times // Evan Halper – June 11, 2015* llary Rodham Clinton will forcefully lay out her motivation for running for president during a major rally in New York on Saturday, campaign officials say, drawing from her personal story to frame the theme of a White House run that some Democrats worry has lacked in inspiration. In her formal announcement speech at Four Freedoms Park, on a small city island named after Franklin D. Roosevelt, Clinton will talk about how the tough childhood experiences of her mother drove her to enter public service. She will seek to dispel the notion that she is running because it is her turn to inherit the Democratic nomination and offer instead a personal, detailed biographical sketch that campaign advisors say will make a compelling case for why the White House is her calling. The speech will be Clinton’s most expansive since she announced her candidacy in April, and it provides an opportunity to reboot a campaign that is way ahead in the polls but has yet to spark the kind of enthusiasm among the grass roots that twice carried Barack Obama to victory. Advisors have been working on the address for weeks. They are seeking to replicate for Clinton the kind of response Obama triggered with his 2007 kickoff address in Springfield, Ill., where he presented himself as an agent of change and hope. “This is an important foundational moment for the campaign,” said Jennifer Palmieri, Clinton’s communications director. “If she wins, this is how she will govern. ... She has been working on this for a while." The absence of any formidable opponent has allowed Clinton to run a cautious campaign, sticking to boilerplate Democratic issues and mostly avoiding answering questions from the media. Campaign officials say her approach will change as she moves into this new phase of her run. The roundtables with handpicked audiences will soon be accompanied on the calendar by larger, unscripted events such as town halls and news conferences. But like everything else in the Clinton campaign, Saturday’s speech will be carefully crafted. The setting is notable for its associations with Clinton’s own background. New York was where she launched her political career, serving the state as a U.S. senator. Roosevelt Island is, of course, named for the architect of the New Deal, and Clinton’s messaging – if not her actual policy proposals – borrows heavily from the time. “She will talk about the principles behind FDR’s policies that continue to be true to the Democratic Party,” Palmieri said. “He is someone that she has admired and been inspired by.” Some parts of the speech that campaign officials previewed Thursday, in fact, could just as easily have come from Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, the self-described democratic socialist who is also running for the nomination, albeit as a major underdog to Clinton. She will say that hedge fund managers and bankers need to take more responsibility for the welfare of the country, ostensibly by contributing more of their earnings to government. She will herald “everyday Americans” for making sacrifices that mended the national economy and proclaim it is their turn to be rewarded, announcing, “It is your time.” Clinton will be accompanied in New York by her husband, former President Clinton, and their daughter, Chelsea. It will be the first time the family has appeared together at a campaign event since Clinton announced her run. The candidate was notably absent from another major family event this week, the annual gathering of the Clinton Global Initiative in Denver. It's part of the family's foundation, which has been a source of relentless negative press for Clinton of late, as reporters investigate the millions of dollars in donations it received from foreigners with business interests in America while she was secretary of State. Hillary Clinton attacks Republicans over voting restrictions Saturday’s rally will be followed by a whirlwind of events in early caucus and primary states. Clinton will be in Iowa by nightfall on Saturday, in New Hampshire on Monday and then off to campaign events in South Carolina and Nevada by the middle of next week. Clinton will tease some of the big policy proposals the campaign will unveil over the summer. Whether the speech will live up to the billing of campaign officials as an event that will give voters a personal connection to Clinton remains to be seen – many of the proclamations Clinton intends to make in it seem a mere amplification of points she has been raising already in more intimate settings. But the goal is to supplant what voters may think they know about Clinton’s personal story with a more textured portrait to which they can relate and find inspiration in. “People know she is a fighter who does not quit and hangs in there,” Palmieri said. “It is important that they understand where this comes from. … She has been on the national stage for a long time, but we think there is a lot to fill in. When you are asking people to put their faith in you to be their president, it is a big ask." Clinton will talk in detail about her mother, the late Dorothy Rodham, who was abandoned as a child, sent to California to live with harsh and unloving grandparents, and found redemption in her early teen years through the kindness of an employer who provided cheap room and board and encouraged her to finish high school. “Clinton will discuss how her mother shaped the person she is today and why she could not duck away from this fight,” said a preview from the campaign. Clinton will attribute her “fighter’s instinct” to her mother, according to the campaign, as well as her belief that “everyone needs a champion.” The speech will be accompanied by a major social media push, centered on a video the campaign is producing about the “fights Hillary Clinton has taken on during her career.” *Clinton plans personal kick-off speech, but Democrats want aggressive agenda* <http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clinton-plans-personal-kick-off-speech-but-democrats-want-aggressive-agenda/2015/06/11/4bc107e6-1077-11e5-9726-49d6fa26a8c6_story.html>* // WaPo // Philip Rucker & Anne Gearan – June 11, 2015* Democratic activists have been hungry for their presidential front-runner to articulate a detailed and aggressive path forward on issues ranging from the economy to the environment to gay rights. Hillary Rodham Clinton will begin her effort to meet those expectations on Saturday when she formally kicks off her 2016 campaign with a major speech in New York City. At an outdoor rally on Roosevelt Island, Clinton will cloak her candidacy in the symbolism of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the New Deal as she offers her rationale for running and her vision for a more activist federal government. But Clinton is not planning to offer specific policy prescriptions — at least not yet. Instead, her advisers said Thursday, she will speak about her upbringing as the daughter of a woman who was abandoned as a child and why she sees herself as an advocate for those left behind in a fast-changing economy. She also intends to draw contrasts with Republicans, portraying them as champions of corporations and the super-rich. “It’s a big speech, but it’s not the venue to do a lot of specifics on individual pieces of policy,” said Jennifer Palmieri, the Clinton campaign’s communications director. “The speech is the cornerstone of the campaign — that’s how she looks at this. It’s the foundation from which you run the rest of the campaign, and if she is elected president it’s the foundation of how you govern.” “She can’t just be a tribune of the Democrats,” said Robert Reich, a liberal economist who served as labor secretary in former president Bill Clinton’s administration. “It would be useful for her to make a very strong economic statement about why inequality is eating away at our economy, our democracy and the moral fabric of the country.” Clinton’s speech comes amid an intense debate on Capitol Hill over an Obama-backed trade bill that has divided Democrats. Clinton, who as secretary of state was involved in negotiating the trade deal, so far has been careful not to take a position — much to the chagrin of labor unions and liberal leaders, who are pressuring her to oppose it. New York Mayor Bill de Blasio (D) — who was campaign manager on Clinton’s 2000 Senate run but has not yet endorsed his former boss — said he wants to see her make “a very clear statement that this trade deal should be opposed and should be stopped.” Otherwise, De Blasio suggested, she could jeopardize the support of working-class voters in places like Ohio and Pennsylvania who were central to her 2008 campaign. “I think it’s very important that she speak up and say there will be no more NAFTA’s,” he said, referring to the controversial North American Free Trade Agreement of the 1990s. It is unclear whether Clinton intends to mention trade. Her campaign aides previewed a markedly personal address framed around the wrenching story of her late mother, Dorothy Rodham, who was abandoned and mistreated as a child and whom Clinton has credited with giving her lessons of hope and perseverance. The heavy emphasis on Clinton’s personal story is part of a rebranding strategy to humanize a candidate who sometimes comes across as chilly and aloof. Her husband, Bill, and their daughter, Chelsea, plan to appear with her on Roosevelt Island — their first appearance of the campaign. Shortly after the speech, Clinton’s campaign will release a biographical video that casts the candidate as a fighter and advocate, dating to the earliest days of her adult life. “The speech is about her — what I think is the diagnosis of the problems in the country, this is my vision of where I want to take the country, here are my solutions,” Palmieri said. Clinton’s solutions, however, will not come until later this summer and fall when she gives a series of policy speeches. Across the Democratic coalition, expectations for Saturday’s event vary. Behind the scenes, environmentalists have been pressing Clinton aides to ensure she prioritizes global warming in her remarks and signal she would be more aggressive than Obama in tackling greenhouse gas emissions. “We believe this speech is a great opportunity for her to make crystal clear that she cares deeply about addressing climate change and will make it a top priority throughout her campaign,” said Tiernan Sittenfeld, senior vice president for government affairs at League of Conservation Voters. Gay rights activists hope Clinton champions priorities beyond legalizing same-sex marriage, such as passing comprehensive federal non-discrimination legislation. “It would benefit her and it would certainly benefit members of our community to see her dedicate herself and be on the record about her commitment to a more inclusive America for all of its people,” said Fred Sainz, a vice president at the Human Rights Campaign. Meanwhile, economic progressives, many of whom tried unsuccessfully to draft Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) into the race, want to see Clinton address economic inequality with specific solutions. Will she call for busting up the big banks? Raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans? Closing the carried interest tax loophole that benefits hedge fund managers? Tougher anti-trust regulations? “I would love to see some specifics — expanding Social Security, debt-free college, holding Wall Street accountable,” said Charles Chamberlain, executive director of Democracy for America, an advocacy group that grew out of former Vermont governor Howard Dean’s 2004 presidential campaign. “But I don’t want to make it sound like there’s a menu and she just needs to go down and check the boxes. The key is we want to see a real fighter out there.” Some activists likened it to the president’s annual “State of the Union” address, in which each interest group hopes the speech touches on its priorities. But many acknowledged, as American Federation of Teachers president Randi Weingarten put it, that the speech will be about “values and aspiration” rather than a policy agenda. “As always happens with anything involving the Clintons, people spend a lot of time thinking about what are they going to do, what are they going to say, but as important a speech as it is, this is one speech,” said Weingarten, who is a Clinton ally, although AFT has not yet made its endorsement. Matt Bennett, a veteran of past Democratic presidential campaigns, said Clinton is smart to put off her policy plans. Otherwise, she would give her opponents targets. “She’s being bombarded with people seeking space in her speech for their wool and mohair subsidies or their piece of the action, but we think it would be unwise for her to go too deep into the details,” said Bennett, a senior vice president at Third Way. “She will be pecked to death by ducks for the next 18 months if she does that.” In the first two months of her campaign, Clinton has given important speeches on three policy matters — immigration, criminal justice and voting rights. But she has said relatively little about the issue many Democrats see as shaping the 2016 election: the structure of the economy. “She’s got to take this on,” Reich said. “She said when she launched her campaign that ‘the deck is still stacked in favor of those at the top.’ She’s got to tell us what she’s going to do to un-stack the deck.” *Hillary's rally and rationale: More Rodham, less Clinton* <http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/11/politics/hillary-clinton-2016-campaign-rally/index.html>* // CNN // Jeff Zeleny & Dan Merica – June 11, 2015* When Hillary Clinton sweeps onto the stage Saturday for the first major rally of her campaign, she will set aside her family's presidential legacy and concentrate on a chapter of her life she rarely speaks about: the Depression-era story of her mother, Dorothy Rodham. As she seeks to present herself as a candidate who will fight for the middle class, aides say Clinton will turn to lessons learned from her mother, who was abandoned by her parents as a child and was forced to bring herself up. She will argue that her Rodham roots have made her the person she is today, a subtle concession the power of the Clinton legacy alone will not carry her into the White House. "She is a well-known figure but when you're asking the American people to support you as president, even if it is for the second time, there is no skipping of steps," said Jennifer Palmieri, the campaign's communications director. "If you want to understand Hillary Clinton, and what has motivated her career of fighting for kids and families, her mother is a big part of the story." The rally on Saturday at Roosevelt Island in New York, which will be awash in symbolism of Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt, offers a moment for Clinton to reset her candidacy. She intends to offer a more expansive rationale for why she believes she should be president, an argument that some Democrats believe she and her campaign have failed to clearly articulate. That was among the conversations at a dinner Clinton attended early last week at the home of Sen. Dianne Feinstein in Washington, where several other Democratic women senators gathered for an intimate discussion about her candidacy. They urged Clinton to present herself as more of a fighter, participants said, who is passionate about improving the plight of everyday Americans. Two months after she launched her candidacy, Clinton remains in command of the Democratic nominating fight. Yet she has struggled to rally excitement among some liberals in her party. It's an open question whether there will be enough substance to satisfy critics who have said Clinton has been short on specifics, particularly on trade and other liberal priorities. While the calls for Sen. Elizabeth Warren to enter the race have cooled, the long lines of Democrats waiting to see Sen. Bernie Sanders on the campaign trail underscore that she cannot take anything for granted. The opening chapter of her second presidential bid has been far rockier than she and her advisers expected, more than a dozen Democrats close to the campaign told CNN this week. She enters the summer facing far more questions about her long-term prospects than when she first jumped into the race. A CNN/ORC poll last week found that 57% of Americans thought Clinton was not honest and trustworthy, which was up from 49% in March. And less than half of people feel she cares about people like them, 47%, which is down from 53% last July. Campaign aides familiar with the speech on Saturday say Clinton's chief goal will be to outline her rationale for running, providing voters with a reason to elect her and responding to those who have said her run is based on nothing more than inevitability. The entire day will focus on Clinton, aides said. Although both Bill and Chelsea Clinton will attend -- the first time either will appear at a campaign event -- they will not be the focus and will likely not speak. The speech will be centered around the story of Rodham, aides said, far more than the legacy of Clinton. "The example she learned from her mother's story is critical to knowing what motivated Hillary Clinton to first get involved in public service," Palmieri said on Thursday. "And why people can count on her to fight for them and their families now." Clinton's speech will not be a detailed policy rollout. Instead, the former secretary of state will preview a list of critical policy issues, aides said, but will wait until later in the summer to outline the details of each policy proposal. Aides said that Clinton's speech will be a mix of her biography and vision, with the former first lady arguing that the guiding principle in her campaign will be how America's families are doing, not those at the top. Clinton will repeatedly use the phrase "it is your time," aides said, to hammer home that Americans who help bring the country back from recession now deserve to enjoy the benefits. Campaign aides are producing a biographical video documenting different points in Clinton's career, including her work as a lawyer for the Children's Defense Fund. The Clinton campaign used Hillary Clinton's Twitter account to tease the video that is expected to be released after Saturday's rally. And Clinton's speech, of course, will not be without partisan politics. Aides said she will argue Republicans are a repeat of their predecessors and will ensure voters that she will offer a clear choice in 2016. While the first two months of her candidacy have been intentionally downsized -- small roundtable conversations over big rallies -- Clinton has spent considerable time appearing before small groups of donors. Clinton has personally headlined 37 fundraisers in 13 states. It is likely, given the attendance of each event, that more than $16 million has been raised from Clinton-headlined fundraisers. Her top aides and operatives have headlined dozens more. Clinton aides have said they hope to raise $100 million by the end of 2015. In the weeks after her campaign kickoff, CNN has learned, Clinton will headline four more fundraisers in California, three in Massachusetts and one in Indiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Illinois, Pennsylvania, New York and New Hampshire. Before June 30, the final day of the first fundraising deadline, Clinton will have personally headlined over 50 fundraisers. "She has to raise a lot of money," said former ambassador Edward Romero, who hosted a Clinton fundraiser in New Mexico earlier this month. "Every candidate has that pressure." *Hillary Clinton Will Evoke Roosevelt and Try to Ease Fears on Trust in New York Speech* <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/12/us/hillary-clinton-to-invoke-roosevelt-in-new-york-speech-laying-out-vision.html>* // NYT // Amy Chozick – June 11, 2015* Hillary Rodham Clinton, at a major outdoor rally planned for Saturday, will directly address concerns that have emerged in the early weeks of her candidacy, telling voters they can trust her to fight for the middle class and stressing that she cares about their problems, several people briefed on her plans say. The speech, at an event shaping up to be the most ambitious public gathering undertaken by the campaign since Mrs. Clinton began her quest for the White House in April, will be shaped by symbolism as she seeks to make the case for why she should be president. It will be held in New York City on an island named for Franklin D. Roosevelt, in the shadow of diverse middle-class neighborhoods, as Mrs. Clinton tries to evoke the legacy of the New Deal and lay out her vision for a federal government substantially engaged in lifting American families that feel economically insecure and increasingly left behind. Mrs. Clinton has yet to put forth a clear rationale for her candidacy since announcing in a brief online video that she would run for the Democratic nomination. “She has to articulate an authentic, compelling rationale for her candidacy, a cause and vision that is larger than her own ambitions,” said David Axelrod, a former senior adviser to President Obama. But the large outdoor event, complete with a marching band and a space for an overflow crowd to watch the speech on giant monitors, must also counteract some signs of decline in Mrs. Clinton’s personal appeal, with polls showing that a growing number of Americans do not trust her or think she understands their lives. A CNN poll released June 2 showed that 57 percent of Americans thought that Mrs. Clinton was not honest and trustworthy, up from 49 percent in March, and that 47 percent of voters thought that Mrs. Clinton “cares about people like you,” down from 53 percent last July. Publicly, Mrs. Clinton’s campaign aides have shrugged off such polls as evidence that voters distrust Washington and politics in general. Privately, they are strategizing about how to reframe the conversation. Rather than defend attacks on Mrs. Clinton’s trustworthiness regarding her use of a private email address at the State Department while she was secretary of state or foreign donations to her family’s philanthropy, the campaign will seek to turn the trust issue on its head. “But who do you trust more to fight for you when they get in the Oval Office?” the Democratic strategist, Steve Elmendorf, said, repeating a line often used by Mrs. Clinton’s senior advisers. The campaign will try to turn another one of Mrs. Clinton’s challenges, her tendency to incite strong and divisive reactions from people, to her advantage, emphasizing her perceived toughness. Her campaign chairman, John D. Podesta, often refers to Mrs. Clinton as a “tenacious fighter,” a theme that will echo throughout the speech and her campaign. Mrs. Clinton’s husband, former President Bill Clinton, and daughter, Chelsea, will appear with her at the rally, the first time the family will make a joint campaign appearance since Mrs. Clinton became a candidate. Saturday’s event will signal the end of the first phase of Mrs. Clinton’s campaign, which mainly featured the former first lady holding round-table discussions with small groups of voters. Mrs. Clinton has said that she has learned a lot from those meetings, but they could come across as scripted and lacking in energy, especially as one rival, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, has already drawn large crowds. In the coming weeks, Mrs. Clinton will present more specific policies, speak to larger audiences and appear at town hall gatherings. The staging of Saturday’s event has been meticulous. Huma Abedin, a longtime aide to Mrs. Clinton and vice chairwoman of the campaign, and Greg Hale, an Arkansas-based consultant who has handled events for the Clintons for years, have taken a lead on planning. Jim Margolis, the news media consultant behind both of Mr. Obama’s inaugurations, and Mandy Grunwald, the longtime Clinton adviser who helped choreograph the appearance of Mr. Clinton and his family at the 1992 Democratic National Convention in New York, have also been involved. For weeks, aides weighed various locations. Rather than choosing Iowa or New Hampshire, they settled on New York, where Mrs. Clinton served as a senator and where a friendly crowd of supporters was simple enough to summon. Looking at a map of New York, aides in the campaign’s Downtown Brooklyn headquarters settled on Roosevelt Island, the 2-mile-by-800-foot strip of land on the East River between Manhattan and Queens. The event is open to the public, and the campaign has received several thousand requests to attend, though the forecast of scattered thunderstorms could affect turnout. The campaign angered some island residents after a community day for children had to be rescheduled. Others have grumbled that the national news media has, in terms of accessibility, compared Roosevelt Island to the nearby jail complex of Rikers Island. (Roosevelt Island is reachable via public transportation as well as a tram that has in the past stalled, leaving passengers suspended over the murky brown waters of the East River.) Mrs. Clinton will deliver the speech at Four Freedoms Park, a memorial with a grassy tree-lined mall, named after the four tenets that Roosevelt presented in his 1941 State of the Union address: freedom of speech and worship, and freedom from want and fear. She has defined her campaign as taking on “four fights,” including strengthening the economy, helping families and communities, getting unaccountable money out of politics and protecting the country from foreign threats. She is expected to evoke Roosevelt’s policies to reiterate her belief that government is needed to help lift wages, create jobs, make college and health care more affordable, and rebuild antiquated infrastructure. “It’s important for the campaign to demonstrate the sense of energy and excitement,” the Democratic pollster Geoff Garin said. But what is more important, he added, “is laying out an agenda that makes people feel that Hillary Clinton will be a fighter for them.” Mrs. Clinton’s message will reflect the Democratic Party’s leftward shift and stand in sharp contrast to the new covenant of personal responsibility that Mr. Clinton preached when he announced his candidacy in 1991 at the Old Statehouse in Little Rock, Ark. “Government’s responsibility is to create more opportunity,” Mr. Clinton said in that speech. “The people’s responsibility is to make the most of it.” Dan Schwerin, a policy adviser to Mrs. Clinton, is among the aides who have helped her shape her speech. Mrs. Clinton has already tested many of the main themes, including a populist critique of Wall Street excesses. She has called for equal pay for women, an overhaul of the criminal justice system and voting rights policies that would make the process easier for young people and minorities. Framing all of this with the pomp and celebration of an official announcement speech can serve not just as an introduction for a candidate (or in Mrs. Clinton’s case, a reintroduction), but also as a crucial chance to counteract negative opinions more than a year before a general election. In 2000, Vice President Al Gore’s campaign tried to reposition his wooden and cerebral demeanor as an advantage against the more affable George W. Bush. “At the end of the day, with critical decisions impacting your family, do you want someone you know is smart or not?” was how Chris Lehane, an adviser to Mr. Gore, summed up the strategy. Or, in shorthand: “You date Bush and marry Gore.” With Chelsea nearby, Mrs. Clinton will remind voters about her years as a working mother, her experience working for the Children’s Defense Fund in the 1970s and her record of as an advocate for women and children as a first lady, senator and secretary of state. The campaign also has a biographical video in the works. “You can become a caricature of how the press has determined who you are,” said Thomas R. Nides, a friend and adviser who worked for Mrs. Clinton at the State Department. “But the good news about Hillary Clinton is that she has a long history of who she is and what she stands for.” *Hillary Clinton Plans to Re-Introduce Herself to Voters* <http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clinton-plans-to-re-introduce-herself-to-voters/>* // CBS News // Stephanie Condon – June 11, 2015* After decades in the spotlight, Hillary Clinton this Saturday will use her first major address as a 2016 presidential candidate to re-introduce herself to voters, explaining how her personal story has driven her career aims of helping children and middle class families. Since launching her 2016 bid for the Democratic nomination in April, Clinton has held small events in key voting states. This Saturday's speech and rally at Four Freedoms Park in New York City marks the next phase of her campaign, according to a campaign official. Four key elements will comprise Clinton's speech: her motivations, who she's fighting for, her vision for the nation and a comparison between her vision and the GOP vision. The undergirding concept behind the whole speech is her personal story, the Clinton campaign said. Clinton, of course, heads into the 2016 race as one of the most well-known presidential candidates ever, after serving as secretary of state, a U.S. senator, the first lady of the United States and the first lady of Arkansas. Still, the campaign says, her personal story explains Clinton's drive to be a champion for everyday Americans. "She is a well-known figure, but when you're asking the American people to support you as president, even if it is for the second time, there is no skipping of steps," Jennifer Palmieri, the Hillary for America communications director, told CBS News in a statement. That story starts with Hillary Clinton's mother, Dorothy Rodham. In her memoir Hard Choices, Clinton wrote, "No one had a bigger influence on my life or did more to shape the person I became" than her mother. Dorothy Rodham's childhood was "marked by trauma and abandonment," Clinton wrote, noting that her mother was on her own and working as a housekeeper and nanny by age 14. In spite of the challenges she faced, Dorothy Rodham told her daughter she thrived in life because of the help of others. In her speech, according to a campaign official, Clinton will share that story and talk about how she adopted a fighter's instinct from her mother. She'll also explain how her mother's reliance on the help of others shaped her belief that everyone needs a champion. That belief drove her career in public service. To further share her story, Clinton's campaign is producing a biographical video, expected to be rolled out in the days after Saturday's event. It will highlight Clinton's work as an advocate for children and families, dating back to her work as a young lawyer for the Children's Defense Fund. Meanwhile, as Clinton readies her message for Saturday, Republicans are ratcheting up their own efforts to frame Clinton's campaign. The Republican National Committee is releasing a new ad, called "Wrong for America," as part of its larger #StopHillary campaign. The ad is airing on cable in Washington, D.C. and New York City starting Friday. The new effort also includes a targeted digital push in the key states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, in conjunction with Clinton's upcoming campaign stops. *Hillary Clinton gets personal* <http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/hillary-clinton-gets-personal>* // MSNBC // Alex Seitz-Wald – June 11, 2015* Hillary Clinton will lay out a personal rationale for her second attempt at the presidency Saturday in a major campaign rally to be held at a party honoring Frank Delano Roosevelt in New York City. The former secretary of state soft-launched her White House bid April 12 in a video posted online. But Saturday’s rally will mark the beginning a full-fledged presidential campaign after eight weeks of a low-key ramp-up. In the presence of a giant bust of FDR on an island named after the former president between Manhattan and Queens, Clinton will offer her most expansive remarks yet on why she’s running for president. Thousands are expected, with tickets to the event no long available on Clinton’s campaign website. Bill and Hillary Clinton will be on hand, but are not expected to speak. Those who make onto Roosevelt Island or watch on TV from home will see a very different Clinton than the one who lost the 2008 Democratic primary. Whereas Clinton was seen as impersonal and bloodless then, she now says the chief motivation of her public life is her mother. Whereas Clinton was seen as moderate and cautious then, she will now embrace a president who remade the country in a more progressive image. It shows that as the Democratic Party has moved left on social issues and both parties have become more populist, Clinton is finally catching up, said Bob Shrum, a former Clinton White House aide. “Maybe it’s left compared to the era of triangulation, but the era of triangulation over and is not where the party is or where the country is, as she discovered in 2008,” he said. Times have changed and with even Republicans discussing income inequality, Clinton is demonstrating she gets it. “I think she’s sending a very clear signal,” said Shrum. That comes from a personal place, she will say. On Saturday, Clinton will say that her mother’s brutal childhood is what motivated her to get into public service and work as an advocate of women and children, the campaign official said. Her mother’s story will be the foundation of her rationale for running for president. As a child, Dorothy Rodham was abandoned by her parents and sent to live with strict relatives. Not able to bare it anymore, she ran away at 14 and worked as a housekeeper for a kind-hearted woman who took her in and showed her what parenting should look like. That trauma and resilience, Clinton has said, taught her and how to be tough and made her want to help people in difficult circumstances. “No one had a bigger influence on my life or did more to shape the person I became,” Clinton wrote in her 2014 autobiography “Hard Choices.” Clinton’s mother will likely emerge as a recurring motif of the campaign. Immediately following her kick-off in New York City, Clinton will travel to Iowa and then New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada, and is likely to discuss her mother there, too. “If you want to understand Hillary Clinton, and what has motivated her career of fighting for kids and families, her mother is a big part of the story,” said Jennifer Palmieri, the Clinton campaign’s communications director. In an attempt to reintroduce her to voters – or introduce her for the first time to millennials, a critical voting bloc that missed most of the 1990s – the campaign has produced a biographical video covering Clinton’s lengthy career, the official added. It starts with her work at the Children’s Defense Fund, just after she left Yale Law School, and continues through her time at the State Department. It will be unveiled in the coming days. The rest of her speech will strike a decidedly populist economic tone, the official said. And she’ll preview policy ideas that will be rolled out in more detail later this summer. And Clinton will take on Republicans. Instead of addressing the Democrats running against her for the party’s nomination, she’ll look clear past them to the hypothetical GOP nominee she would face next year if she wins the primary. She’ll frame the election as a choice between her economic ideas and those of the Republicans. Likely to go unmentioned are Former Gov. Martin O’Malley, Sen. Bernie Sanders, and former Gov. Lincoln Chafee, who have all mentioned Clinton in their presidential announcements. Like many good presidential kick-offs, Clinton’s launch will be about symbolism as well as substance. Barack Obama chose the place where Abraham Lincoln gave his “House Divided” speech. Former Gov. Martin O’Malley and Sen. Bernie Sanders announced at outdoor rallies in the cities where they once were mayor. Rick Perry last week launched his run in front of a cargo plane he flew in the Air Force. Clinton chose a park honoring FDR in the state where she served as senator for eight years, a choice campaign officials say is meant to invoke Roosevelt’s legacy. “She could have chosen anywhere to make her announcement,” said Felicia Wong, the President of the Roosevelt Institute, a progressive think tank dedicated to carrying on the legacy of Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt. “By choosing this venue, she and her team have put themselves squarely in the legacy and the spirit of Franklin Roosevelt, who re-wrote the rules of the 20th century.” Roosevelt is credited with creating the modern welfare state, saving the economy from collapse, taking on entrenched wealthy interests, and defeating an expansionist, totalitarian foreign power. At the same time, he built the modern Democratic Party and the values that would emerge at its core to this day. Clinton has long seen Eleanor Roosevelt, a fellow first lady, as a role model and last year spoke admiringly about Teddy Roosevelt, saying she devoured Ken Burns’ expansive documentary series on the family. The kick-off comes at time when Clinton is trying to win over restive progressives. Tying herself to Roosevelt is a smart move, says New York-based Democratic strategist Hank Sheinkopf. “It is very much aimed to the left,” said Sheinkopf. “She needs to get rid of everybody who’s pestering her on her left, and one of the best ways to get rid of them is to invoke Franklin Roosevelt.” New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, a leader of the national progressive movement, will notably not attend the rally, his office has said. Clinton and de Blasio are longtime friends and he managed her Senate campaign in 2000. So far, however, de Blasio has declined to endorse Clinton’s presidential bid. Sheinkopf thinks de Blasio is playing hard to get in order to amp up the value of his endorsement down the road. Comparing de Blasio to “artillery” when it comes to defending her left flank, Sheinkopf said it’s too soon: “De Blasio is less needed now and more more needed later. Why do you want to use a howitzer now, when frankly when you can use much lighter weapons?” Her embrace of Roosevelt and progressive ideas is about more than the primary, however. She’ll need the so-called Obama coalition to turn out for her in a general election if she makes it there, and these are the issues they care about. “With the increasing polarization of the country, the fact is the key to winning these election is turning out your base,” said Shrum, who has held senior roles in Democratic campaigns. Still, Clinton has not yet weighed in on a few top issue for liberals. The House will vote Friday on a Trade Promotion Authority bill, which labor unions and others are fighting tooth and nail. That will have to wait until sometime after her kick-off. *Hillary Clinton Will Push Personal Story at Campaign Launch* <http://time.com/3918339/hillary-clinton-launch-new-york-city/?xid=tcoshare>* // TIME // Sam Frizell – June 11, 2015* For Hillary Clinton, this campaign is personal. When the democratic presidential candidate holds her much hyped rally on Saturday in New York City, her team said Thursday, she will emphasize her own history, discussing her family, her mother and her upbringing as a central part of her rationale for running for President. The speech will build on many of the tropes that Clinton has developed throughout the first two months of the campaign, as she uses her past to talk about income inequality and building stronger families. Much of her remarks will also center on her domestic and economic vision for the country. Clinton will in particular talk about her mother, Dorothy Rodham, who was abandoned by her parents and worked as a secretary before marrying Clinton’s father, Hugh Rodham. “If you want to understand Hillary Clinton, and what has motivated her career of fighting for kids and families, her mother is a big part of the story,” Jennifer Palmieri, the campaign’s director of communications, said in an email to reporters. “The example she learned from her mother’s story is critical to knowing what motivated Hillary Clinton to first get involved in public service, and why people can count on her to fight for them and their families now.” In 2007 and 2008, Clinton ran as a determined and businesslike candidate whose unofficial campaign slogan was “ready on Day One,” turning off some voters who found her difficult to relate to and distant. This time, Clinton has taken an entirely different, speaking frequently about her granddaughter, Charlotte, her father’s drapery business and her mother. Her website prominently displays photos of her as a baby and during her younger days with Bill Clinton. On Thursday, her newly minted Instagram feed featured a photo of her as a toddler riding a tricycle with the caption “Pedal to the metal. #tbt” Clinton’s team is marking Saturday as official the start of her full-blown campaign, though she announced her candidacy in mid-April and has been holding small events in the four early primary states of Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada over the past nine weeks. During those months she largely insulated herself from the media while holding carefully controlled roundtable conversations with voters. She will deliver her speech on Roosevelt Island in New York’s East River, a narrow four-mile-long residential haven with views of midtown Manhattan and Queens. Saturday’s event will be the first large rally of Clinton’s 2016 campaign. Since joining the race and reentering partisan politics, Clinton’s favorability among voters has dropped. According to a CNN poll published last week, 57% of Americans view her as dishonest and trustworthy, up from 49% in March. Clinton’s campaign will be resting their hopes on her personal story reinvigorating voters over the course of the campaign. “There’s still a lot of things people don’t know about her,” said Celinda Lake, a Democratic strategist unaffiliated with Clinton’s campaign. “The fact she came from Republican family, that she’s a person of faith. Her long history working for women and children… I think these numbers will pick up particularly among independent women as they get to know and see her better.” On Saturday, the campaign said, Clinton will discuss the lessons she learned from her mother and will return to some of the populist tones she has struck so far: that prosperity has to reach more than just the super rich, and be about everyday Americans and families—the ones that she has been meeting with on the campaign trail. Clinton will roll out major policy proposals throughout the summer, but she has talked frequently about income inequality and criminal justice reform, and laid out specific ideas about expanding voter participation and immigration. *At Launch Rally, Hillary Clinton to Tell Americans 'It Is Your Time'* <http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-11/at-launch-rally-hillary-clinton-to-tell-americans-it-is-your-time->* // Bloomberg News // Jennifer Epstein – June 11, 2015* Hillary Clinton has spent the past two months reintroducing herself to voters with carefully controlled campaign stops and minimal interaction with the media. On Saturday, she’ll initiate the next phase of her presidential candidacy with her first campaign rally, where she’ll discuss oft-omitted pieces of her personal story and tell the country why she’s best suited to be the next occupant of the Oval Office. She’ll discuss what motivates her, who she is fighting for, her vision for the country and what the choices are for voters in the 2016 election, Clinton officials said Thursday. The rally, slated for late morning at Four Freedoms Park on New York’s Roosevelt Island—a tribute to Franklin Delano Roosevelt and, to a lesser extent, Eleanor Roosevelt—won’t be heavy on policy details, but it will kick off a summer that will be full of economic proposals, including Clinton’s views on the minimum wage, Wall Street regulation and student debt. “She’s begun to lay an important foundation on which to build the next phase of her campaign.” Clinton’s economic positions will be progressive without leaning as far left those of Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, a self-identified socialist who in many polls is running a distant second to her for the Democratic presidential nomination. And they’ll draw on the principle of fairness that drove FDR’s presidency. “It is your time,” she will tell the people who her campaign has chosen to call everyday Americans, arguing that America’s success is measured not by how those at the top are doing but how the rest of the country is doing. Prosperity is for every American, she will say, not just for CEOs and hedge fund managers. Clinton will also argue that the election will leave voters with a clear choice between what her aides see as Republicans’ top-down economic policies and out-of-date social view, and her own views, which they say hinge on fairness and justice for all. Clinton shied away from her personal story throughout her 2008 campaign but has chosen, this time, to use her own experiences from long before she stepped foot in the White House or the State Department. It’s a way to connect with voters whose biographical knowledge of Clinton is limited to her years as first lady and secretary of state, and doesn’t trace back to her middle class beginnings in the Chicago suburbs or the roots of her indomitable spirit. Clinton’s life story from her parents’ influence onward, her supporters argue, is critical to convincing voters that she is the right person to lead the country. “She is a well-known figure but when you're asking the American people to support you as president, even if it is for the second time, there is no skipping of steps,” Clinton communications director Jennifer Palmieri said. The first two months of Clinton’s campaign started laying the groundwork for her reintroduction to the American people and the methodical campaign that she and her team have planned for the next 17 months. “Voters are seeing her not as secretary of state, not as first lady, not as Bill Clinton’s wife, not as a surrogate for President Obama but as Hillary Clinton, the 2016 candidate who is looking for their vote and their confidence to be their next commander-in-chief,” said Democratic strategist Maria Cardona, who advised Clinton’s first presidential campaign. During the first phase of her campaign, Clinton was "putting one foot in front of the next very methodically," said Bill Galston, a domestic policy adviser in Bill Clinton's White House. "She is not trying to force herself to be someone she’s not. She’s not Barack Obama. She's not her husband." Clinton's close ties to the last two Democratic presidents can make it difficult to differentiate her from them, but she's widely seen as more disciplined than her husband and more interested in engaging in politics than the current president. Clinton has suggested on the campaign trail that she could do better than Obama at working with Republicans and Democrats in Congress and, Galston said, "she has some skills that [Obama] lacks and those skills in these polarized times are pretty damn important." Much of Clinton’s focus on Saturday and as she travels next week to Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada, will be on one important figure in the candidate’s life: her mother, Dorothy Rodham, who suffered multiple rounds of “trauma and abandonment” as a child, as Clinton wrote in her 2014 memoir Hard Choices, but experienced enough acts of kindness to persist through the hardships she faced. “Mom measured her own life by how much she was able to help us and serve others,” Clinton wrote, and Rodham taught her daughter: “Never rest on your laurels. Never quit. Never stop working to make the world a better place. That’s our unfinished business.” From her mother’s example, Clinton learned that every child needs someone fighting for him or her—a belief that has pulled her through her career, beginning with her work as a young lawyer for the Children’s Defense Fund. “If you want to understand Hillary Clinton, and what has motivated her career of fighting for kids and families, her mother is a big part of the story,” Palmieri said. “The example she learned from her mother's story is critical to knowing what motivated Hillary Clinton to first get involved in public service, and why people can count on her to fight for them and their families now." The shift to a focus on Clinton's personal story—which will also include the campaign's release of a biographical video about Clinton in the coming days—comes after an initial active avoidance of focusing too much on the larger-than-life candidate. "One thing that struck me from the start as exactly right was to have this election not be about her but about everyday Americans," said Geoff Garin, Clinton's 2008 pollster. "She’s begun to lay an important foundation on which to build the next phase of her campaign." Americans, he added, "want their elected officials to be in touch with them and to have a personal understanding of what they’re going through. She's demonstrated a commitment to doing that and I think she’ll be a better candidate as a result of it." *Hillary Relaunch to Have 'Airport Style Security'* <http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/hillary-relaunch-have-airport-style-security_969446.html>* // The Weekly Standard // Daniel Halper* Security will be tight at Hillary Clinton's re-launch in New York City. It will mimic "airport style security," according to an email from the campaign to people who have registered for the event. "We can't wait to see you on Saturday at the Hillary for America official launch event -- we're so excited that you're going to be a part of this day! Here's some information you'll need ahead of time," reads the email describing Saturday's event. When and Where - Saturday, June 13th doors open at 9:30 a.m. - 1:00 p.m. - FDR Four Freedoms Park, Roosevelt Island, NY What to bring - Your printed ticket -- the confirmation email you received when you registered for the event, you can also use your phone to show your ticket. Children under the age of 13 do not need a ticket to enter the event. - Small personal cameras and cell phones will be permitted. - Guests are encouraged to bring water in standard-sized, clear plastic bottles, as there will be a limited supply at the event. What not to bring - There will be airport style security. Items that will NOT BE permitted include food, liquids other than water, large bags, large purses, backpacks, strollers, umbrellas, noise makers, bullhorns, posters, signs, pets other than licensed service animals, sharp objects, or weapons. What to expect - Limited cell service on Roosevelt Island. - The event is standing only -- seating will be provided for ADA guests. - Food is not permitted in the park, so make sure to have breakfast before you arrive. - Be prepared for a hot summer day; sunglasses, sunscreen, and comfortable shoes are highly encouraged. How to get to Four Freedoms Park The best way to get to the park is by public transportation -- parking on the island will be extremely limited. - Subway: Take the F Train to the Roosevelt Island stop. Follow signs to Four Freedoms Park. - Tram: From Manhattan: Get on the tram at 59th Street & Second Avenue Station. Travel time to Roosevelt Island is 4-5 minutes, with trams departing every 10 minutes. Exit at Tramway Station on Roosevelt Island. Follow signs to Four Freedoms Park. - Bus: From Queensboro Plaza overpass, take stairway down north side to corner of Crescent and Bridge Plaza North. Take the Q102 Queens Surface bus to Roosevelt Island. Follow signs to Four Freedoms Park. We want to accommodate as many ADA guests as possible, so if you know that you will need assistance on-site, please contact [email protected] to make necessary arrangements. ADA guests are welcome to bring one guest with them into the ADA section. This is going to be a great event and we're thrilled to have you -- one of our best supporters -- there as we launch into the next phase of this campaign. Thanks, Hillary for America *HRC** NATIONAL COVERAGE* *Hillary Clinton and Wishful-Thinking Politics <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/11/upshot/hillary-clinton-and-wishful-thinking-politics.html?abt=0002&abg=1&_r=0> // NYT // Brendan Nyhan – June 11, 2015* Hillary Clinton’s campaign took a beating among some pundits this week for telling the truth: She’s going to employ a strategy focused on a narrow set of the most competitive states. In other words, she’s running as a modern presidential candidate. Mrs. Clinton’s statement is what’s called a Kinsley gaffe — taking its name from Michael Kinsley, a journalist who said a gaffe is something true that a politician isn’t supposed to say. By conceding the obvious, she revealed the disjunction between the politics we say we want and the kind we actually have. In reality, her approach is far less different from those of recent candidates than it might appear. No presidential candidate — including Mrs. Clinton’s husband, whose strategy was compared to hers — competes in every state. The reason is the Electoral College, a winner-take-all system that rewards candidates who focus almost exclusively on closely contested states. The difference is in which states she will target. The electoral map has changed since 1992, when the legacy of the old one-party South helped her husband win a number of Southern states that are now out of reach for Democrats. As a result, the targeting strategy that worked for her husband would not succeed today despite wishful thinking that she could, for instance, win Kentucky. Most troubling to some observers, though, was the way that Mrs. Clinton’s strategy dispensed with the pretense that she would create unity and consensus by running to the center. The uncomfortable reality is that presidents don’t magically unite us, especially in our highly polarized era. With the public closely divided between the two parties, successful politicians have to mobilize their base to win. Consider recent history. The last three presidents — Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama — were all elected after promising to transcend partisanship. All failed in that aim after learning some hard lessons about how Washington actually works. Mr. Bush and Mr. Obama then ran re-election campaigns focused on turning out their core supporters — the same model Mrs. Clinton plans to adopt. Presidential candidates should still try to speak to all Americans. But we shouldn’t pretend that pleasing words from Mrs. Clinton are going to bring back the politics of 1952 or even 1992 — that era is gone and it’s not coming back. *Virginia Is Latest Front in Democrats’ Voting Rights Battle <http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/11/newest-front-in-democratic-voting-rights-battle-virginia/?smid=tw-share> // NYT // Maggie Haberman – June 11, 2015 * Democrats allied with Hillary Rodham Clinton have filed a voting rights lawsuit in Virginia, the third time they have done so in a crucial presidential battleground state in the last two months. The suit, like the others, was filed by Marc Elias, a Democratic election lawyer whose clients include Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign and four of the party’s major national committees. Mrs. Clinton is not a party to any of the lawsuits, but her campaign aides have expressed supported for the two earlier suits, in Ohio and Wisconsin. The Virginia lawsuit is part of a broader effort by Democrats to try to roll back voting laws that have been passed in nearly two dozen states since 2010. Many of the laws were passed in states where Republican governors and legislatures rose to power after the Tea Party wave. The Virginia action, described by the California-based election law expert Richard L. Hasen on his website, Election Law Blog, is primarily based on the state’s voter identification law. The plaintiffs — which include the Virginia Democratic Party — argue the law will suppress turnout, particularly among blacks and Hispanics, the poor and college students. Republicans have argued that the spate of new laws were important added protections against election fraud. They dismiss the Democratic lawsuits as publicity stunts to energize minority voters in support of Democratic candidates. *These 9 words prove that Bill Clinton still doesn’t get it on the Clinton Foundation <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/06/11/these-9-words-prove-that-bill-clinton-still-doesnt-get-it-on-the-clinton-foundation/?postshare=6371434053846669> // WaPo // Chris Cillizza – June 11, 2015 * Bill Clinton sat for an interview with Bloomberg News on Wednesday to talk about, among other things, the controversy surrounding the Clinton Foundation and his wife's 2016 presidential bid. And, in the course of that conversation, he let loose with this stunner: "Has anybody proved that we did anything objectionable? No." Um, what? This is the latest in a string of statements by the former president that suggest he still doesn't grasp why the Clinton Foundation questions continue to swirl and, because of that lack of understanding, remains unable to effectively parry them. Let's go through the problems with Clinton's answer. First, there's little doubt that some of the donations accepted by the Clinton Foundation have been viewed as objectionable by lots and lots of people. To cite one example: Allowing the Qatar Supreme 2022 Committee, organized to lure the World Cup to the nation, to serve as the main sponsor for a 2013 Clinton Global Initiative event. Qatar has been tied to not only allegations of wide-scale bribery of FIFA to acquire the games but is also the subject of widespread humanitarian concerns regarding the number of deaths related to the construction of the soccer stadiums to host the World Cup in 2022. So, on its face, the claim that no one has come forward to object to certain donations/donors is just not right. Then there is the fact that Clinton's answer on the foundation seems to be based on the idea that he and his wife are operating in a legal sphere for the next two years. They're not. They're living in the world of politics -- and the rules of that world are far different than those of a court of law. Clinton's argument boils down to the idea of a burden of proof. As in, if there's something truly objectionable in what the foundation has done, then someone should prove it. Legally speaking, Clinton's right. If you think he or the foundation broke some sort of law, then you should need to provide conclusive evidence of when, where, why, what and how. But of course, what we are mostly talking about when it comes to the Clinton Foundation is the gray area between contributions made by donors and decisions made by the foundation that benefited those people. Proving that sort of quid pro quo in a legal setting is virtually impossible barring a smoking gun -- like an e-mail that says: "Mr. X gave $300,000. Let's fund his project now." In politics, however, gray areas can be exploited to great advantage by your political opponents. Raising questions about the timing between donations to the Clinton Foundation and decisions made that lined the pockets of those donors is totally within the bounds of acceptable -- and effective -- negative messaging. Republicans don't need to prove that the Clinton Foundation did anything untoward. The burden of proof that there was no wrongdoing lies with the Clinton Foundation. That reality clearly annoys Bill Clinton, and somewhat understandably. After all, the Clinton Foundation is a massive operation and, as Bill likes to point out, does lots and lots of work that has nothing to do with politics. "Do I have the most comprehensive disclosure of any presidential foundation? Yes," Clinton said in that same Bloomberg interview. "Is our -- our disclosures more extensive than most private foundations? Yes, they are, having nothing to do with politics." (Sidebar: It's not clear that Clinton's claim about the foundation's disclosure policies is totally accurate.) Here's the problem for Bill: No other foundation in the world is run by a former president and a former secretary of state who also happens to be the de facto Democratic presidential nominee in 2016. That fact means that the Clinton Foundation isn't like any other foundation in the world -- and therefore, how all of those other foundations treat disclosure is sort of immaterial. It's also worth noting here that the successes of the Clinton Foundation in terms of raising money are built on the prominence and political influence of Bill and Hillary Clinton. There are lots and lots of organizations out there that have been far less successful doing what the Clinton Foundation does simply because they lack messengers like Bill and Hillary. And so, when that prominence also subjects the Clinton Foundation to heightened scrutiny, that's the sort of thing that comes with the territory. Bill Clinton needs to understand that no matter how beneficent he believes the Clinton Foundation is, it's now a major part of the broader political conversation regarding Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign. (If you need evidence of that politicization of the foundation, witness the furor over donations to it by ABC newsman George Stephanopoulos.) He may not like it, but good politicians -- and Bill Clinton is definitely one of those -- deal with the world as it is, not how they want it to be. He has yet to do that. *She won’t back down. Or go away. <http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/national/2015/06/11/hillary-clinton-wont-back-down-or-go-away/> // WaPo // Kent Babb – June 11, 2015 * Hillary Rodham Clinton looked into their eyes, her voice dropping. “I have to confess,” she said, and the group surrounding her in this little makeshift room leaned in. Usually the atrium at PS/IS 41 in Brooklyn is a community area, kids’ voices echoing off the tile walls. On this Wednesday in April, it was a political proving ground: Clinton alongside Chirlane McCray, the first lady of New York City, to promote a campaign that encourages parents to talk or sing to their children. Clinton was just days away from launching a second run for the White House, determined to win what she lost in spectacular fashion in 2008. But her won’t-back-down resolve — the quality that could make her America’s first female president if it doesn’t sabotage her first — was nowhere in sight as she sat at a table with about a half-dozen parents and educators, nodding at their stories. This was a chance, in a carefully controlled setting, to project the warmer, more intimate persona she would be unveiling in Iowa and New Hampshire. She may have gotten her first campaign for the Democratic nomination wrong, but now she was planning to get it right. So here she was, in a neighborhood dominated by public housing projects, trying to connect not as President Obama’s first secretary of state, or an ex-U.S. senator, or the former first lady of the United States — though her audience was acutely aware that she’d been all those things. Nor did she want to be seen as a $200,000-per-speech megastar who was driven in a private van to a public school where nearly all 525 students qualify for free or reduced lunch. Clinton was presenting herself as a mother, just like those gathered around the table with her. And maybe if she said it often enough — believed it hard enough — voters would see her as she likes to see herself. And, anyway, about that confession: She can’t sing a lick. Years ago, Clinton told the group, amid laughter, that she would rock young Chelsea to sleep by singing her favorite song, “Moon River.” Her daughter was less than appreciative, her tiny finger pressing into her mother’s lips. “No sing, Mommy,” Clinton recalled Chelsea saying, some of the child’s first words. Clinton was a young mother then and is a 67-year-old grandmother now, and my, how fast the time goes. The parents nodded. Clinton was grooving now, comfortable and in command, offering a tender version of herself in a place where no one would challenge her about her e-mail accounts, or the attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya, or the ugly political fights of the past four decades. Where no one would bring up the psychological Kevlar she wears into every room, the unyielding mind-set that has defined her since she was a child and still fuels her now. “She will not give up when she knows she’s right,” says Sara Ehrman, a friend and confidante of Clinton’s since the 1970s. “She will not give up. And it is admirable — and annoying.” Or as Clinton put it in a 2012 e-mail to a State Department colleague bracing to testify on Benghazi before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee: “Well, what doesn’t kill you, makes you stronger (as I have rationalized for years), so just survive and you’ll have triumphed.” Fifteen miles from Chicago, jets descended over the northern suburbs into O’Hare International Airport. It was the early 1950s, and a 4-year-old girl danced alone in her family’s back yard, reaching for the rumbling sky. This is one of young Hillary’s earliest memories, recounted decades later in her first memoir, “Living History.” She declined to be interviewed for this article, but in her book she remembers her mother, Dorothy, asking her why she wasn’t playing with other kids in Park Ridge, the suburb where the Rodhams lived. Hillary started to cry. The problem was a girl named Suzy. Suzy was bigger, meaner, used to roughhousing with her older brothers, Hillary told her mother. She was afraid of her. “Go back out there,” Dorothy Rodham ordered her oldest child and only daughter, nudging her out the door. Dorothy reminded her that if Suzy bullied her, she had her mother’s permission to punch back. “You have to stand up for yourself. There’s no room in this house for cowards.” Though Dorothy deferred always to her opinionated, domineering husband, Hugh, she was perhaps the household’s strongest soul. She had spent her own childhood mostly alone, taking care of her sister when their parents left them alone for days. Dorothy was 8 when her parents put her on a train in Illinois bound for California, shuffled off to live with relatives who weren’t any more caring. Dorothy’s grandmother once confined her to a year in her room for the sin of celebrating Halloween. She left at age 14 to work full time, as a $3-per-week housekeeper and nanny for a family that actually seemed to love one another. Years later, Dorothy watched from behind a curtain as Hillary marched out to confront Suzy. The bully backed down, and Hillary raced home to announce her victory: “I can play with the boys now!” Hillary began defying the limits imposed on girls in that era. She dreamed of becoming an astronaut or a baseball player and ran unsuccessfully for student government president at Maine South High. When she later applied to law school at Harvard and Yale, a well-known professor told her at a cocktail party that Harvard didn’t need more women, Hillary’s final nudge toward Yale. Still, Hillary sometimes harbored self-doubt. She was a freshman at Wellesley College, an all-girls school near Boston, when her first math and French grades came back. They weren’t A’s. She called home, holding back tears. Hugh Rodham told her to come on back to Illinois. Dorothy, who had never felt in control of her own life, said no such thing. She had been offered no opportunities; she wasn’t going to let her only daughter give up on hers. “I realized,” Clinton would later write, “that I really couldn’t go home again.” They stopped twice in Virginia and again in Tennessee. The question was always the same: “Are you sure?” And the answer was always yes, so they kept driving. Hillary had moved to Washington after graduating from Yale Law School, where she had met a bright and charismatic student named Bill Clinton. She worked as a staff attorney for the Children’s Defense Fund, then for the House committee investigating Watergate. Home during those years had been Ehrman’s Capitol Hill townhouse, where the roommates often talked about the future. Hillary’s ambition was among the most popular topics. “She wanted a job. She wanted a life. She wanted to be recognized for what she was qualified to do,” Ehrman recalls. Now, as they drove south, Ehrman was trying to talk her friend out of a decision that contradicted all that: Hillary wanted to join Bill in Arkansas, where he was a law professor with lofty ambitions of his own. Ehrman agreed to drive her because it gave Ehrman time to talk Hillary out of it. “Are you crazy?” she asked during one of their stops, telling her friend that she was throwing her future away. Hillary's determination, Ehrman learned, also came with a frustrating side. They arrived in Fayetteville, Hillary taking her first steps toward a new life that would eventually make her one of the most powerful — and most controversial — women in the world. Ehrman, still certain her friend was making a terrible mistake, sat in her car and cried. Hillary married Bill in 1975 but refused to take on Clinton’s last name, raising eyebrows in conservative Arkansas. When Bill ran for governor in 1978, advisers urged her to rethink such a trivial matter, but the fact was, this wasn’t trivial to her. Hillary, who would go on to be the first female partner at Rose Law Firm, wouldn’t be talked out of flying to New York a month before Chelsea was born to make a presentation alongside board members of the Arkansas Children’s Hospital — and she wouldn’t be talked out of this. “I was still me,” she wrote in “Living History.” “She has always done what she thinks is the right thing,” says Sheila Bronfman, a longtime friend from Arkansas. “And she lives with her choices.” Then Bill, seeking a second term as governor, lost to a Republican challenger named Frank White, and advisers put some of the blame on Hillary’s refusal to be a genteel Southern wife. When Bill announced he would seek the office again in 1982, his wife began calling herself Hillary Rodham Clinton — a notable compromise. Winning, she realized, was more important. A few months later, Bill retook the Governor’s Mansion in a landslide. She stood alone sometimes looking out a White House window, watching as the tourists strolled by. Years of fighting had helped Bill Clinton become America’s 42nd president, but it had left Hillary with more enemies than allies. She spent her first two years in Washington in the center of bare-knuckle exchanges: with media organizations, with Republicans, within her husband’s administration — no battle too small. “I’m used to winning, and I intend to win on my own terms,” she once said to Diane Blair, one of her closest friends, according to a collection of Blair’s notes archived at the University of Arkansas. Hillary had demanded her own 20-person staff and West Wing offices, unprecedented for a first lady, and was charged with running point on a task force to reform the country’s health-care system. She conducted many of the initial proceedings in secret, eventually leading to a lawsuit. The initiative died a painful death; she was lampooned and attacked, and she found herself unable to ignore barbs that grew increasingly personal. During the dawn of the 24-hour news cycle, no topic was off limits. The Clintons’ marriage was dissected as a union not of love but shared ambitions; she was depicted as a ruthless woman who craved power. Her approval rating dipped to 44 percent, and at a 1994 tobacco rally in Kentucky, a Hillary effigy was burned. When she felt bullied, as she had been so many years earlier in Park Ridge, she wanted to punch back. “As always,” Blair once wrote in her journal, “she thinks the only answer to anything is to go on the offensive.” But more often she found herself in a defensive crouch, walling herself off from her attackers, always seeking control. Blair suggested she could spare herself headaches by being friendlier to the press and dabbling in fewer political decisions. “I know how to compromise, I have compromised,” Blair wrote that Hillary told her during a phone call. “I gave up my name, got contact lenses, but I’m not going to try to pretend to be somebody that I’m not.” During the months before the Fourth World Conference on Women in 1995, she insisted on traveling to the Beijing event — a move that had the potential to offend the Chinese. When Democrats balked and the White House hesitated, she threatened to board a commercial flight and attend anyway, not as first lady but as a private American. The administration relented, and she delivered the conference’s signature speech. “Human rights are women’s rights,” she told the gathering, “and women’s rights are human rights.” When Hillary returned to Washington, it was as a global champion of feminism and, perhaps, a future politician herself. For kicks, Blair sometimes sent articles to her about the nation’s readiness for its first female president. Then, in 1998, two years into his second term, Bill Clinton admitted to having an affair with a White House intern named Monica Lewinsky. The scandal led to impeachment and to the spectacle of Hillary, who had once dismissed questions about her marriage by declaring that she wasn’t “some little woman standing by my man,” doing exactly that. Although preserving her marriage confounded some feminists, Hillary’s approval rating soared to 67 percent in December 1998, the highest it has been before or since. Her husband survived impeachment, and Hillary survived public humiliation and endless speculation about whether she remained married out of love, ambition, or a combination of both. The Clintons had just six months left in the White House in 2000 when Hillary learned that her beloved friend Blair, who had been battling lung cancer, was dying. Hillary visited her in Arkansas, asking Blair how “Senator Hillary Clinton” sounded. Blair squeezed Hillary’s hand and whispered, “Don’t ever give up on yourself or what you believe in.” Hillary, Bill and Chelsea Clinton leave the White House for a Thanksgiving getaway at Camp David in 1997. (Frank Johnston/The Washington Post) Sen. Hillary Clinton is joined by Bill, Chelsea and her mother, Dorothy Rodham, on June 7, 2008, at the National Building Museum in Washington as she concedes the Democratic presidential nomination to Sen. Barack Obama. (Richard A. Lipski/The Washington Post) Hillary Clinton looked into their eyes, her voice dropping. “This is very personal for me,” the senator from New York told a small group of undecided voters in a Portsmouth, N.H., cafe in January 2008. Her voice cracked with emotion. Clinton’s campaign for president was foundering. Another history-seeking Democrat, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, had won the Iowa caucuses, and polls showed him with a double-digit lead over Clinton on the day before the New Hampshire primary. A woman asked how Clinton did it — how, after all she had been through, she remained so upbeat. Clinton paused, tears welling in her eyes. “I see what’s happening,” she said. “And we have to reverse it.” She had, until that point, been scripted and cautious, intent on projecting the gravitas of a commander in chief. Voters struggled to connect, and the campaign appeared adrift, beset by bickering and leaks that Clinton seemed unable to control. Then, whether it was authenticity or a Hail Mary by a desperate campaign, Clinton went off the familiar script. Her voice softened. “I just don’t want to see us fall backwards,” she said. “You know?” The next day, she erased Obama’s lead and won New Hampshire, though Obama’s historic momentum would be too much to overcome. Portsmouth, though, was more meaningful than one primary win. “I found my footing,” Clinton wrote in “Hard Choices,” her second memoir, “and my voice.” She refused to concede to Obama, even when it was clear she couldn’t win. And by the end of her campaign, 18 million people had voted to nominate a woman for president of the United States. When the time finally came to withdraw, an 89-year-old woman wearing green entered the atrium of Washington’s National Building Museum to listen to Clinton’s concession speech. “When you’re knocked down,” Clinton told hundreds of supporters, “get right back up and never listen to anyone who says you can’t or shouldn’t go on.” The woman in green applauded, and Clinton continued. “Although we weren’t able to shatter that highest, hardest glass ceiling this time, thanks to you, it’s got about 18 million cracks in it,” she said as Dorothy Rodham watched from a few feet away. Clinton exits after delivering the keynote address April 29 at the David N. Dinkins Leadership and Public Policy Forum at Columbia University in New York City. (Kevin Hagen/Getty Images) Ablack van traveled out of New York last month and into the heart of America, through Pennsylvania, Ohio and Indiana, stopping at one point in Joliet, Ill., about 40 miles from the Chicago suburb where a mother once nudged her daughter outside to confront her tormentor. The last of Dorothy’s fight had left her in 2011 as Hillary Clinton held her dying mother’s hand. For the first time, she would have to take on all those Suzys alone, no one but herself to push her out the door. Clinton, who visited 112 countries in four years as secretary of state, announced her second run for the White House on a Sunday in mid-April, and Hillary haters cracked their knuckles. Her motives will again be scrutinized, and so, of course, will her marriage. Can she go the distance, avoiding the traps and attacks, including the self-inflicted ones? And what if she wins — making her, at 69, not just the first woman but the second-oldest president to assume office? Clinton in 1985 wearing her inaugural-ball gown after Bill Clinton was reelected as governor of Arkansas. (Associated Press) “I’m aware I may not be the youngest candidate in this race,” Clinton told Democrats in South Carolina in May. “But I have one big advantage: I’ve been coloring my hair for years. You’re not going to see me turn white in the White House. And you’re also not going to see me shrink from a fight.” The day after her announcement video posted online, Clinton surrendered catered meals, private jets and prized privacy for stops at Chipotle, a converted van and unpredictable encounters with strangers. On a Tuesday in Iowa, seven vehicles passed grain silos, taking Exit 63 toward a community college in the rural town of Monticello. A small crowd waited outside to see which Hillary Clinton would emerge from the back seat: the defiant but locked-in former first lady, the controlled and locked-down secretary of state — or some new version of a candidate everyone thinks they know. The van pulled up inside a loading area, and Clinton stepped out and waved. Then a door opened, the same as it did more than six decades earlier in Park Ridge, and she walked through it. *Clinton’s Donor Dominance Not Absolute <http://www.wsj.com/articles/clintons-donor-dominance-not-absolute-1434065493> // WSJ // Peter Nicholas & Laura Meckler – June 11, 2015* Hillary Clinton appears to be winning over the lion’s share of elite fundraisers who powered President Barack Obama’s 2012 campaign, another sign of her dominant position in the Democratic primary. But enough unease about her candidacy has materialized to give fuel to one of Mrs. Clinton’s rivals, Martin O’Malley. A Wall Street Journal survey of many of the top Obama fundraisers found that some are backing other candidates or weighing their options. Interviews with donors also found that Mr. O’Malley, a former Maryland governor, is making an aggressive push to win their allegiance. Mr. O’Malley, who himself was an Obama fundraising “bundler,” has deep ties to the Obama campaign finance apparatus and has won sympathetic hearings or outright support from several of the people who helped pay for the $1.1 billion Obama re-election campaign. Even a modest level of fundraising support could be enough to propel Mr. O’Malley through Iowa and New Hampshire, states that hold the first nominating contests and whose advertising markets are less expensive than those of Florida and many other states that vote later. Of 72 top Obama fundraisers from 2012 whose preferences could be learned through interviews, campaign statements or invitations to fundraising events, about three in four back Mrs. Clinton. The rest support someone else, remain undecided or are sitting out the race for personal or other reasons. A handful of Mrs. Clinton’s backers said they are prepared to switch allegiances or to fund more than one Democratic candidate. Kerman Maddox, a partner at a public-affairs firm in Los Angeles, said that at a comparable point in the 2008 race he was raising money and organizing events for then-Sen. Obama. This time, he is considering his options after being approached by both Mrs. Clinton’s campaign and Mr. O’Malley’s. “The energy and enthusiasm of 2008 was so infectious, you had to get involved, and that really doesn’t exist so far in 2016,” said Mr. Maddox. This cycle “so far is underwhelming to me.” But Mrs. Clinton has the bulk of the fundraisers in her camp, including some boldface names and power brokers who raised millions for Mr. Obama, such as Vogue magazine editor Anna Wintour, longtime Hollywood executive Jeffrey Katzenberg and movie producer Harvey Weinstein. In 2012, 249 people raised at least $500,000 each for Mr. Obama’s campaign. Of them, at least 25 now serve as U.S. ambassadors or in other posts that bar political work. The Journal determined the intentions of 72 of the rest. Of the 72 people, 54, or 75%, said they were committed to raising money for Mrs. Clinton. Six said they had chosen another candidate or were leaning toward one. Four were undecided. Eight people said they were sitting out the election for personal or other reasons. Mrs. Clinton and her husband have assembled their own network of fundraisers through decades of campaigning, and a super PAC backing her is raising money as well. Politics is a game of addition, though, and locking in the Obama network would strengthen her hand both in the primary and general election. Moreover, any defections from Mrs. Clinton are noteworthy, because she is perceived as the overwhelming front-runner. Mrs. Clinton is devoting considerable time to raising money. On Wednesday, she attended three fundraising events, in Massachusetts and Rhode Island. Aides said her aim is to raise $100 million this year to spend during the Democratic primaries. “We are in a competitive primary, and Hillary Clinton is working to earn the support of Americans across the country,” said Josh Schwerin, a campaign spokesman. Andrew Weinstein, one of the top 2012 Obama bundlers, said he backs Mrs. Clinton because “she’s the best chance to preserve the progress that this president has made. She’s the LeBron James of the Democratic field: She’s going to be impossible to beat in a primary in 2016, and very, very formidable in a general election.” Interviews suggest Mr. O’Malley has the potential to pry loose some of Mrs. Clinton’s support, aided by his links to the Obama fundraising team. Mr. O’Malley raised more than a half-million dollars for Mr. Obama in 2012, when he was governor. His campaign’s national finance director, Michael Kurtz, served as a Midwest finance director for the president’s 2012 campaign. Mr. O’Malley is scheduled to attend a June 22 fundraising reception in Los Angeles co-hosted by Dixon Slingerland, an invitation shows. Mr. Slingerland raised more than $500,000 for Mr. Obama in 2012. Calls to Mr. Slingerland seeking comment weren’t returned. Doug Goldman, another top Obama bundler, said he has met privately with Mr. O’Malley and is leaning toward supporting him. “Thus far, this race is not going in the right direction for Hillary,” Mr. Goldman said. “That’s opening the door for others, including Martin O’Malley. The situation is causing me to consider the need to provide support elsewhere.” Bill Hyers, Mr. O’Malley’s senior strategist, said it is possible for the former governor to do well in Iowa with a small budget, perhaps $5 million or $6 million. “Iowa’s a cheap state,” he said. Interviews with former Obama fundraisers found little sign of outreach from the other declared Democratic candidates, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and former Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee. George Tsunis, a New York-based hotel executive, is backing Mrs. Clinton but said he would switch to Vice President Joe Biden should he enter the race. Some fundraisers say they want another option in case Mrs. Clinton stumbles. Ken Solomon, who was Southern California finance chairman for Mr. Obama in 2012, said he was inclined to raise money for Mr. O’Malley as well as for Mrs. Clinton. The party must protect itself in case the leading candidate should falter, Mr. Solomon said. “We can’t be left without a Plan B,” he said. *Inside Hillary's house-party strategy <http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/inside-hillarys-house-party-strategy-118905.html#ixzz3cndq1vBH> // Politico // Annie Karni – June 11, 2015 * Since declaring her candidacy in April, Hillary Clinton has spent much of her time attending house parties. Two months and over 30 fundraisers later, Clinton has raised only a relatively modest $13 million or so from the events, according to a POLITICO analysis. For the hours she has invested meeting donors face to face, Clinton’s does not seem like a cost-effective strategy — $13 million, after all, sounds like one very good week for former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who has been running his campaign out of his super PAC and is expected to raise somewhere in the vicinity of $100 million in the first quarter. And it’s a departure from her strategy last time around, when Clinton hauled in $36 million in the first three months of her 2008 presidential bid. But Clinton’s gamble is that while collecting relatively small checks from relatively small groups — the maximum is $2,700 per head and the average party attracts about 120 people — she is also harvesting something else: goodwill, in a business sense, among a cohort of early donors whose feeling of personal connection to Clinton and her campaign are expected to pay dividends down the line. “This was a very unique opportunity, because she’s only raising primary money, and when the campaign gets geared up and she starts raising general election money, events will have to be bigger,” said Tom Nides, a longtime Clinton donor. “It’s hard and she’s got a lot of stamina. But it was an investment in the future.” Clinton’s “ramp-up” period, as her campaign calls it, ends Saturday with her big kick-off rally. During the two month ramp-up stretch, the roughly 60 donors who hosted her earliest fundraisers have acted like early stage VCs investing in a new start-up. And they are expected to be valuable to her beyond writing one big check. A review of the first-wave hosts shows a varied group made up of billionaire hedge fund managers and real estate honchos, personal injury lawyers, professors, film producers, ambassadors — even the original tiger mom. They represent longtime Friends of Bill with ties to the Clinton Foundation, former bundlers for President Obama, and individuals getting involved in presidential politics for the first time. They live in cities across the country, from New York City to San Francisco to Houston. Many of them are women. Because of high demand to host and a tight schedule, some who have never met before have been paired together by the campaign as co-hosts. Among the group are those mega-wealthy usual suspects who have backed the Clintons in the past. They include philanthropist Susie Tompkins Buell, the co-founder of Esprit and a close Clinton friend; banker Steve Rattner, who served as Obama’s car czar; billionaires Cheryl and Haim Saban, the chairman of Univision; billion venture capitalist J.B. Pritzker, media mogul Fred Eychaner; hedge fund manager and Chelsea Clinton’s former boss Marc Lasry; and billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer — all longtime supporters who over the years have also donated millions to the Clinton Foundation. Two ambassadors are on the list: Elizabeth Bagley, who bundled $100,000 for Clinton during her last run and who has given over $1 million to the Clinton Foundation, and Ed Romero, who was appointed Ambassador to Spain by Bill Clinton. But the early host group also includes faces new to Clinton world. Former Obama bundlers like Frank White and John Morgan, hosted events in Washington, D.C. and Orlando. Another new addition to a Hillaryland: Eileen Donahue, who chaired the National Women for Obama Finance Committee in 2008. The list includes supporters who have never been deeply involved in political fundraising before, like music producer LA Reid and his wife, Erica, whose Manhattan event attracted pop star Beyonce and singer Meghan Trainor. In Atlanta, A.J. and Judy Johnson hosted an event for Clinton on May 28, part of their first foray into hosting events at the presidential level. Jonathan Davis, the founder of a Boston real estate firm, and his wife, Margot, hosted Clinton at their Chestnut Hill home on Wednesday —one of their first political fundraisers. “I have never done a fundraiser for her, or for presidential candidates before,” said Yale Law professor Judith Resnik, who co-hosted a New Haven event for Clinton last week after some of Clinton’s former classmates from Yale Law School reached out and asked her to. Her co-host at the event, she said, was Amy Chua, law professor and best-selling author of “The Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother,” another newer addition to Clinton’s coterie of supporters. “Having a grown-up woman in charge of the U.S. would not only be great for the country but for the globe,” said Resnik. “I’m completely enthusiastic and delighted to help.” Resnik is not the only supporter motivated by electing the country’s first female president. While Clinton has not been stressing the historic nature of her run in public events so far, the early stage fundraisers include many women who want to be in on the ground floor as Clinton gives it her last go. Silda Wall Spitzer, the former first lady of New York, hosted a “conversation with Hillary Clinton” billed as a women’s-only fundraiser. At the Women’s National Democratic Club in Washington, D.C., Clinton’s hosts were Claire Lucas and Judy Dlugacz, founders of a cruise line targeting gay women. Laura Ricketts, a co-owner of the Chicago Cubs, has previously served as a top LGBT bundler for Obama. She co-hosted a house party for Clinton in Chicago last month. Another faction of the early-investor group are elected officials, like Reps. Grace Meng and Joe Crowley of Queens, who co-hosted an event in Queens on June 1, and are valuable because they can mobilize their constituencies to get involved with the campaign down the line. “I’ve been a Hillary supporter since day one,” said Crowley, who recalled Clinton staying over at his home in Queens during her listening tour when she ran for Senate. California Sen. Barbara Boxer also co-hosted an event with television producer Steven Bochco and his wife, Dayna. Some of the hosts proactively reached out to the campaign offering to help, others were connected by mutual acquaintances, and others were asked by the campaign to help. Hillary Clinton speaks as J.B. Pritzker looks on at the Economic Club of Chicago on Oct. 8, 2014. “I know people who couldn’t get on the schedule,” said Jacobs, a prominent New York Democrat and Clinton fundraiser who hosted the former Secretary of State at his Long Island home on June 1. “I’ve been advocating to do an early fundraiser for a long time. I let them know a long time ago, I mean way longer ago than since she announced. I was chomping at the bit.” The average house party, so far, has been limited to about 120 attendees. At those events, Clinton typically delivers remarks for about 20 minutes, and then circulates, spending some one-on-one time and taking a photo with every attendee. She’s been known to linger longer than scheduled, taking her time. All in all, hers is a big pitch for some small checks — and the cheapest way Democratic donors have been able to get real face time with a top-tier presidential candidate since Barack Obama’s early fundraising events in 2007. As the campaign heats up over the coming months, the small house parties at low prices will be slowly phased out and replaced with larger, lower-dollar events to attract bigger crowds, according to a campaign official. But the investments Clinton is expecting from her early stage donors is emotional capital, which will be used to spread much-needed enthusiasm among a broader set of donors who can be hit up for money multiple times over the next 18 months. “This decision will pay enormous benefits to the campaign long term,” said Nides. “There’s a multiplier effect.” *The Real Felony: Denying Prisoners the Right to Vote <http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/12/the-real-felony-denying-prisoners-the-right-to-vote.html> // The Daily Beast // Barrett Holmes Pitner – June 12, 2015* Of course ex-felons should have their voting rights restored. But let’s go further: There’s no good reason to deny prisoners the franchise. Recently, Hillary Clinton dramatically put voting rights back on the national agenda with an audacious call to register every American citizen when he or she turns 18. Voter ID laws are not new issues in our politics, but Clinton’s full-throated appeal felt serious and sincere: Perhaps we will finally tackle the perverse voter disenfranchisement of minorities and the poor that still persists throughout this country. But I’ll go her one better. If Hillary is serious about social justice and equality, I hope she does not overlook one nearly voiceless population that needs to be included in this debate: ex-convicts returning home from prison, and, yes, even incarcerated prisoners. The United States has the most prisoners of any developed country in the world, and it has the largest total prison population of any nation. Period. America’s prison population has increased 800 percent since 1980, and much of the increase is due to harsher punishments for non-violent crimes. As a result, more than 1.57 million inmates are behind bars in federal, state, and county prisons and jails at any one time. And when you consider the estimated 12 million Americans who cycle through county jails for periods of less than a year, the total number of Americans behind bars can jump to an estimated 2.4 million. When you factor in released inmates who are barred from voting due to felony convictions, the number of voter-disenfranchised Americans grows to an estimated 5.85 million, or 2.5 percent of the nation’s voting population, according to a recent report by The Sentencing Project. Additionally, since America consists of a patchwork of laws varying from state to state regarding the voting rights of convicted felons, many felons who have the opportunity to vote are simply unaware or are unable to overcome the bureaucratic hurdles that would allow them to vote, and as a result they become de facto disenfranchised. Some states allow felons to vote if they are on probation, but not if they are on parole. In Tennessee a felon’s voting rights can be revoked if he is late on child support payments. According to Myrna Pérez, deputy director of the Brennan Center’s Democracy Program, “There are some states where it does not matter what you did, how long ago it was, how young you were, etc. If you have a felony conviction in the past you have lost your right to vote permanently, unless the governor specifically decides that he or she wants to pardon you.” Yet finding various creative ways to keep certain Americans off the voting rolls has not been adopted by all of America. Vermont and Maine have both bucked the trend of voter disenfranchisement and allow inmates to vote. In fact, Vermont’s 1793 Constitution stipulates that residents can lose their right to vote only if convicted of voter fraud. Vermont and Maine have both bucked the trend of voter disenfranchisement and allow inmates to vote. So to the Republicans such as New Jersey Governor Chris Christie who have already scoffed at Clinton’s voter expansion proposal for fear that it would create voter fraud, and would inevitably deride the expansion of voting rights to felons and inmates, the State of Vermont successfully handled this issue more than two centuries ago. At a national level, one of the biggest questions regarding inmates voting is what voting precinct these votes fall in. Many prisons are located in rural areas that are represented by Republicans at the state and national level, and as African-Americans make up a disproportionate size of the prison population, many conservative areas would be less inclined to open voting to a demographic that leans heavily Democratic. The logical extension would be that we allow prisoners to vote absentee ballot from their known address at the time of conviction, or the address they intend to return to upon release, and not for the one where their detention facility is located. The debate on extending voting rights to inmates and convicts is more than just an individual rights or social justice issue. It makes sense from a public policy and law enforcement perspective too. Voting has been shown to have a rehabilitative effect that can reduce recidivism and thereby, crime, and save governments millions of dollars. Recidivism has been shown to drop by at least 10 percent when voting has been extended to ex-felons. “It is important for voting rights to be extended to those that are incarcerated so that they can remain connected to the communities that they will ultimately return to,” said Laurin Hodge, the president and executive director of Mission Launch, a non-profit that works to reacclimatize the previously incarcerated into civil society. “Ultimately prison should be about rehabilitation and not ongoing punishment.” Additionally, even for those with life sentences or on death row, the act of voting can have an impact that reverberates throughout their communities back home. It is becoming more apparent that voting is a responsibility that needs to be fostered, and many people develop the voting habit from observing previous generations. Voting builds stronger communities of people who are more likely to participate in the democratic process. Similarly, inmates who are able to vote will feel more connected and invested in their communities, and can set a positive example to the outside world while they are behind bars. It may be easy to discredit how informed inmates may be, but data are emerging showing that “informed” voters by and large vote along party lines and are not as well versed on the issues as we would like to believe. And we need not forget that prisoners have plenty of spare time, and are one of the few demographics that could leisurely read two newspapers a day and still find time to watch the evening news. The argument for keeping the incarcerated and the newly released off the voting rolls is based on an archaic punitive disciplinary structure that we need to move beyond. Maintaining an electoral process that actively works to disenfranchise nearly 3 percent of eligible voters is a structure that no democratic nation should support. *Hillary Rally Vs. the Gun Show at Iowa State Fair <http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/hillary-rally-vs-gun-show-iowa-state-fair_969226.html> // The Weekly Standard // Jeryl Bier – June 11, 2015 * Hillary Clinton will certainly have supporters at Sunday's rally in Des Moines at the Iowa State Fairgrounds, but could face some stiff competition from another event: the final day of a three-day gun show. The show is one of six being held during 2015 at the fairgrounds, and one of more than a dozen put on around Iowa during the year by the show's promoter, Trade Show Productions: The gun show is located in one of the fairground's 24 venues, the William C. Knapp Building. The Clinton campaign does not specify the venue for Sunday's rally, but a 2007 rally for Mrs. Clinton on her first run for president was held at one of the fairground's outdoor staging areas. According to CBS News, that event featured "an elaborate stage of hay bales, American flags and even a fireworks show at the conclusion." Last summer, Mrs. Clinton had some harsh words for Second Amendment supporters, saying (via The Hill): “We cannot let a minority of people, and that’s what it is, it is a minority of people, hold a view point that terrorizes the majority of people,” Clinton said during a CNN town-hall event. It is unlikely Mrs. Clinton will address gun control Sunday, and not simply because of the proximity of the gun show. The second-time candidate has been hesitant so far in 2015 to articulate many specific policy proposals, and The Hill even speculated that muting her support of gun control measures could benefit Mrs. Clinton in the general election: The extent to which Clinton embraces gun control in her White House bid remains to be seen. While an emphasis on guns could help Clinton win over the left, it could prove to be a liability in several battleground states that could decide the presidential election. For the first time in decades, a majority of Americans say it is more important to protect gun rights than it is to limit gun ownership, according to a December poll from the Pew Research Center. The same Pew poll found that a slight majority of women now believe owning a handgun can protect them from becoming victims of crime. The gun show is not the only event competing with the Clinton relaunch rally. The Iowa State Fairgrounds schedule shows that a flea market is also running Sunday concurrently with the rally. If Mrs. Clinton intends to continue to make her appeal to be the "champion" of Everyday Americans, plenty of them should be on hand this weekend in Des Moines. *Hillary Clinton's Truth-O-Meter record <http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/jun/11/hillary-clintons-truth-o-meter-record/> // Politifact // Lauren // Carroll – June 11, 2015 * Hillary Clinton formally announced her 2016 presidential campaign with a video in April, and she’s been on the trail since -- but she’s courting media attention with a major launch event on June 12 at New York City’s Roosevelt Island, a site that invokes the legacy of its namesake, President Franklin D. Roosevelt. The former secretary of state is slated to deliver a speech to a large audience, a contrast with her recent series of small, roundtable-style events that she’s held in the early caucus and primary states of Iowa and New Hampshire. We’ve fact-checked Clinton more than 100 times since we began operations in 2007 -- a period that stretches back to her first presidential campaign. So far during the 2016 campaign, we’ve checked nine of her claims. Clinton, wife of former President Bill Clinton, is also a former Democratic senator from New York. Her Truth-O-Meter record over the past eight years includes 34 Trues, 19 Mostly Trues, 23 Half Trues, 18 Mostly Falses, 11 Falses and Two Pants on Fires. We’ll continue to watch Clinton’s campaign closely looking for facts to check, but for now, here are some of the most interesting fact-checks in our Hillary Clinton file. 2016 Most recently, we looked into several claims from a speech in which Clinton called for an expansion of voting rights. Clinton attacked what she described as efforts to restrict voting by Republican governors who also are potential presidential candidates. She singled out former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, former Texas Gov. Rick Perry and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker. PolitiFact looked into specific claims related to these four governors and found that her attack lines were largely accurate but could have used some additional context. We gave her four Mostly Trues. Meanwhile, at a campaign event in Iowa, Clinton tried to show that she understands the struggles of undocumented immigrants by saying that "all my grandparents" immigrated to America. We found that not all of Hillary Clinton’s grandparents were immigrants -- in fact, only one was. (Buzzfeed fact-checked it first.) So we rated that claim False. Also in Iowa, she lamented that "hedge fund managers themselves make more and pay less in taxes than nurses and truck drivers." Looking at the amount paid, we found that fund managers were paying multi-million-dollar tax bills to the IRS, compared to an above-average example of a nurse paying $15,700. Even her intended point -- that hedge fund managers pay a lower tax rate -- isn’t clearly accurate. We gave that claim a False. Earlier claims Before her campaign launch, we looked into Clinton’s claim that she "fully complied with every rule" while exclusively using private email while secretary of state. We couldn’t put this claim on the Truth-O-Meter because too much remains unknown. Still, we interviewed several experts on government transparency and records preservation. They said a lawyer might be able to put together a case that Clinton "complied" with the rules governing federal employee email use -- but they added that her actions are still hard to defend. (Read the full report.) In 2014, while on a publicity tour for her book Hard Choices, Clinton said that she and her husband "came out of the White House not only dead broke, but in debt." It’s possible that the Clintons’ liabilities exceeded their assets when Bill’s term ended in 2001, but they were able to muster a cash down payment of $855,000 and secure a $1.995 million mortgage. Additionally, in the months following their departure from the White House, Bill Clinton regularly took in speaking fees of at least $125,000, and Hillary Clinton received $2.84 million in book royalties. We rated that claim Mostly False. In an interview, Clinton said the number of jobs created and people lifted out of poverty during Bill Clinton’s presidency was "a hundred times" what it was under President Ronald Reagan. Clinton’s record on these issues does outpace Reagan’s, but the differences were not like night and day, as her phrasing claims. We rated this claim False. Many Republicans have criticized Clinton’s actions before, during and after the deadly 2012 attack on an American diplomatic compound in Benghazi. In Clinton’s testimony before Congress, regarding the motivation behind the attack, she asked rhetorically, "At this point, what difference does it make?" The question became an oft-quoted sound bite, so we decided to lay out the full quote in context. Her 2008 campaign In a 2008 foreign policy speech, Clinton reminisced about her days as first lady and a trip to Tuzla, Bosnia, that she made in March 1996. She said, "I remember landing under sniper fire." But that's not what happened, as demonstrated by CBS News video that shows Clinton arriving on the tarmac under no visible duress, and greeting a child who offers her a copy of a poem. We rated the claim Pants on Fire. Perhaps the strangest claim from Clinton’s first campaign was that "A ham and cheese sandwich on one slice of bread is the responsibility of the USDA ... But a ham and cheese sandwich on two slices of bread is the responsibility of the Food and Drug Administration." A USDA undersecretary told PolitiFact that Clinton’s description of sandwich regulations is accurate -- and that the rule "defies logic." We rated her claim True. *Change she can believe in: Clinton bets voters want more of the same, only better <http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-hillary-clinton-theme-20150611-story.html#page=1> // LA Times // David Lauter – June 11, 2015 * the heart of Hillary Rodham Clinton's strategy for winning the presidency lies a basic assumption about the public's desire for political change. History says that after eight years of a presidency, Americans typically want something different. Elections in which one party seeks a third term in the White House tend to be tough slogs. Indeed, as Clinton prepares for the first major rally of her campaign on Saturday in New York, Americans by about 2 to 1 say the country is headed down the “wrong track.” But what sort of change do Americans want? Republican candidates, from former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush in the party's center to Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas on its right, are betting that voters want a major shift toward conservatism. Clinton, the overwhelming favorite to win the Democratic nomination, has made a different calculation. Her advisors believe that a significant share of those who say the country is on the wrong track feel that Republican policies would only make matters worse. On the big issues, voters favor President Obama's values and priorities, Democratic strategists say. What they want is to see that agenda implemented more effectively. That's why, while Clinton plans to roll out policy proposals this summer, some of which will differ from or go beyond Obama's, the more crucial pitch will be about her ability to govern. As she told supporters at a recent speech in South Carolina: “I do know how hard this job I'm seeking is. I've seen it up close and personal. You're not gonna catch me wondering what it's like. Instead, I'm spending my time planning for what I will do for you when I get there.” “You're also not going to see me shrink from a fight,” she added. “I think you know by now I don't quit.” That emphasis on Clinton's toughness and tenacity aims to reach voters who say in polls and focus groups that they supported Obama but have grown disappointed about how much he's been able to accomplish. It addresses a major concern for Democrats, but also poses some risks. The concern could be seen at a focus group a few weeks before last fall's midterm election, as an African American woman, the mother of a 7-year-old girl, sighed slightly as she gave her opinion of the man she had twice backed for president. “I would say he seems depressed,” she said of Obama. “I really don't feel he's had the opportunity to do the things that he is capable of doing because different parties are holding him back.” That's a view that strategists in both parties continue to see frequently. “Most people don't blame the president,” said Democratic pollster Mark Mellman. “But they do wish more had gotten done.” The first big risk for Clinton in trying to turn that sentiment to her advantage is the possibility that Republicans have better gauged the public mood. “An overwhelming majority of Americans want to see a new set of policies from their next president, not a continuation of the same failed ones,” said Republican National Committee spokesman Michael Short. A second pitfall is that highlighting Clinton's skill at political combat could worsen a problem that Obama famously poked when the two opposed each other in 2008: “You're likable enough, Hillary,” he dismissively quipped during a debate. On the first concern, public polls offer considerable evidence for the Democrats' view, with one major caveat about the role of government. The RNC's Short points to polls showing that Americans want the next president to “change direction” from Obama's policies. When asked about specific issues, however, rather than Obama in general, the needle swings in the other direction. Asked, for example, whether the government should do more to address the growing income gap between the very rich and everyone else, Americans supported more government action by 57% to 39% in a recent CBS/New York Times poll. Even larger majorities favored a hike in the minimum wage — which all the current GOP candidates oppose — plus higher taxes on millionaires and government-mandated paid family leave. On social issues, numerous polls have shown the public growing more liberal across the board. Most notably, surveys find that by roughly 60% to 40%, the public favors marriage rights for same-sex couples, which the Republican candidates oppose with varying degrees of fervor. Half of Americans in a recent poll by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center said they believe that the earth's climate is warming largely as a result of human activity such as burning fossil fuels, the position espoused by nearly all Democratic elected officials. Only about 1 in 4 said that no solid evidence proves the climate is warming, the position taken by most Republican hopefuls. By 72% to 27% in a Pew survey last week, the public said that immigrants in the country illegally should be allowed to stay. That majority favoring what conservatives denounce as “amnesty” included 42% who supported allowing the immigrants to seek citizenship, as Clinton advocates, and 26% who favored permanent residency without citizenship, Bush's position. But while the majority of Americans agree with Democrats on those specific issues, Republicans stay competitive largely because of the deep, abiding skepticism and frustration about government voiced by a majority of Americans, most notably non-college-educated whites. In a sharply divided nation, a majority of Americans agree with Democrats on specific goals, but a crucial swing bloc mistrusts the ability of either party to get much done or to make the nation's economic system work on their behalf. That's where touting Clinton's experience and reputation for political shrewdness could pay off, Democratic strategists believe. At the same time, campaign officials seem resigned to the reality that the negative side of how the public sees her probably won't change. Unlike most presidential hopefuls, Clinton has the luxury of not having to introduce herself to the public or get over the hurdle of having people see her as a plausible candidate. The flip side of that, however, is that she enters the race with many Americans already opposed to her. As she has moved back into the political arena from her days as secretary of State, the percentage of Americans who see Clinton unfavorably has risen. Amid controversy over her use of a private email server when she headed the State Department and questions about the motivations of donors to the Clinton Foundation, the share who see her as honest and trustworthy has declined. Democratic strategists insist that's a manageable problem. “It's an issue,” said one strategist with long-standing ties to both Clinton and former President Clinton. “But it's not the only thing.” “We did a poll just before the 1992 election, and only about one-third of people said Bill was honest and trustworthy, but they elected him anyway,” he said, speaking anonymously to avoid straining ties with the Clintons. Ironically, one factor helping Clinton is the partisanship that has stalled large parts of Obama's agenda. As Democrats see Clinton under attack, polls show they have started to circle the wagons, dismissing the criticisms as political sniping from the other side. A recent Des Moines Register/Bloomberg Politics poll of Democrats likely to vote in Iowa's caucuses, for example, found that 7 in 10 thought the Clintons were getting a “bad rap” on the controversies. America's partisan lines have hardened dramatically during the George W. Bush and Obama presidencies, notes Alan Abramowitz, a political science professor at Emory University in Atlanta and an expert on U.S. elections. Because of that, the Clinton campaign's main task is to keep Democrats motivated to vote while reaching out to a relatively small slice of voters who are truly up for grabs, including those disappointed by the achievements of the last eight years. “It's almost certainly a close election,” Abramowitz said. “The partisan divide is so strong. There's less room for movement.” *Hillary Clinton's big bet: Stress toughness, tenacity, Democratic agenda <http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-hillary-clinton-theme-20150611-story.html?track=rss&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&dlvrit=1115915#page=2> // LA Times // David Lauter – June 11, 2015 * At the heart of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s strategy for winning the presidency lies a basic assumption about the public’s desire for political change. History says that after eight years of a presidency, Americans typically want something different. Elections in which one party seeks a third term in the White House “tend to be toss-ups” at best, said Alan Abramowitz, political science professor at Emory University. As Clinton prepares for the first major rally of her campaign, Saturday in New York, Americans by about 2-1 say the country is headed down the “wrong track.” But what sort of change do Americans want? Republican candidates, from former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush in the party’s center to Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas on its right, are betting that voters want a major shift toward conservatism. On the big issues, voters favor President Obama’s values and priorities, Democratic strategists say. What they want is to see that agenda implemented more effectively. Clinton, the overwhelming favorite to win the Democratic nomination, has made a different calculation. Her advisors believe that a significant share of those who say the country is on the wrong track feel that Republican policies would only make matters worse. That’s why, while Clinton plans to roll out policy proposals this summer, some of which will differ from or go beyond Obama’s, the more crucial pitch will be about her ability to govern. As she told supporters at a recent speech in South Carolina: “I do know how hard this job I’m seeking is. I’ve seen it up close and personal. You’re not going to catch me wondering what it’s like. Instead, I’m spending my time planning for what I will do for you when I get there. “You’re also not going to see me shrink from a fight,” she added. “I think you know by now I don’t quit.” That emphasis on Clinton’s toughness and tenacity aims to reach voters who say in polls and focus groups that they supported Obama, but have grown disappointed. It addresses a major concern for Democrats, but also poses some risks. The concern could be seen at a focus group a few weeks before last fall’s midterm election as an African American woman, mother of a 7-year-old girl, sighed slightly as she gave her opinion of the man she had twice backed for president. “I would say he seems depressed,” she said of Obama. “I really don’t feel he’s had the opportunity to do the things that he is capable of doing because different parties are holding him back.” That’s a view that strategists in both parties continue to see frequently. “Most people don’t blame the president,” said Democratic pollster Mark Mellman, “but they do wish more had gotten done.” “An overwhelming majority of Americans want to see a new set of policies from their next president, not a continuation of the same failed ones,” said Republican National Committee spokesman Michael Short.The first big risk for Clinton in trying to turn that sentiment to her advantage is the possibility that Republicans have better gauged the public mood. A second pitfall is that highlighting Clinton’s skill at political combat could worsen a problem that Obama famously poked when the two opposed each other in 2008: “You’re likable enough, Hillary,” he dismissively quipped during a debate. On the first concern, public polls so far offer considerable evidence for the Democrats’ view, with one major caveat about the role of government. Short points to polls showing that Americans want the next president to “change direction” from Obama’s policies. When asked about specific issues, however, rather than Obama in general, the needle swings in the other direction. Asked, for example, whether the government should do more to address the growing income gap between the very rich and everyone else, Americans supported more government action by 57%-39% in a recent CBS/New York Times poll. Even larger majorities favored an increase in the minimum wage, which all the current Republican candidates oppose; higher taxes on millionaires; and government-mandated paid family leave. On social issues, numerous polls have shown the public growing more liberal across the board. Most notably, surveys find that by roughly 60%-40%, the public favors marriage rights for same-sex couples, which the GOP candidates oppose with varying degrees of fervor. Half of Americans in a recent poll by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center said they believe that the Earth’s climate is warming largely as a result of human activity such as burning fossil fuels, the position espoused by nearly all Democratic elected officials. Only about one-in-four said that no solid evidence proves the climate is warming, the position taken by most GOP hopefuls. By 72%-27% in a Pew survey, the public said that immigrants in the country illegally should be allowed to stay. The majority that favors what conservatives denounce as “amnesty” is divided, with 42% favoring allowing the immigrants to seek citizenship, as Clinton advocates, while 26% supported permanent residency without citizenship, Bush’s position. But while the majority of Americans agree with Democrats on those specific issues, Republicans stay competitive largely because of the deep, abiding skepticism and frustration about government voiced by a majority of Americans, most notably non-college-educated whites. In a sharply divided nation, a majority of Americans agree with Democrats on specific goals, but a crucial swing bloc mistrusts the ability of either party to get much done or to make the nation’s economic system work on their behalf. That’s where touting Clinton’s experience and reputation for political shrewdness could pay off, Democratic strategists believe. At the same time, campaign officials seem resigned to the reality that the negative side of how the public sees her probably won’t change. Unlike most presidential hopefuls, Clinton has the luxury of not having to introduce herself to the public or get over the hurdle of having people see her as a plausible candidate. The flip side of that, however, is that she enters the race with many Americans already opposed to her. As she has moved back into the political arena from her days as secretary of State, the percentage of Americans who see Clinton unfavorably has risen. Amid controversy over her use of a private email server when she headed the State Department and questions about the motivations of donors to the Clinton Foundation, the share who see her as “honest” and “trustworthy” has declined. Democratic strategists insist that’s a manageable problem. “It’s an issue,” said one strategist with long-standing ties to both Clinton and former president Bill Clinton, “but it’s not the only thing.” “We did a poll just before the 1992 election, and only about one-third of people said Bill was honest and trustworthy, but they elected him anyway,” he said, speaking anonymously to avoid straining ties with the Clintons. One factor helping Clinton is the partisanship that has stalled large parts of Obama’s agenda. As Democrats see Clinton under attack, polls show they have started to circle the wagons, dismissing the criticisms as political sniping from the other side. A recent Des Moines Register/Bloomberg Politics poll of Democrats likely to vote in Iowa’s caucuses, for example, found that seven in 10 felt the Clintons were getting a “bad rap” on the controversies. And because America’s partisan lines have hardened dramatically during the Bush and Obama presidencies, the Clinton campaign’s main task is to keep Democrats motivated to vote while reaching out to a relatively small slice of voters who are truly up for grabs, including those disappointed by the achievements of the last eight years. “It’s almost certainly a close election,” Abramowitz said. “The partisan divide is so strong. There’s less room for movement.” *Centrist Dems wary of Hillary’s move to the left <http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/244631-centrist-dems-wary-of-hillarys-move-to-the-left> // The Hill // Alexander Bolton – June 11, 2015 * Moderate Democrats are worried about Hillary Clinton’s recent embrace of liberal policies. After positioning herself as a centrist and steely potential commander in chief in the 2008 Democratic primary, Clinton has shifted. Clinton is now to the left of President Obama on the federal minimum wage. While Obama has endorsed a $10.10 hourly rate, Clinton has signaled support for more than doubling it, to $15 an hour. The former first lady says same-sex marriage should be a constitutional right and endorsed Obama’s executive action shielding millions of illegal immigrants from deportation. She wants broad reform of a criminal justice system and calls for automatic voter registration. Red-state Democrats in Congress don’t want Clinton to lose sight of a broadly appealing economic message that can win over white working-class voters who have deserted the party in droves recently. “It’s important that she has an economic platform that people can get on board with regardless of what state they live in,” said Sen. Jon Tester (Mont.), the chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. “Be everywhere — Montana, Missouri, everywhere,” Tester added. Centrist Democrats say Clinton should broaden, not narrow, her approach. “I don’t think you write anything off. You show that you’re not afraid and you show the ability to go into an area, and it will help lift spirits,” said Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.). “I always do visit all 55 counties in my state. So when I ran statewide, I didn’t give up on certain counties and never visited. So you don’t give up on anybody.” It is very common for presidential candidates to move closer to their base in the primary and shift back to the center in the general election. But Clinton’s strategy suggests she needs to shore up more of the base and is responding to pressure from liberal leaders such as Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). Still, moderate Democrats are particularly concerned about Clinton’s potential effect on state legislative races in Republican dominated states. They worry if she stays away from solid-red states, they will have a hard time winning down-ballot races that could shape the congressional districts of the future. Some were alarmed when The New York Times reported that she is discarding the nationwide electoral strategy that her husband employed in the 1990s to win Southern states such as Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana and Tennessee. The Times reported she is poised to “retrace Barack Obama’s far narrower path to the presidency” by focusing on the liberal base in a handful of battleground states in the Midwest and West instead of persuading undecided voters. They fear a reprise of the failed electoral strategies of John Kerry in 2004 and Al Gore in 2000, who poured their resources into a handful of swing states instead of attempting to widen the playing field by playing offense in traditionally Republican territory. “The election to look at was in 2004. John Kerry had conceded 227 electoral votes before Election Day. That means George Bush only had to get 43. That is the danger you run into. It took Al Gore down in 2000. You can’t concede but so much. I don’t think you concede anything. I think you battle them everywhere,” said David “Mudcat” Saunders, a Democratic strategist who specializes in reaching white, working-class voters. Saunders says Kerry blundered by suspending campaign operations in seven states — Virginia, Louisiana, Arkansas, Missouri, Nevada, Arizona and Colorado — after winning the Democratic nomination in 2004. It didn’t help, he added, that Democrats decided to nominate him at a convention held in liberal-leaning Boston. While Clinton might not have much hope of winning in Louisiana, Missouri or South Carolina, strategists argue that making a good-faith effort in those states can help candidates down ballot. “The problem you got is the state legislatures. Take South Carolina for instance. In 2016 they’re going to have house elections and senate elections in their statehouse. If the Democrats don’t play there, it doesn’t increase turnout. Turnout in all cases always helps the Democrats in those areas,” Saunders said. Clinton’s current chief rival, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, has aggressively pushed a 50-state strategy for more than a year. Last year he met with activists, unionized workers and college students in Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi and South Carolina. This month he wrote a letter to Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz calling for presidential debates in red states. “By expanding the scope geographically of debates beyond the early calendar states we can begin to awaken activism at the grassroots level in those states and signal to Democrats and progressives in places like Texas, Mississippi, Utah, and Wyoming that their states are not forgotten by the Democratic Party,” he wrote. Rep. David Price (N.C.), one of only a handful of white Southern Democrats left in the House, said, “I agree with what people in the so-called red states are saying about the down-ballot effects. A successful president is going to have to have some support from those states and members elected from those states. “There’s a stake for the presidential candidate in spending a reasonable amount of time in non-blue-state areas,” he added. The Clinton campaign, which did not comment for this article, has not publicly acknowledged giving up on a 50-state strategy. It unveiled a nationwide organizing effort in April with a video in which Clinton vowed “there’s gonna be campaigns in all 50 states and we’re gonna need as many people as we can to volunteer, to sign up, to help us organize because I need your voices to be speaking out.” Rep. John Yarmuth, a Democrat from Kentucky, said he has heard Clinton already has a field director in his home state. He believes Clinton has a chance of winning Kentucky, which her husband carried twice; he urged her to visit. Some Democrats, however, argue that Clinton won’t alienate voters in Southern states if she pushes immigration reform and same-sex marriage. “In my district we have over 100 languages spoken in the public school system. It’s become a very diverse population,” said Yarmuth. “We have a huge thoroughbred breeding operation and thoroughbred breeding industry that relies heavily on immigrant labor. The people of Kentucky understand how important immigration reform is. “Voting rights are important everywhere. Gay marriage is an issue right now that doesn’t move voters away from somebody,” he added. *Hillary Clinton's Economic Inequality Whisperer <http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/hillary-clinton-s-economic-inequality-whisperer-20150612> // National Journal // Eric Garcia – June 12, 2015* Heather Boushey’s work on income inequality, paid family leave, and more may provide a preview of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 messaging. June 12, 2015 In her first campaign video, Hillary Clinton talked about how "the deck is still stacked in favor of those at the top" and how she wanted to be the champion for "everyday Americans." In one of her first campaign stops, she criticized outsized CEO compensation. And in March, before her official announcement, she said Americans should "think hard" about ways to make sure cities deal with inequality. But despite Clinton's talk, the actual specifics of what she would do as president to ameliorate growing wealth and income inequality in the United States have been quite thin. To get an idea of what Clinton's proposals could be, talk to Heather Boushey, an economist who's regarded as a valuable adviser to the former secretary of state on economic policy. "In terms of what I have been talking to her about, it has been about the big questions about what we should do for our economy and how we should think about the interventions that policymakers should make," Boushey told National Journal. Boushey, who is advising Clinton in a private capacity, serves as executive director and chief economist of the Washington Center for Equitable Growth, which aims to make wonky research tangible for policymakers. In a way, that's what Boushey is working to do for Clinton. Boushey has researched the role of women in the workforce, income inequality, and paid family leave—all things that Clinton will be talking about in 2016. Elisabeth Jacobs, senior director for policy and academic programs at the Washington Center, says Boushey is good at it, too. Boushey and Jacobs once explained French economist Thomas Piketty's landmark book on wealth inequality, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, to Sen. Angus King. That, Jacobs said, was like giving the senator "the Cliff Notes" version, and then starting "a conversation about what this might actually mean based on what he was thinking." "She's really exceptional in doing that translational work between the serious economic and other social science academic work into the policy space," Jacobs says of Boushey. Boushey's work on paid family leave has lent some potential clarity to the candidate's policy gaps. Clinton hasn't said much about how she would enact the policy, and Jane Waldfogel, a professor at Columbia University School of Social Work, says it's difficult to get that done at the national level versus at the state level. Three states that have started paid family leave policies have used their already-existing temporary disability insurance programs to do so, and only five states and Puerto Rico have temporary disability insurance (Washington State had its program signed in 2007 but is not yet in effect.). Boushey thinks a national paid family leave policy is possible. In a 2012 paper for Center for American Progress, where she is a senior fellow, Boushey laid out plan for a paid family leave program that would be administered by the Social Security Administration. On CEO pay, Boushey again gets more detailed. "There's a lot of wiggle room to be taxing at the top, but how you do that actually has implications for compensation," Boushey says, citing a study by Piketty, University of California, Berkeley's Emmanuel Saez, and Harvard's Stefanie Stantcheva. Boushey had the economists' study out in front of her during our interview. "There's a lot of evidence that the way we've been structuring tax policy vis–à–vis those at the top is not creating the right incentives for investment, [research and development] and shared prosperity," she said. Boushey is glad that the wealth gap has come to the forefront of the 2016 political debate. "I have to say that it is beyond exciting to see things that you have been, for me, working on spreadsheets for and thinking about for a really long time actually entering the political discourse," she said. Boushey said recoveries from the last three national recessions, including the most recent one, have seen anemic job growth, which has made people more aware of the gap between rich and poor—and what that means for the economy. "What you're seeing are repeated recoveries that just aren't cutting it," she said. "We've been like ostriches putting our heads in the sand going, 'What has changed in the past two decades?'" Boushey answers her own question: "Well, one of the biggest things is inequality." Other researchers emphasize Boushey's realism and attempts to convert ideas that are being discussed in research circles into tangible policies. "Heather really has been the person over the last several years who has taken the lead of just thinking really hard what it would take to enact paid family leave on the national level," said Jane Waldfogel, a professor at Columbia University School of Social Work. "She has her feet on the ground and has a very firm grasp of the economic principles." For Boushey, an important part of being an income inequality-focused economist interested is trying to make the results of her research tangible for the average citizen. "Where I think you hit the sweet spot in research is when what you can actually tease out of these datasets actually resonates with people's real-lived experiences," Boushey said. "For me, those moments come when I talk about my own research with my allergist, with my mom, and my mother-in-law." By translating income inequality to people's experiences, Boushey could help Clinton craft a message on inequality that could appeal to ordinary Americans—and present inequality not through a divisive prism of class war, but as a matter of economic security. *THE LEGACY TRAP <http://www.nationaljournal.com/next-america/newsdesk/hillary-clinton-jeb-bush-and-the-legacy-trap-20150612> // National Journal // Ronald Brownstein – June 12, 2015* Can Clinton and Bush transcend debates about their families’ pasts to offer answers for the country’s future? As Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush formalize their presidential candidacies over the next few days, both face the complex challenge of adapting their family legacies to their parties' new dynamics. Compared with Bill Clinton's era, the Democratic Party today is more culturally liberal and economically populist. Compared with George W. Bush's era, the GOP is more dogmatically committed to shrinking government. These changes have presented Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush with the common puzzle of appealing to parties that have grown more ideologically militant without renouncing the policy agendas and political strategies associated with their family names—agendas and strategies that often defied each party's traditional orthodoxy. So far, this test has stumped Bush more than Clinton—as underscored by the campaign-staff reshuffle the former Florida governor announced this week, just before he is due to officially declare his candidacy next Monday. His lackluster first months exploring the race have been dominated by questions of where he would extend the policies of his brother, George W. Bush. That has exposed Jeb Bush to darts from both ideological conservatives and party pragmatists most concerned about finding a candidate who can win. The pragmatists were dismayed by Bush's recent struggles to explain what he would have done differently than his brother in Iraq. That ordeal left Republicans fearing that if the party nominates Bush, Democrats would find it too easy to convert the campaign into a referendum on returning to the policies of the last Bush administration. Bush's problems with the Right are rooted in two other elements of his brother's legacy. Though staunchly conservative on most issues, George W. Bush backed a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants and an aggressive role for Washington in education reform. Politically, each idea was intended to court voters beyond the GOP base. Conservatives chafed against those policies during George W. Bush's presidency and, after he left office, successfully eroded support in the party for both ideas. Jeb Bush, though, threatens that victory. The younger Bush has said he would accept either a pathway to citizenship or permanent legal status for the undocumented, and he has defended the Common Core curriculum reform (while rejecting President Obama's effort to advance it through federal policy). Can Bush win these arguments in the GOP? Despite loud resistance from prominent conservatives, "Jeb Bush's view on immigration is … more acceptable to Republican primary voters than most people assume," notes Peter Wehner, senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. While many Republican voters view immigration skeptically, in the latest Pew Research Center survey, nearly three-fifths of the party (including GOP-leaning independents) said the undocumented should be allowed to remain legally inside the country. That number reached nearly two-thirds among the college-educated Republicans who are Bush's natural constituency. Bush's continued support for Common Core may be a tougher sell with Republican voters. But it's probably less important for Bush to win the specific debates over immigration and education than to subsume both issues beneath bold new domestic and foreign policy ideas that excite GOP voters. So far he hasn't done that. Unless Bush can shift his campaign's focus toward the country's future, he's likely to remain stuck in debates over his party's past. And driving in reverse is no way to win a race. Hillary Clinton, who kicks her campaign into higher gear with a major address on Saturday, hasn't faced nearly as much pressure yet within her party but could eventually confront her own legacy trap. Her announced rivals, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley, have denounced free-trade and financial-deregulation policies that Bill Clinton pursued. Other Democrats worry about the Clinton family heritage of ethical controversy. On both fronts, Hillary Clinton's challenge will be less to defend that record than to transcend it. On social issues such as gay marriage, Hillary Clinton has already embraced the Democrats' more liberal consensus. But for all her fiery economic rhetoric, it's not clear where she will land between her husband's business-friendly, deficit-conscious centrism and her party's rising populist current. It seems inevitable that Clinton, like Obama, will propose more responsibility for Washington than her husband envisioned when he declared, "The era of big government is over." Less certain is whether she will challenge her party to simultaneously reform government, as Bill Clinton did when he restructured welfare and balanced the federal budget. If she embraces reform (for instance, by streamlining entitlements for seniors to fund investments in kids), she risks antagonizing the Left; if she doesn't, she risks helping Republicans tag her as a return to uncontrolled big-government liberalism. Like Jeb Bush, Hillary Clinton has to convince Americans that she is offering not just a dusted-off collection of ideas stored in the family attic but an agenda attuned to the challenges people face today. Their famous families make almost everything else about running for president easier, but no contenders may find that bar harder to clear than the candidates named Clinton and Bush. *POLITICAL INSIDERS POLL <http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/poll-does-hillary-clinton-s-wealth-pose-a-problem-for-democratic-messaging-in-2016-20150612> // National Journal // Sarah Mimms – June 12, 2015* "I think the contributors to the foundation pose the biggest problem." Q: Does Hillary Clinton's wealth pose a problem for Democratic messaging in 2016? DEMOCRATS (91 VOTES) Yes: 30% No: 70% Yes "Clouds the income-inequality message, which is not necessarily a winning message, but complicates it nonetheless." "Nothing says 'middle class' quite like a $250,000 speaking fee." "Hillary's camp will continue to protest that she's operated in a lawful way, but traction on speeches-for-hire and suspect activities of [the Clinton Global Initiative] are too inviting to ignore by ad-makers. Problem." "Best case, we won't be able to attack Repubs as out of touch. Worse case, they turn HRC into Romney." "It's not the wealth itself but the means by which she accumulated it that makes it hard for 'ordinary Americans' to relate." "I think the contributors to the foundation pose the biggest problem." No "Voters respect wealth. The issue is what you do with it and how you got it. She will be fine." "FDR, JFK, HRC. No." "As long as she doesn't build a car elevator in her house, she will be fine. Americans still admire success, although not ostentatiousness." "Last time I checked, Lifestyles of the Rich & Famous and Keeping up with the Kardashians were very popular TV shows. She's fine as long as she keeps a common touch." "If she were new to the electorate, possibly. But that's not the case. If you like her, you like her regardless. Who are the nonwealthy candidates?" Q: Does Hillary Clinton's wealth pose a problem for Democratic messaging in 2016? REPUBLICANS (88 VOTES) Yes: 82% No: 18% Yes "Hypocrisy anyone?" "Both her declared primary opponents will put her on the defensive on this." "It's going to be very hard for her to talk about income inequality when she's been getting six figures for an hour-long speech." "Her definition of 'flat broke' is different from most people's." "In the context of income inequality, it takes away a huge issue for the Democrats." "Wellesley, Yale, corporate boards, governor's mansion, White House, Senate, Foggy Bottom, back to the White House… just like you and me." "Not because of how much money she has but the way she has made it and the way they have operated the Clinton Foundation." "Like Romney, it is not the fact [that]she is wealthy that is a problem; it is her inability to talk about it that is a killer." "Not as bad as Romney's car garage, but makes her Warren channeling seem a bit hollow." No "Rich Democrats get a pass in a way that rich Republicans never could." "People generally expect politicians to be rich." "She'll argue she can't be bought. The irony will be lost on the stupid." . . . . . . . . . . . . *What Hillary Clinton Can Learn from Michelle Kwan's Figure Skating Career <http://www.newrepublic.com/article/122008/what-if-hillary-clinton-michelle-kwan> // The New Republic // Elspeth Reeve – June 11, 2015 * Hillary Clinton has hired beloved Olympic figure skater Michelle Kwan. But if you followed the athlete’s career, the symbolism couldn’t be more disastrous for Clinton’s 2016 campaign. Clinton’s career has some uncomfortable parallels with Kwan’s: No one could beat the Kween. Until someone did. Some political writers (dudes) like to compare politics to football or baseball, team events with many players and many games. But clear-eyed sport-loving political writers (me) know that politics is actually like the glamour sports—ice skating and gymnastics—which involve years of unseen training and a whole team of coaches and image-makers who sit on the sidelines on the big night as the athlete competes alone in the spotlight. The tortured but entertainingly ominous HillKwan analogy goes like this: The 1998 Olympics Games in Nagano are the 2008 election. HillKwan is the beloved favorite. Kwan was the U.S. national champion; Clinton had coasted to reelection in the Senate. But a year before the Olympics/election, a fresh-faced youngster named Tara Lipinski [Barack Obama] had been getting attention. At the Olympics, HillKwan won over the judges [super delegates], but in the free skate, Tarack competed dazzling feats of difficulty and strength [doing the math on the primaries and caucuses]. In the end, HillKwan was defeated by the upstart Tarack. Now, the important and serious question we face today is: Is the 2016 election exactly like the 2002 Olympic figure skating competition? Like Clinton in 2016, the graceful Kwan was the favorite in Salt Lake City, too. It was her turn. Despite troubles with her longtime coach [staff?], she was again U.S. national champion. Sure, Kwan faced tough competition from Russians [Republicans?] in the form of Irina Slutskaya [war on women!], but she was the battle-tested veteran, competing on home turf [friendly demographic trends!]. She started strong, winning the short program [the invisible primary?]. But in the free skate, Kwan stumbled. She was surpassed not only by Slutskaya, but by another teammate, the 16-year-old athletic snoozefest Sarah Hughes [Martin O’Malley??], who became 2002 Olympic champion. After the competition, Kwan skated the exibition she’d planned long before—in a gold dress, to the song “Fields of Gold.” That, sports fans, is hubris. As she finished, tears ran down her cheek. Take note, Hillary. “Every four years a new person arose to take out Michelle,” former pairs skater Chris Schleicher told Deadspin last year. Sound familiar? Kwan is now fully on board with Clinton’s campaign to make sure Olympic past is not political prologue. *With boost from Clinton, efforts to expand voting access advance <http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/boost-clinton-efforts-expand-voting-access-advance> // MSNBC // Zachary Toth – June 11, 2015 * States from Rhode Island to Louisiana took steps this week toward making voting easier. In Washington, a new bill that would automatically register citizens to vote when they turn 18 is gaining traction among Democrats. And Ohio’s top voting official blocked a Democratic lawmaker on Twitter amid a spat over efforts to increase access to the ballot in the nation’s most pivotal swing state. It’s more evidence that Hillary Clinton’s major speech on voting last Thursday helped move along a conversation – already underway, to be sure – about how to to expand access to the ballot, especially by modernizing voter registration systems. It’s a conversation that threatens to put Republicans on the defensive after years of playing offense on the issue with a wave of restrictive voting laws. In her speech in Houston last Thursday, Clinton laid out an expansive and positive agenda to boost voting participation. The centerpiece was automatic voter registration, in which any citizen who has contact with the DMV is automatically registered unless he or she chooses to opt out—putting the responsibility for registering on the government rather than the individual. But Clinton also talked up online voter registration, a nationwide standard of at least 20 days of early voting, a full restoration of the Voting Rights Act, and a loosening of felon disenfranchisement laws, among other ideas. In March, Oregon became the first state in the nation to pass automatic voter registration. Since then, 14 other states plus the District of Columbia—including deep red ones like Texas and Georgia—have introduced automatic registration bills, according to a tally by the Brennan Center for Justice. And three states plus D.C. have this year passed online voter registration, bringing the total number of jurisdictions that offer it to 27. In just the week since Clinton spoke, Ohio and Rhode Island have both moved forward with online voter registration bills, and Louisiana passed a bill to study automatic voter registration. If it weren’t for the fact that most state legislatures have already adjourned for the session, the number of states moving forward with expansive legislation would likely be larger. “Many, many states are moving in the direction toward a more modern voter registration system,” said Wendy Weiser, the director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center. “I’m really glad that this issue is now at a national stage, that we sort of set our sights toward the end goal of a real modern system that registers every eligible voter, that’s accurate, that’s updated, and where the government takes responsibility.” U.S. Rep. David Cicilline on Wednesday introduced a federal automatic voter registration bill modeled on Oregon’s. The measure already has around 50 Democratic co-sponsors, including powerful figures like DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz, former Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Steve Israel, and civil rights icon Rep. John Lewis. Cicilline’s bill was in the works before Clinton’s speech, but he said it could still get a boost from her high-profile embrace of the idea. “Hopefully the secretary’s comments will bring some more attention to this issue, and help us build momentum,” Cicilline said. I think we have a responsibility to do everything we can to remove as many obstacles as possible to voting.” The bill is unlikely to go anywhere in a Republican Congress that won’t even restore the Voting Rights Act. But Cicilline suggested his legislation could nonetheless provoke a useful and clarifying debate about whether Republicans actually want to make voting easier. “I think if there’s substantial resistance from the leadership in the House, it will invite a real conversation,” he said. “You know: Why is it that one political party is not supporting this effort, and one is?” But Ohio might be ground zero for how Clinton’s ambitious plan may already be boosting those looking to make voting easier. On Wednesday afternoon, State Rep. Kathleen Clyde, a Democrat, was notified on Twitter that she’d been blocked by an account in the name of Secretary of State Jon Husted. The move came after Husted, a Republican, responded defiantly to Clinton’s criticism of Ohio’s voting policies, among other states, in her speech. Husted, rebutting Clinton, called the state “the gold standard” for election administration. That led to a series of tweets by Clyde Wednesday mocking the “gold standard” claim. Clyde accused Husted of improperly purging the vote rolls, and failing to mail absentee ballots to around 1 million eligible voters just because they hadn’t voted recently. And she noted, accurately, that Husted has waged a years-long campaign to reduce early voting. Husted and Clyde also have been sparring over how and whether to advance some of the expansive voting policies Clinton proposed. Though he’s gained a national reputation as an advocate of restrictive voting policies, Husted has long been an advocate of online registration, and he testified Wednesday in support of a Republican-sponsored online registration bill, calling it “a common sense reform that is long overdue.” The bill is expected to pass the Senate, but its prospects in the House are far less clear. But in a letter sent the same day, Clyde wrote that Husted doesn’t need new legislation to implement online registration. She said it’s already in place, but it currently only accepts registration updates, not new registrations. All that’s needed to change that is for Husted to “switch on” full online registration. “He’s been talking about this for years. How about some action?” said Clyde in an interview. “This is the type of thing that we should get up and running well before the presidential election in Ohio.” Husted has said he needs further legislative authority, and election law experts in Ohio say the question is debatable. In the letter, Clyde also urged Husted to support a bill she introduced earlier this year that would establish automatic voter registration. Husted’s office has opposed that measure, misleadingly suggesting – despite the opt-out provision – that it would require people to be on the rolls even if they didn’t want to be. A Husted spokesman didn’t respond to a request for comment about blocking Clyde on Twitter, or about the secretary of state’s positions on online or automatic voter registration. *De Blasio says he will not endorse Hillary Clinton until she clearly opposes Trans-Pacific Partnership <http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/de-blasio-not-back-hillary-opposes-trade-deal-article-1.2255489> // NY Daily News // Jennifer Fermino – June 11, 2015 * He's really playing hard to get. Mayor de Blasio, who has said he won’t endorse Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton until he’s convinced she’s got a plan to battle income inequality, is now calling on his old boss to speak out against a controversial trade deal. Hizzoner said Thursday he’s looking for a “very clear statement” from Clinton opposing the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which is loathed by the left but being pushed by President Obama. “I think it’s very important she speak up, make clear . . . that this trade deal is unacceptable,” de Blasio said on a phone call he held with reporters blasting the deal. He said it was important both as a matter of policy, and politically. “People all over the country at the grass roots – certainly Democrats all over the country – are looking to her for leadership and her strong voice at this moment would make a very big difference,” he said. It’s his latest attempt to push the traditionally centrist Clinton further to the left as she gears up for the 2016 Democratic primary. It’s his latest attempt to push the traditionally centrist Hillary Clinton (pictured) further to the left as she gears up for the 2016 Democratic primary. Clinton has so far been mum on the trade deal, which would remove tariffs and other barriers to trade between the U.S. and 11 other nations. Supporters say it will help the U.S. compete globally, but detractors — including many unions — insist it’s a jobs killer. In another snub to Clinton, he praised two of her rivals for the Democratic nomination — U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley — for their opposition to the trade deal, which Congress is currently debating. “They both said very important and appropriate things on trade, and I give them both credit for that,” said de Blasio, who headed Clinton’s 2000 Senate campaign in New York. “And I think that represents what a lot of people in this party feel on the ground all over the country.” De Blasio declined to say whether Clinton’s support for the deal would be a deal breaker in terms of his endorsement. “I don’t deal with hypotheticals,” he said. On Wednesday, de Blasio announced that he would not be attending Clinton’s campaign kick-off on Roosevelt Island on Saturday because he still hadn’t heard her vision for combating income inequality, which he has made the cornerstone of his mayoralty. Although he’s repeatedly declined to endorse Clinton since she announced her candidacy in April, de Blasio has taken pains to praise the former secretary of state. On Thursday, he said he is impressed with her so far. “I’m very optimistic about where she and her campaign are going,” he said. *Dem operative Woodhouse says NYT retracted charges of illegality in Clinton email story <http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jun/11/brad-woodhouse/dem-operative-woodhouse-says-nyt-retracted-charges/> // Politifact // Jon Greenberg – June 11, 2015 * Questions about Hillary Clinton’s handling of her email records during her time as secretary of state are likely to dog her throughout her presidential campaign. But the candidate will have many defenders, including Correct the Record, a super PAC created to support Clinton. Correct the Record president Brad Woodhouse, a long-time Democratic operative, dismissed the entire email matter during an interview recently on CNN. "Every federal employer has to consider what they archive as work-related and what they consider personal, and she did what every other federal official did, what every other previous secretaries of state did," Woodhouse told New Day co-hosts Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota on June 5, 2015. "Look, nobody has found -- you know, the New York Times wrote a story that some type of laws had been broken. Turns out they had to retract that. People had to back off that, and it's totally not true." In the news business, retractions don’t come lightly and we wondered if in fact, the newspaper of record had taken back part of what it reported on Clinton. In reality, the New York Times hasn’t retracted a word. The closest it came was in acolumn from public editor Margaret Sullivan, who wrote that the article that broke the story "was not without fault." But the lapse, Sullivan continued, was a failure to list exactly which regulations Clinton might have ignored. That lack of specificity, Sullivan wrote, allowed Clinton supporters to score political points. "Not because it highlighted a factual error — the story was accurate — but because it kicked up enough dust to obscure the facts." Sullivan, we should note, doesn’t speak for the newspaper. Her job is to serve as an internal but independent critic of the paper’s work, something akin to an inspector general in government. Formal retractions or corrections come from the editors themselves, and as we noted, that has not happened. Adrienne Watson, a spokeswoman for Correct the Record, said Woodhouse was not using the word retraction in an official sense. Rather, he was speaking of the gradual fade in New York Times coverage that insinuated that Clinton had broken some law. "Ultimately the charge was retracted, even if the New York Times never issued a correction," Watson said. "Their own experts changed their minds." Let’s unpack that. What the ‘New York Times’ said The newspaper broke the story under the headline "Hillary Clinton Used Personal Email Account at State Dept., Possibly Breaking Rules." It’s opening lines were "Hillary Rodham Clinton exclusively used a personal email account to conduct government business as secretary of state, State Department officials said, and may have violated federal requirements that officials’ correspondence be retained as part of the agency’s record." So the top of the story suggested a possible violation, which falls short of charging outright that she broke a law, as Woodhouse said. But the article does lay the groundwork to add weight to the idea of a potential violation. "Under federal law, however, letters and emails written and received by federal officials, such as the secretary of state, are considered government records and are supposed to be retained so that congressional committees, historians and members of the news media can find them." And: "Regulations from the National Archives and Records Administration at the time required that any emails sent or received from personal accounts be preserved as part of the agency’s records. But Mrs. Clinton and her aides failed to do so." About week and half after the initial story, the New York Times wrote that theregulations on preserving emails were vague. "Although the White House has strict requirements dating back two decades that every email must be saved, there is no such requirement for federal agencies. Instead they are in charge of setting their own policies for determining which emails constitute government records worthy of preservation and which ones may be discarded." While, as the story noted, President Barack Obama signed a 2014 bill that required government officials who use personal email accounts to hand over those records in 20 days, that law took effect after Clinton left the State Department. According to Thomas Blanton, a government disclosure expert cited in the story, this gave Clinton "wiggle room." Blanton was also cited in the original article. However, it is not accurate to say he changed his mind from one week to the next. In the first New York Times story, Blanton said "it was a shame" that the emails from Clinton’s personal account had not been turned over automatically. The New York Times also cited in its first story Jason Baron, a lawyer at Drinker Biddle and Reath, who is a former director of litigation at the National Archives and Records Administration. At the time, Baron said he could not think of another instance when a high-ranking official used a private email account for all government business. Blanton described Clinton’s email scenario as a serious breach. However, Baron did not say the practice was illegal. In the weeks that followed, he consistently said it was a bad practice. Our ruling Woodhouse said that the New York Times retracted the charge that Clinton’s handling of her email broke a law. That's wrong on two points. The newspaper never accused Clinton of breaking a law. Also, while the newspaper’s public editor said the original story should have included more details, the paper never issued a retraction or a correction. A spokeswoman for Woodhouse’s organization agreed with that point. The claim is not accurate, and we rate it False. *Bill Clinton’s Labor Secretary Urges Hillary Clinton to Oppose TPP at Kickoff <http://observer.com/2015/06/bill-clintons-labor-secretary-urges-hillary-clinton-to-oppose-tpp-at-kickoff/#ixzz3cmUfLHyo> // The Observer // Jullian Jorgensen – June 11, 2015 * Former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich, who served under President Bill Clinton and oversaw the roll-out of the North American Free Trade Agreement, joined Mayor Bill de Blasio today in urging Hillary Clinton to use her presidential campaign kickoff speech to oppose the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade pact—a deal Mr. Reich deemed “NAFTA on steroids.” “I would hope that she very clearly, specifically opposes the Trans-Pacific Partnership,” Mr. Reich said of the former secretary of state in a media conference call this afternoon. Mr. de Blasio, Ms. Clinton’s former Senate campaign manager who has yet to offer up an endorsement in the Democratic primary, also urged Ms. Clinton to come out against the trade deal, which unions and progressive politicians have derided as bad for American workers. “I’d like to see a very clear statement that this trade deal should be opposed and should be stopped,” Mr. de Blasio said. While he knew what he’d like to hear, Mr. de Blasio has said he will not attend Ms. Clinton’s campaign kick-off, which is being held Saturday just down the East River from Gracie Mansion on Roosevelt Island. Today, he recalled her speaking on trade issues in 2008 in a way that “resonated” in states like Ohio, which he visited to campaign for her in that year. “I think it’s very important she speak up make clear that there will be no more NAFTAs,” Mr. de Blasio said. “People all over the country, at the grassroots, certainly Democrats all over the country, are looking to her for leadership, and certainly her strong voice would make a very big difference.” Mr. Reich noted it would not be the first time Ms. Clinton, as a candidate, has taken a position that differed from the policies of her husband, former President Bill Clinton. He noted her recent push to end mass incarceration. “I hope that she does the same with the TPP, relative to NAFTA,” Mr. Reich said. Mr. Reich was charged with rolling out NAFTA under Mr. Clinton and, like many who oppose the TPP, said the 1990s trade pact had delivered poor results for American workers. “Once the dust cleared, we did find that a lot of manufacturing jobs left the U.S., they first went to Mexico and then they promptly went to Southeast Asia,” Mr. Reich said. He was also charged with enforcing the trade deal’s guidelines for better labor conditions in other countries, but said it proved “extraordinarily difficult to do,” something he suspected would hold true for the TPP as well. Mr. Reich and Mr. de Blasio bashed the idea of Congress holding a “fast-track” up or down vote on the trade pact, very little of which has been made public. The deal has pitted many in the left wing of the Democratic party against President Barack Obama, who backs the deal. “To have this large a trade agreement or investment agreement negotiated in secret and fast tracked through Congress without any opportunity for amendment, when most of America has no access to this trade agreement at all—what I know about it was leaked through Wikileaks—it seems to me makes a mockery of democracy,” Mr. Reich said. *Bill Clinton brushes aside foundation criticism <http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/11/politics/bill-clinton-foundation-hillary-2016/index.html> // CNN // Dan Merica – June 11, 2015 * The entire Clinton interview will air Sunday at 9 a.m. on CNN's "State of the Union" with Jake Tapper. Denver (CNN)Bill Clinton aggressively denied allegations that donors to his family's foundation were given special treatment by Hillary Clinton's State Department in a lengthy interview with CNN set to air on Sunday. The former president told CNN's Jake Tapper that no Clinton Foundation donor has "asked me for anything," adding that his wife was too busy as secretary of state to do favors for foundation supporters. "She was pretty busy those years," Clinton told Tapper. "I never saw her study a list of my contributors, and I had no idea who was doing business before the State Department." The Clinton Foundation and their rolls of foreign and corporate donors have become a flashpoint for Hillary Clinton's newly announced presidential campaign. Critics and investigative reporters have sought to prove that supporters of the Clinton Foundation were currying favor with the Clintons when they donated, but no blatant example of influence peddling has been revealed in months of scrutiny. Clinton said that any crossover between Clinton Foundation donors and companies the State Department was lobbying for abroad was more happenstance than nefarious. "America's always had to lobby for American-made airplanes," Clinton said, referring to the fact that Boeing, an American airplane manufacturer, had worked with both the State Department while also donating to the foundation's work in Haiti. "I don't think they (donated) to make the government like them better. We do like them better. All Americans are grateful that there are American jobs and businesses around the world," Clinton said. "So I don't know of anything, if there was even an appearance of conflict, except all these folks helped us do what we do, which I think is good work." While Clinton said nothing was ever given to the foundation's donors, he said that he could not outright deny that any of his donors were hoping for anything in return when they cut his foundation a check. "I know of no example, but I don't ever know what people's motives are," he said. Clinton echoed many of his wife's supporters and aides when he said attacks on his foundation were strictly about politics. "Nobody even suggested it or talked about it or thought about it until the political season began," Clinton said.. The foundation, however, has admitted they've made missteps in the past, particularly on the reporting and approval of their foreign donations. Foundation aides admitted earlier this year they "made mistakes" in reporting, but did nothing intentionally wrong. Clinton's comments came during the annual meeting of Clinton Global Initiative America in Denver, where foundation supporters made nearly 80 pledges to address issues such as providing low-income Americans with alternatives to predatory loans and providing Navajo Nation with solar power. In his interview with Tapper, Clinton described his foundation as an endeavor to "get people who have money to people who don't, and to give it to them in a way that's empowering so it actually changes their lives." Clinton reiterated that the foundation's aim was to help the powerless; people "who are working as hard as they can, but who don't have enough money to support their kids and meet basic human needs." "They can't change the future," he said. "(For them) every tomorrow is just like yesterday. That's how I define powerless. Not poverty. Not adversity alone. But the inability to alter your condition." The entire Clinton interview will air Sunday at 9 a.m. on CNN's "State of the Union" with Jake Tapper. *'Conversation' with Hillary Clinton? That'll be $2,700 <http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/afp/article-3121244/Conversation-Hillary-Clinton-Thatll-2-700.html> // Daily Mail // AFP - June 12 2015 * Four, five, even six times per week, Hillary Clinton meets deep-pocketed supporters eager to shake hands with the celebrity Democrat -- all-but-obligatory encounters helping her amass the war chest needed to win the White House. Qualifying guests are invited to hold what is described as a "conversation with Hillary," at a cost of $2,700 -- the legal limit set by the Federal Election Commission (FEC) on donations to candidates in the 2016 presidential primary cycle. Once the primaries are decided, a supporter can contribute a fresh $2,700 maximum to a candidate in the presidential election. Clinton, a former secretary of state and the prohibitive favorite for the Democratic nomination, has participated in some 40 fundraising receptions since launching her campaign in April, according to the Sunlight Foundation, a nonpartisan Washington organization that studies campaign financing. By any measure it is an intense schedule to follow from now until Election Day 17 months away, and more rigorous than the smattering of public events she has held as a candidate. Clinton, 67, holds her first major campaign rally Saturday in New York, one expected to draw thousands of voters. But who attends the swankier, less publicized functions? Friends of Clinton, influential Democrats, executives, a Facebook co-founder, her husband Bill, and clean-energy billionaire Tom Steyer have participated in the events. On June 29, rocker Bon Jovi will sing for one of the gatherings. Clinton participated in three receptions Wednesday in three cities in the US northeast. Regulatory loopholes could allow Clinton to extract more money from her donors, but the candidate has publicly committed to reforming campaign finance laws in order to dampen the growing influence of private donations on US elections. Prominent Republican rival Jeb Bush regularly commands tens of thousands of dollars per attendee at certain events, in extraordinary cases up to $100,000. He avoids campaign ceilings through a legal formulation known as a "super PAC." These types of political action committees were born from a 2010 Supreme Court decision allowing unlimited contributions to such groups as a form of free expression, provided the entities remain independent from the candidates and their campaigns. But the alleged independence of such super PACs has come into question. Jeb Bush's "Right to Rise" group is led by a close associate of the all-but-declared candidate, and the organization is exclusively dedicated to supporting Bush's run. Bush, a former Florida governor, has yet to announce his candidacy -- that is expected to occur Monday in Miami. But the PAC's staffers are already talking openly about preparing for Bush's campaign. By delaying formal declaration of his candidacy, Bush can continue to raise unlimited funds for his super PAC, bypassing campaign contribution caps. - 'Obscene moment' - Clinton herself will likely hold her nose and open the fundraising floodgates in order to fill Democratic campaign coffers if she is to match Bush's money juggernaut. A specific goal is already said to have emerged: exceed the $1 billion raised by President Barack Obama, the Democratic Party and affiliated groups for his successful 2012 re-election effort. Several Democrats allied with Obama, and close to Clinton, are expected to launch a fundraising effort seeking contributions to Priorities USA Action, a super PAC formerly committed to Obama. Clinton is expected to tap into such flows. "She does not have clean hands," said Bill Allison, a senior fellow at Sunlight Foundation. "She would argue that she's forced to do it because that's the system we have," Allison added. "That to some extent is true, but that doesn't make her noble." One candidate who says he refuses to embrace the fundraising leviathan is independent Senator Bernie Sanders, a "Democratic socialist" and Clinton rival in the primaries who believes campaign finance will be a central theme of the election. "We live in an obscene moment," Sanders said Thursday. "Billionaires are now literally buying American elections and candidates." *Duggan's power now rivals Putin, Bill Clinton jokes <http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/detroit-city/2015/06/11/bill-clinton-detroit-bankruptcy-duggan-putin/71084104/> // Detroit News Washington Bureau – June 11, 2015 * Former President Bill Clinton heralded Detroit's turnaround after the Motor City's exit from a record setting Chapter 9 bankruptcy restructuring — and jokingly compared the city's mayor to Russian leader Vladimir Putin. At a Clinton Global Initiative event Wednesday in Denver, Clinton held a panel discussion with Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan, Kresge Foundation president and CEO Rip Rapson and a Detroit baker and business owner, April Anderson. During the nearly 40-minute discussion on neighborhood revitalization, Clinton said that being mayor of Detroit could be America's "most coveted municipal job" — and noted that with the Detroit land bank, much of the city's 139 square miles is controlled by the city. Detroit's 2013 bankruptcy restructuring allowed Duggan to "basically become the most powerful municipal official in the country. He controls over half the land mass in the city of Detroit now. He's making old Putin look like a piker — and people actually like (Duggan)," Clinton said to laughter, according to video of the event posted online by the Clinton Foundation. Rapson said Duggan may not live that image down: "That's a great image. I like to think of Mayor Duggan as our Mayor Putin. That's terrific. I think that's going to stick," Rapson said. The city owns nearly half the city's property, Duggan said, or about 40,000 vacant parcels. Clinton compared Detroit to the "Homestead Act" in 1862 that convinced Americans to help settle the west by offering them free land. Duggan didn't directly respond to the Putin comparison. Kresge was one of the nonprofits that helped Detroit exit bankruptcy more quickly by contributing to a fund that saved city-owned art at the Detroit Institute of Arts from being sold and defrayed pension losses for retirees. Clinton praised the city's revitalization, but noted that the city lost 60 percent of its population since the 1950s — and is down a quarter since 2000. Duggan, 56, said that he is focused on boosting the population — and has said he wants to be judge when he is up for re-election if the city is growing again. Detroit has lost population for every year that Duggan has been alive. "You can drop Manhattan, Boston and San Francisco in the city of Detroit boundaries — and still have room left over," Duggan said. The real challenge is revitalizing the neighborhoods after the dramatic turnarounds in downtown and midtown, he said. Duggan said there are 5,000 new housing units under construction in Detroit. Duggan said he is working to sell the 40,000 vacant houses in the city. The city is auctioning three homes a day. On Tuesday, three homes sold for a total of $100,000, Duggan said. Duggan noted that the city is offering to allow homeowners to buy next door vacant lots for just $100. The city is now also offering to lease vacant land if the neigbhorhood association signs off on the use — such as a playground or urban farm. During the event, Duggan said Clinton is the single biggest customer of Detroit watchmaker Shinola. Clinton bought customized watches for the Secret Service agents on his security detail that featured the presidential seal as Christmas presents. *Speech inflation: Why Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and others get massive speaking fees <https://fortune.com/2015/06/11/politician-speaking-fees-speeches/> // Fortune // Ben Geier – June 11, 2015 * In just under two years, President Obama will be out of office, leaving the White House and giving way for another politician to start taking flak. What, pray tell, will he do with all that free time? If his predecessors offer any clue, he won’t do much, but he’ll get paid a lot for it. Last week, Politico reported that former President George W. Bush makes between $100,000 and $175,000 for every speech he gives and that he has given at least 200 speeches since leaving office in 2009. A bit of simple math translates that activity into more than $30 million for the former president in speech fees alone. Compare that to the relatively paltry $400,000 a president makes a year while in office, and you can see why presidents look forward to their retirement. Paying ex-presidents to give speeches really took off with Gerald Ford, Politico notes—which makes sense, since Ford didn’t ever really plan to run for president and likely figured he would stay in the House much longer than he did. Ford took umbrage when he was criticized for making money off of his former job, saying that as a private citizen he could leverage his past however he pleased. Not long after Ford started hitting the lecture circuit, the Washington Speakers Bureau—home to many high-powered speakers, including George W. Bush and his wife Laura—was founded in 1979. These agencies have played a major role in the skyrocketing fees that high-powered speakers now command. “Whenever you have a middleman, that adds to the cost,” said Lance Strate, a communications professor at Fordham University. The desire among agencies to maximize fees, and the added ability to negotiate that comes with having professional representation, means organizations are more likely to see speaking fees grow. Plus, the agency system simply provides more access to influential figures like ex-presidents, meaning more groups are able to get the power elites they want, if they are willing to pay the price. But why exactly are organizations willing to pay so much for an hour of a former politician’s time? It isn’t for the content, that’s for sure. Generally, speakers and those who hire them are mum on just how much money gets handed over for these engagements—which, by the way, aren’t usually the most thought-provoking or newsworthy speeches. (Politico notes that in one speech to a bowling industry group, Bush let loose the earthshaking bon mot that “bowling is fun.”) “The speech is kind of secondary to … just being able to have a big name at your event,” Strate said. “It might get reported on some form of TV or cable news, which further adds to the prestige and the publicity of the event.”And even if it doesn’t end up on the evening news, almost every conference will put their speeches on YouTube, where there is always a chance it will go viral. Though speakers fees are often kept confidential, we do have a few estimates of what famous ex-politicians make: Bill Clinton supposedly made around $225,000 for a gig last February. Rudy Giuliani, the former mayor of New York and one-time Republican presidential hopeful, is said to have pulled up to $270,000 for a speech. Sarah Palin, former Alaska Governor, former Republican vice-presidential candidate, and all-time cable news and tabloid fixture—is said to have made $115,000 for a speech in 2011. These are just the big guns. Even the fringiest of also-rans—think Howard Dean and Herman Cain—have big-time speakers agents and can pull in serious coin for giving a fluffy 45-minute talk. Given that most of the declared 2016 candidates on both sides of the aisle have a fairly slim chance of becoming president, perhaps financial incentives, rather than the pull of public service, has some impact on just how many people run for high office. *Clinton rally coincides with gun show at fairgounds <http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/caucus/2015/06/11/hillary-clinton-gun-show-iowa-state-fairgrounds/71074790/> // The Des Moines Register // Josh Hafner – June 11, 2015 * Hillary Clinton's Iowa campaign kickoff event will share the Iowa State Fairgrounds this Sunday with an established gun show. The gun show's organizer, a Republican county supervisor, has welcomed Clinton, a Democratic frontrunner for president, to visit to learn about Iowa gun enthusiasts and hunters. "If Hillary Clinton would come through, I would welcome her," said Daryl Klein, 56, of Dubuque County, who's operated gun shows in Iowa for more than 30 years." I would like her to see what we do instead of the rhetoric put out by the media a lot of the times, what and who we are." Clinton, the former first lady and secretary of state, has called for tighter gun regulations in the U.S. as recently as last year, calling the country's handling of firearms "way out of balance" in an address to the National Council for Behavioral Health in Maryland. "We have to rein in what has become (an) almost article of faith, that anybody can own a gun anywhere, anytime. And I don't believe that," she said, according to Politico. When informed of Klein's invitation to the Clinton campaign, Iowa spokeswoman Lily Adams said she would pass it along. "Hillary has been to the state fairgrounds before and is excited to host the launch party there on Sunday. It's no surprise to us that other organizations found a home at the fairgrounds as well." Security at the gun show Klein stressed to The Des Moines Register that ample safety rules enforced by his gun show should prevent any worry about the amount of firearms that the gun show will draw to the same site of Clinton's event. The show's team of private security ensures each gun that enters the show is empty, marked and rendered inoperative with a cable tie, he said. His security guards also check guns upon exit, Klein said. Still, accidents happen: During the show's 2012 event at the fairgrounds, one vendor shot his own hand while setting up a gun display. That vendor, now banned from the show, was not seriously injured. "We are a family event. We have lots of women and children come through also," Klein said. "I think sometimes we get a bad rap." Other candidate visits Clinton wouldn't mark the first presidential candidate to visit one of Klein's gun shows, held under his banner of Trade Show Productions, Ltd., which have taken place at the fairgrounds for years. Republican Rick Santorum, the 2012 Iowa caucuses winner now on his second White House campaign, has visited the gun show in the past, Klein said, as well as Iowa U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley, also a Republican. One-time GOP candidates Tom Tancredo and Sam Brownback also visited in years past, Klein said. *Hillary Clinton Supports Women's Rights, Gay Rights in "Living History" Instagram Video <http://www.eonline.com/news/665831/hillary-clinton-supports-women-s-rights-gay-rights-in-living-history-instagram-video-watch-now> // E! Entertainment – June 11, 2015 * Hillary Clinton's Instagram game is on! The 2016 presidential hopeful only joined this realm of filtered squares yesterday, but she's already got a lifetime of accomplishments up on display! In a mere six posts--including one "Living History" video--@hillaryclinton has brought the social media world up to date on what she's been doing throughout the years to advance women's rights and gay rights. This particular clip includes photos from Hillary's childhood, her wedding to Bill Clinton (!), family trips to Disneyland and her own daughter Chelsea Clinton becoming a mother. We also look back and see her as first lady, New York's first elected female Senator and U.S. Secretary of State. In videos pieced together from decades back to the present, she champions the a similar message: "Human rights are women's rights, and gay rights are human rights." Brava! Ms. Clinton even had time to put up a most impressive #throwback Thursday photo that shows she's had lots of ambition from the get-go! Hillary, who made her Insta-debut with a cleverly captioned pantsuit pic, is using this feed to rally her supporters, too. She's got a graphically pleasing countdown to her official campaign kickoff on New York City's Roosevelt Island, urging her current followers to "Get in a New York State of Mind" and "tag a friend who should follow before Saturday"! #SomebodyHiredAGoodSocialMediaManager! *Lady Gaga and Tony Bennett to sing for Hillary <http://pagesix.com/2015/06/09/lady-gaga-and-tony-bennett-to-sing-for-hillary/> // NY Post // Emily Smith – June 9, 2015 * Lady Gaga and Tony Bennett will serenade Hillary Clinton at a fundraiser for the presidential candidate at Manhattan’s Plaza Hotel. Tickets for the June 27 event are $2,700 a pop with a limited number of $1,000 tickets. But the devoted few who raise $50,000 get blessed with host status, a photo with Clinton (and possibly Gaga and Bennett) and an invite to a VIP after-party. A source said, “They’re not sure if it’ll be a seated affair or if people will be standing — it’s a pricey night to be standing.” Gaga has long supported Clinton, calling for her to run for president and blasting Tim Gunn for criticizing her pantsuits. Gaga said in 2011, “I think Hillary Clinton has more important things to worry about than her hemline.” *Quote Of The Day <http://www.theskimm.com/2015/06/10/skimm-for-june-11th-3?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+theSkimm+%28theSkimm%29> // The Skimm – June 11, 2015 * “Hard choices” – The caption on Hillary Clinton’s first Instagram post that featured red, white, and blue pantsuits. House of Uncle Sam would approve. *OTHER DEMOCRATS NATIONAL COVERAGE* *O’MALLEY* *O'Malley: I haven't seen video of pool party brutality <http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/11/politics/martin-omalley-mckinley-pool-party/index.html> // CNN // Alexandra Jaffe & Betsy Klein – June 11, 2015 * As a former mayor of Baltimore, Martin O'Malley has made racial unrest and law enforcement reform an issue in his nascent presidential campaign. But on Thursday night, he said he had not seen the video of the latest incident that's sparked cries of police brutality against minorities: an officer's apparent disproportionate reaction to reports of a group of teens fighting at a pool party in Texas. The video of the incident went viral and critics accused the officer Eric Casebolt of racism. Casebolt was caught on tape responding to reports of fighting at a pool party by slamming a bikini-clad, teenage girl to the ground and waving his gun at a group of boys, most of them black. He resigned on Tuesday, amid a police investigation into his actions. When CNN asked O'Malley about the incident, he said, "I haven't seen it, I've heard of it." O'Malley said because of the widespread use of camera phones, "we're going to be seeing more incidents that involve police officers and citizens," but did not comment on substance of the specific incident in Texas. "And often times, those incidents will involve issues of race and legacy of race that all of us, whether black or white, share as Americans. And that issue of race in America and law enforcement have been intertwined for 300 to 400 years in this country," he said. O'Malley said that officers who are "well-trained and play by the rules" are the "norm," but acknowledged videos like these make Americans question that. Officers should adopt body cameras and other tools to combat the negative perception of police officers and protect themselves, O'Malley said. "With the advent of new technology in the hands of every citizen, we need to put better technology in the hands of police departments so they can be open and transparent and accountable," he said. During his campaign launch, O'Malley touched on the death of Freddie Gray, who died in the back of a police van in Baltimore. "There is something to be learned from that night, and there is something to be offered to our country from those flames," he said. *O’Malley touts progressive values, experience, results <http://qctimes.com/news/local/government-and-politics/elections/o-malley-touts-progressive-values-experience-results/article_9387cb37-a722-5799-8872-edd63daedc77.html> // Quad City Times // James Lynch – June 11, 2015 * Selling himself as a progressive who gets things done, Martin O’Malley engaged in classic Iowa retail politics Thursday afternoon at a Mount Vernon house party. O’Malley, who later had a campaign rally at Sanctuary Pub in Iowa City, emphasized his experience and record of getting things done as Baltimore mayor and two terms as Maryland governor. “I am the only candidate in this race with 15 years of elected executive experience.” O’Malley said more than once during a 13-minute stump speech and about 20 minutes of question-and-answer. That’s important, he told more than 120 people who crowded into Nate and Maggie Willems’ home, because “getting things done matters." “It matters not only for the accomplishment of the task at hand, it matters for restoring the public trust necessary to build the deeper and larger consensus so we can start acting like Americans again,” O’Malley said. The 52-year-old O’Malley also drew a generational distinction between himself and the “very honorable and good people” — Hillary Clinton, 67, and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, 73 — who also are seeking the Democratic presidential nomination. His perspective is one that will “speak to where our country is going rather than where our country has been,” O’Malley said. His audience liked the merchandise, but for many, it is too early to commit to a candidate. “He’s an impressive guy,” said Linda Yanney of Iowa City, who asked O’Malley about the disparate incarceration rates for blacks and whites. “He could play well, but there’s a lot of time between now” and the first-in-the-nation precinct caucuses scheduled for Feb. 1. O’Malley offered “the right ideas, progressive ideas,” said Terry Lessmeier of Mount Vernon and might be a nice fit compared to Sanders “who is not discreet and Clinton who is too discreet” in expressing progressive values. That was part of O’Malley’s sales pitch, too. Voters who look at his “15 years of elected executive experience” will see “a fearless advancing of progressive goals and progressive values,” O’Malley said. “I don’t apologize for them. I plan to speak fearlessly about the progressive values and progressive goals that are going to make our country better.” O’Malley, Lessmeier said, may have an advantage in that “he’s the most telegenic, and in today’s world, that’s important.” O’Malley will be back in Iowa July 17 for the Iowa Democratic Party Hall of Fame Celebration in Cedar Rapids. Clinton, Sanders and former Virginia Sen. Jim Webb are scheduled to participate, too. *SANDERS* *Bernie Sanders Demands Hillary Clinton Take Trade Stance ‘Right Now’ <http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/11/bernie-sanders-demands-hillary-clinton-take-trade-stance-right-now/> // NYT // Alan Rappeport – June 11, 2015 * Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont delivered a sharp critique of Hillary Rodham Clinton on Thursday for her reluctance to talk about issues as a presidential candidate and vowed that he is running against her to win. Mr. Sanders, an independent who is seeking the Democratic nomination, said he is offended by Mrs. Clinton’s silence on trade and urged her to share her real views with voters. “Trade policies have been disastrous,” Mr. Sanders said at a breakfast hosted by The Christian Science Monitor in Washington. “If she’s against this, we need her to speak out, right now.” Mr. Sanders then listed a number of issues where he said Mrs. Clinton has failed to share her views, including climate change, the Keystone Pipeline and the renewal of the Patriot Act. “What is the secretary’s point of view on that?” he asked of the act that he voted against. Promising to run a campaign without personal attacks, Mr. Sanders questioned Mrs. Clinton on how she plans to address the influence of the “billionaire class” and said that her vote to authorize the 2003 Iraq War raised questions about her judgment. “I’m not here to criticize a vote that she cast years ago,” Mr. Sanders said. “But what does that mean about your judgment assessing information?” The comments from Mr. Sanders come as Mrs. Clinton is about to formally kick off her campaign with a rally in New York this weekend. The senator acknowledged that he remains an underdog in the race but said that he is picking up momentum in terms of crowds and fund-raising. He estimated that he has received about 200,000 donations averaging about $40 each. “This is not a protest campaign,” Mr. Sanders said when asked if he really believed he could beat Mrs. Clinton. “I am in this election to win.” *Rival Challenges Clinton to Say Where She Stands on Trade <http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/rival-challenges-clinton-stands-trade-31690650> // AP // Ken Thomas – June 11, 2015 * Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders called on Democratic presidential rival Hillary Rodham Clinton on Thursday to say exactly where she stands on President Barack Obama's trade agenda now that Congress is considering it. "I think our trade policies have been disastrous," Sanders said during a breakfast sponsored by The Christian Science Monitor. "Secretary Clinton, if she's against this, we need her to speak out right now. Right now. And I don't understand how any candidate, Democrat or Republican, is not speaking out on this issue right now." The House was starting debate on so-called fast-track authority, which would let the administration complete a trade deal with Pacific countries that Congress could accept or reject, but not change. The proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership would lower trade barriers among 12 nations. Clinton, a former secretary of state, has expressed concern that the deal may allow currency manipulation and fall short on health and environmental protections. But she's said she wants to see the agreement in its final form before judging it. Sanders and former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley, who is also seeking the Democratic presidential nomination, vigorously oppose the deal. Clinton aides did not immediately comment on Sanders' remarks. Clinton has been under pressure to oppose Obama's plan from labor unions and liberal groups, which say it would ship jobs overseas and undermine health and environmental standards. Republicans who lead Congress are planning votes Friday on a program to retrain workers displaced by trade agreements, called Trade Adjustment Assistance, and fast-track authority may be voted on then, too. Sanders, who launched his presidential bid in late April, has drawn large crowds to his events in Iowa and New Hampshire and estimates he has raised $8 million for his presidential campaign, based on about 200,000 contributors donating an average of $40. The Vermont independent, who sides with Democrats in the Senate, predicted he can raise $40 million to $50 million by the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary in early 2016. The self-described democratic socialist said his campaign manager had recently traveled to Iowa and was hiring staff in preparation for the caucuses. "We're gearing up," he said. "This is not an educational campaign," Sanders said. "This is not a protest campaign. This is a campaign to win." Sanders acknowledged Clinton is the "heavy favorite" at the start of the campaign but said "we have momentum. And our numbers are growing." *Bernie Sanders insists his momentum is no fluke <http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/bernie-sanders-2016-president-momentum-hype-polls-118877.html> // Politico // Jonathan Topaz – June 10, 2015 * Bernie Sanders, enjoying a rise in early-state and national polls and attracting large crowds at his rallies, has a message for voters: believe the hype. The Vermont senator, an Independent who is running for the Democratic nomination for president, said on Thursday he has no illusions about the gap between himself and far-and-away front-runner Hillary Clinton. But the self-described democratic socialist said his promising early returns aren’t a fluke. “This is not an educational campaign. This is not a protest campaign. This is a campaign to win,” said a confident Sanders to a group of reporters at a Christian Science Monitor breakfast. Sanders has fashioned himself as the authentic progressive and the preferred liberal alternative to Clinton, who herself has been veering leftward, promoting grassroots issues such as college affordability and criminal justice reform. On Thursday, Sanders acknowledged, as he has in the past, that Clinton is a “heavy favorite,” but argued that he’s making ground and that name recognition plays a big role in polling. “I think the secretary may well be one of the best-known people in the United States of America. I am not,” Sanders said. Sanders grabbed attention this week for scoring over the weekend a surprising 41 percent in an official Wisconsin Democratic Party straw poll at the state convention, losing to Clinton by just eight points. The Vermont senator has also been creeping up in the national polls. He’s climbed to 15 percent in the Democratic field, up from single digits before his kickoff rally in Vermont on May 26. And the most recent Iowa and New Hampshire polls showed him at 16 and 18 percent, respectively — also a jump from earlier polling. Sanders, the longest-serving independent in congressional history, has also been drawing pretty impressive crowds. More than 3,000 supporters showed up to a fiery Sanders rally on a Sunday in Minneapolis. Last week, an estimated 1,000 people showed up in Keene, New Hampshire, and most events in his recent trips to Iowa were standing-room only, including 700 people who showed up in Davenport, the largest Iowa rally for a candidate in either race. Sanders said on Thursday that his campaign has at least 200,000 campaign contributors and that his team is staffing up in Iowa and New Hampshire. His team is expected to open its Iowa office shortly. “We have momentum. Our numbers are growing,” said Sanders, adding that his campaign is less than two months old and still in its early stages. During the breakfast meeting, Sanders continued to pressure Clinton on several policy areas, notably on the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the free-trade deal opposed by the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. He said Clinton’s failure to take a stand on the issue offends him. “If she’s against this, we need her to speak out right now. Right now,” he said. He also contrasted his leadership on several core progressive issues with Clinton — noting his efforts taking on corporate interests, in trying to block the Keystone XL pipeline and speaking out against the PATRIOT Act. “Where is the secretary on that?” he asked. The senator also offered some kind words for New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, a progressive leader who has declined several times to endorse Clinton despite running her 2000 Senate campaign. De Blasio at a press conference this week called Sanders a “great senator” and confirmed that he wouldn’t attend Clinton’s campaign kickoff rally on New York City’s Roosevelt Island. “I have a lot of respect for Mayor de Blasio,” Sanders said, calling the mayor one of the nation’s “leaders” on income inequality. He said that he would call de Blasio at a certain point and that he’d love to have his endorsement. Still, Sanders avoided attacking Clinton too harshly. Unlike fellow Democratic presidential hopeful former Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee, he said her vote for the Iraq War was not disqualifying — “everybody makes bad votes.” And asked about contributions to the Clinton Foundation from foreign governments, Sanders pivoted to the Koch brothers, the GOP mega-donors who he argued were having a more corrosive impact on the democratic process. In calling for more presidential debates, including those with Republicans, he called on Democrats to have a 50-state strategy — part of a larger argument that his progressive policies will play well with a majority of Americans and even traditionally conservative voters. “It is not a radical agenda. In virtually every instance, what I’m saying is supported by a significant majority of the American people,” Sanders said, calling out Republican candidates former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and former Texas Gov. Rick Perry by name for wanting to cut Social Security. Sanders, who wrote Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz to call for more debates earlier in the cycle, called the current structure “much too limited” and said he regretted that the DNC didn’t consult his campaign before rolling it out. One of Sanders’ most direct contrasts with Republicans came during his initial discussion about paid sick leave, maternity leave and vacations — labor protections he said are central to his new “family values” agenda. The senator, who is laying out his plan more specifically later on Thursday, said he borrowed the phrase from Republicans who have used it to restrict reproductive rights for women. Sanders, who has visited several union halls since announcing his candidacy and is a favorite of organized labor, said he will introduce legislation to guarantee ten days of vacation time for workers and keep working to institute the 40-hour work week. Elsewhere on policy, Sanders, who has called for a single-payer health care system and typically offers only mild praise for the Affordable Care Act, confirmed that he would try to “move away from the ACA” toward a Medicare-for-all system if he were to become president. He also added that he’d soon be unveiling a comprehensive tax plan — including a tax on Wall Street speculation and ending loopholes that allow corporations to stash income in tax havens abroad. Sanders said that those moves, plus an unspecified increase in taxes on wealthy individuals, would help pay for his investments in health care and education, including his recently introduced bill to have tuition-free four-year public college. “I believe the overwhelming majority of Americans support it. I suspect Wall Street does not,” he said of a tax on Wall Street speculation. Sanders will head to Iowa this weekend for a three-day swing through the Hawkeye State, and will be there at the same time as Clinton, who kicks off her Iowa campaign Saturday and Sunday. *Bernie Sanders: Hillary Clinton's Silence on Trade Deal 'Offensive' <http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-11/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-s-silence-on-trade-deal-offensive-> // Bloomberg // Sahil Kapur – June 11, 2015 * Hillary Clinton's refusal to take a stand on a controversial Asia trade deal is offensive, one of the Democratic presidential front-runner's challengers, Senator Bernie Sanders, said Thursday. "I don't understand how, on an issue of such huge consequence, you don't have an opinion," Sanders, a self-described democratic socialist who launched a bid for Democratic nomination earlier this year, told reporters at a Christian Science Monitor breakfast. The Vermont lawmaker is an outspoken opponent of the trade deal, known as the Trans Pacific Partnership. Clinton, who spoke in favor of giving President Barack Obama authority to negotiate a sweeping trade deal with Asian countries while she was serving as his secretary of state, has demurred about taking a stand on the legislation now before Congress. “This is a campaign to win.” Senator Bernie Sanders Asked if Clinton's refusal to take a position offends him, Sanders said: "Yes, it does." The trade debate cuts across party lines and divides Democrats like Obama from key parts of the party's constituency: labor unions and environmentalists oppose the deal because they fear it would undercut wages in the United States and permit air and water pollution globally. The Senate approved authority for Obama to cut a deal that could not be amended by Congress; the House is currently considering the bill. "If she's against this, we need her to speak out, right now. Right now," Sanders said. "I don't understand how any candidate, Democrat or Republican, is not speaking out on that issue." Sanders is making economic inequality and the struggles of middle-class and poor workers the centerpiece of his admittedly long-shot bid for the Democratic nomination. He said he plans to introduce legislation later Thursday to extend sick leave rights. He insisted he's not the Don Quixote of 2016. "This is not an educational campaign. This is not a protest campaign. This is a campaign to win," he said. While "I freely admit that Secretary Clinton comes into this a heavy favorite," the senatoradded that "we have momentum. And our numbers are growing." Sanders also said he would not approve a super-PAC. Such entities can establish themselves without the backing of candidates, who are legally not permitted to coordinate with them. But many candidates — including Clinton — have effectively allied themselves with the outside spending groups, signaling to supporters who want to write large checks where they should send them. Sanders, who considers the amount of money that has flowed into campaigns after the Supreme Court effectively gutted legal limits on contributions "obscene," said he won't do that. "I don't want the money of the billionaire class," he said. "Which is easy for me to say because I wouldn't get their money if I wanted to." *Sanders Explains Obama’s Biggest Mistake And What Clinton Is Doing Wrong <http://www.buzzfeed.com/evanmcsan/sanders-explains-obamas-biggest-mistake-and-what-clinton-is#.gl9o73RzG> // Buzzfeed // Evan McMorris-Santoro – June 11, 2015* President Obama turned his back on the millions who rallied to support him when he assumed office, cutting off the only means he had to effect the sweeping changes he promised on the campaign trail in 2008 and leaving him at the mercy of Republicans in Congress. That’s the diagnosis from Bernie Sanders, the independent Vermont senator and Democratic presidential candidate who held court as the left-wing attack dog in the presidential race for about an hour Thursday surrounded by reporters at one of Washington’s fanciest hotels. Sanders proclaimed himself the man with the “most progressive views of any candidate” in the race — “philosophically, I am a Democratic Socialist,” he said at one point — and proceeded to prove the point, detailing broad support for western European economic and education policy, attacking Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton for declining to publicly join the progressive push against free trade expansion, bemoaning money in politics while also promising never to have his own super PAC and proudly noting he never voted for any of the U.S. wars in Iraq, including the one launched in 1991. He spoke about how the faith he was born into motivates him, addressed a weird interview with public radio in which he was accused of having joint US-Israeli citizenship, and spoke about his surprising success in the nascent days of his presidential bid. The impassioned critique of Obama summarized Sanders’ skill at vocalizing the frustrations of the president’s progressive allies, laying out succinctly what anyone who has been within distant earshot of a progressive activist has heard many times. “The biggest mistake Barack Obama made in my view is that after his brilliant campaign in 2008 where he mobilized millions of people, ran one of the great campaigns in American history, essentially what he said to his supporters was, ‘thank you very much for electing me, I’ll take it from here on myself. I’ll sit down with John Boehner, I’ll sit down with Mitch McConnell, we’ll negotiate, we’ll come up with some compromises, thanks very much for what you did,’” Sanders said. “I will not make that mistake. The point that I’m making is, and this is where my campaign is very different from the others, I do not believe that any president who is standing up for the working class of this country can be successful without the mobilized activist grassroots movement behind him or her. So I will be working hard to make sure that mobilization exists.” As for Clinton, Sanders expressed bewilderment that the former Secretary of State hasn’t publicly chosen sides in the trade debate with hours to go before a House vote on fast-track trade authority that the activist left has made defeating as its number one goal. “You can be for the [Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal], I think the president is dead wrong, he is for it,” Sanders said. “You can be against it, I’m against it, Warren’s against it, Sherrod Brown’s against it, the majority of Democrats in the Senate are against it. You can be for it, or against it. I don’t understand how on an issue of such huge consequence, you don’t have an opinion.” Clinton has been playing it very cautiously on the president’s trade agenda, avoiding directly pitting herself against either Obama or his progressive opponents. “There are questions being raised about this agreement. It hasn’t been negotiated yet,” Clinton said on the trail in Iowa recently. “I have said I want to judge the final agreement.” Sanders also spoke of big marches on Washington by students demanding a better deal on college costs and marches by workers demanding an increase in the minimum wage. Sanders’ Obama history is a little off, though his tactical critiques are often raised by liberals. Obama turned his campaign into first Organizing for America and then Organizing For Action, nonprofits whose goal in part was to keep Obama’s campaign infrastructure in place for the reelect but also to use his massive list of supporters to pressure Congress via online campaigns and public rallies. Large OFA marches and rallies, feared by some of Obama’s opponents after he won in 2008, never really materialized, although digital campaigns in support of the president’s policies are still blasted out of OFA’s Chicago headquarters on a regular basis. Sanders has done well in his opening weeks as a candidate, amassing, he said, more than 200,000 small-dollar donors and racking up poll numbers that make him number two in the Democratic nomination contest, albeit one running far behind the frontrunner Clinton. Sanders said he’s in it to win it, and promised an increase in poll numbers as his name ID increases. He also promised to be outpspent by the impressive financial operations of Clinton. On the whole, he was comfortable in the role of pugnacious underdog, dismissing the Democratic Party’s plan for primary debates and promising to open discussions with the party chair and his fellow candidates about how best to build a debate calendar. The Washington event, a breakfast sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor, came just a day after Sanders’ appearance on the Diane Rehm Show, a syndicated public radio program. Sanders said he forgave Rehm for her question about joint Israeli-American citizenship, a longstanding and wholly incorrect conspiracy theory labeled anti-Semitic by some Jewish groups in the hours after Rehm’s broadcast. “I like Diane Rehm. She is a good radio interviewer,” he said. “I suspect what happens is her staff gives her a list of questions and someone screwed up pretty bad.” Sanders was asked to weigh in on how his relationship with Judaism affects his political outlook. “I’m proud to be Jewish, I’m not particularly religious,” he said. He said growing up Jewish in the post-World War II years taught him elections like the one that put Adolf Hitler in office can have very serious consequences. “The lesson that I learned as a little kid was to understand in a very deep way what politics is about,” he said. Reporters also wanted to know a lot about Sanders’ opinion of Europe. Sanders has long called for Western European-style social safety nets, universal healthcare programs, and structures that make higher education free or next to free for most students. America has a lot to learn from Europe, Sanders said. A reporter asked if he thinks Europe has much to learn from America. “As a former mayor, what mayors look at is the concept of best practice. What best practices means…you look all over the country and you say, ‘what are other cities doing that would be good?’ and you steal those ideas,” he said. “That’s what we should be doing as a world. Are we doing things better than other countries? Of course we are, we have a lot to be proud of. We are a very entrepreneurial country, I mean every other day someone is coming up with another great idea, another great invention. We do that probably better than any other country on earth, and people should learn from us.” But in terms of protecting and taking care of the needs of working people,” Sanders continued, “we have a lot to learn from many other countries around the world.” Sanders promised to bring many of those western European-style programs to the United States if he becomes president. Dinging the president again, Sanders said it was time for a more progressive approach than Obamacare. Sanders seemed pleased by his growing standing as the Democratic Party’s progressive-in-chief, a position fueled by a campaign that has lit up the grassroots on the left despite the lack of initial support from many activist left organizations who were until recently pouring all their efforts into trying to cajole Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren into the presidential race. His campaign building steam, Sanders, said he’s been amazed by the DC money machine he’s discovered as he’s emerged as a prominent presidential candidate. “A lot of people want to make a lot of money off of campaigns,” Sanders said, when asked what he has learned so far. “There is an entire industry here in Washington, D.C. of folks who are prepared to help you for some extravagant fees.” *Bernie Sanders hires Elizabeth Warren 'draft' director for progressive campaign <http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/11/bernie-sanders-hires-elizabeth-warren-draft-director> // The Guardian // Ben Jacobs – June 11, 2015 * Bernie Sanders’ campaign for president isn’t just trying to harness the lingering progressive energy behind the failed attempt to draft his fellow liberal senatorElizabeth Warren. Now they’re hiring the minds behind her grassroots movement, too. The Guardian has learned that the Sanders campaign has hired Blair Lawton, who served as field director in Iowa for the Run Warren Run effort, which announced it was shutting down last week. Lawton will serve as political director for Sanders in Iowa, the early primary state where Sanders and Hillary Clinton will both visit this weekend. He previously worked as a regional field director in Iowa for Barack Obama’s re-election campaign, then managed Democratic get-out-the-vote efforts in Alaska in 2014. Sanders long positioned himself as a leading progressive voice in the Democratic party, and has declared he is “in this race to win” as a liberal alternative to Clinton. The grassroots efforts to recruit Warren, however, put up a road block among the party’s left-leaning base – until Run Warren Run gave in to the Massachusetts senator’s repeated insistence that she would not challenge Clinton for the nomination. “To be sure, Warren – and grassroots economic populism more broadly – was already a rising force well before our efforts began,” the group’s organizers wrotein preparation to fold last week. “Although Run Warren Run may not have sparked a candidacy, it ignited a movement.” Warren has long been an icon on the left, but an Iowa poll released earlier this month showed Sanders jumping ahead in the caucus state as he began to draw crowds at double capacity. The hiring of a top staffer from the Run Warren Run effort signals an opportunity for the Sanders campaign to tap into both the enthusiasm for Warren and the organizing already done in the state on her behalf. Sanders has also hired several other staffers to fill key positions in Iowa, including Justin Huck to serve as the campaign’s state field director and Tara Thobe to oversee logistics. *Youth Unemployment and Dr. King’s Dream <https://medium.com/@BernieSanders/youth-unemployment-and-dr-king-s-dream-9b96997d1c8> // Medium // Bernie Sanders – June 11, 2015 * Many years ago I was honored to be among those who marched on Washington with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. I was there for his famous “I Have a Dream” speech, and I heard him say that African-Americans live “on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity.” Dr. King taught us that the struggle for justice is economic, as well as social and legal. As he said in Memphis, a few short weeks before his death: Our struggle is for genuine equality, which means economic equality. For we know now that it isn’t enough to integrate lunch counters. What does it profit a man to be able to eat at an integrated lunch counter if he doesn’t have enough money to buy a hamburger? “We have come here today,” Dr. King told us in Washington, “to dramatize a shameful condition.” We have seen progress, but that shameful condition persists. Too many Americans still live in poverty. Many are working in poverty, too, because they can’t earn a living wage. And if we don’t do something about it, the generations to come will have it even worse. That’s why I have joined with Rep. John Conyers to introduce the Employ Young Americans Now Act. It will provide $5.5 billion in immediate funding to employ one million young Americans between the ages of 16 and 24, and to provide job training to hundreds of thousands of others. Let me tell you why this is so important. The Economic Policy Institute studied the real unemployment figures for recent high school graduates aged 17–20, including people who have given up looking for work and those who are working part-time but seek full-time employment. They are devastating. More than one third of white and Hispanic youth (33.8 and 36.1 percent, respectively) are looking for work. Shockingly, so are more than half of African-Americans (51.3 percent). I want to emphasize that: When you look at the real job figures, more than 50 percent of young African-Americans are looking for work. Recent college graduates are struggling, too. The real unemployment rate for young white graduates is 12.9 percent. And it’s nearly double that for young African-Americans and Hispanics (23 percent 22.4 percent, respectively). That’s nearly one in four. Worse, studies have shown that a person’s lifetime earnings are heavily influenced by the amount of money they make in the first few years of their working lives. We’re not just hurting these young people today. If we do nothing, they will be deprived economically for the rest of their lives. The picture is already grim. More than one in six part-time workers, and nearly one in twenty full-time workers, is impoverished despite their own labors. And African-Americans and Hispanics are twice as likely to among the working poor as their white counterparts. If we do not address the crisis of youth unemployment, these statistics are likely to become even worse. One thing is clear: We are not making the progress that Dr. King called us to achieve in the 1960s. More than one in four African Americans live in poverty, while that figure is less than one in ten for whites. The median income for African-American households is less than 60 percent that of white households. And a recent study from Brandeis University shows that the wealth gap between black and white families has nearly tripled over the last twenty-five years. There is much that we must do to address these inequities. We need to raise the minimum wage to a livable amount. This is not unreasonable. If the minimum wage had kept pace with productivity, it would be more than $16 per hour today. It is only the greed of the few, and the political disenfranchisement of the majority, that has kept the minimum wage so low. When I heard Dr. King speak in on that afternoon in 1963, the actual minimum wage was actually higher than it is today. 1963's Federal minimum wage was worth $8.37 in today’s dollars. Today it’s $7.25. We must not condemn young people, especially in our minority communities, to lives that are even harsher than those of their parents. It is time to declare once and for all: Black lives matter — on the streets, and on the job too. As Dr. King told us on that sunny day in Washington, “1963 is not an end, but a beginning.” It’s our turn to do the work of justice. Our young people are our nation’s future, and it is time to give them the future they deserve. *Sanders hires key Iowa staff members <http://qctimes.com/news/local/government-and-politics/sanders-hires-key-iowa-staff-members/article_17cf980d-ada2-53eb-b1a8-d2f15fbbd888.html> // The Quad City Times // Ed Tibbetts – June 11, 2015 * Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders, who turned a lot of heads last month with big crowds in Iowa, is putting staff in place to try to capture some of that enthusiasm. On Thursday, the campaign said Blair Lawton, the man who ran the Iowa arm of the now-suspended effort to convince U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren to run, is moving over to be the Vermont senator's political director in the state. Lawton's hiring was one of three positions the campaign confirmed Thursday. "He's a good get for us," said Pete D'Alessandro, a longtime Democratic operative who has been charged with putting together a staff in Iowa for Sanders. Lawton said that Sanders was a logical choice for him. "I've always admired the senator," Lawton said. "He's a great progressive we need in the race." D'Alessandro also said that Justin Huck, the field director for the League of Conservation Voters in Iowa, has been picked to be the field director for the Sanders campaign here. In addition, Tara Thobe, who worked in New Mexico the last election cycle, has been tapped to be statewide operations director. Early polls still say former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton holds a wide lead, both in Iowa and nationally. A Des Moines Register/Bloomberg Politics poll, released last week, said that 57 percent of likely Iowa Democratic caucus-goers support Clinton Sanders was next at 16 percent. Former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley and ex-Sen. Jim Webb, of Virginia, both were at 2 percent. Clinton also has an organizational head start. The campaign has opened offices across the state and has more than two dozen field organizers working here. Sanders, O'Malley and Webb all are in various organizational stages. Still, the Sanders campaign says it is seeing dividends from the early interest in the senator. D'Alessandro said of the more than 600 people who signed in at Sanders' event in Davenport, twice as many as he would have expected indicated they were willing to caucus for him. "This early in the game, that's a really good sign," he said. Sanders, Clinton, O'Malley and Webb will all be in Iowa over the next few days. O'Malley will make a trio of stops on Thursday. Clinton, who is launching her campaign with a speech in New York on Saturday, will be in Iowa the same day. On Sunday, she will hold her first large-scale event in the state with a rally at the state fairgrounds in Des Moines. Webb will be in central Iowa on Sunday, Monday and Tuesday. Sanders, meanwhile, will be holding a half dozen events across the state Friday, Saturday and Sunday. None of the visits are to the Quad-Cities. *Sanders pushes paid vacation legislation <http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/local/2015/06/10/sanders-pushes-paid-vacation-legislation/71037360/> // Burlington Free Press // Nicole Gaudiano – June 11, 2015 * Sen. Bernie Sanders will introduce legislation Thursday that would require paid vacations for millions of workers as part of a "true family values" agenda he's pushing as he runs for the Democratic presidential nomination. The bill would provide 10 days of paid vacation for employees who have worked at least one year at a job, ensuring them access to the minimum vacation benefits most companies already offer white-collar, high-salary workers, according to his office. The bill would apply to employers with at least 15 employees. Sanders, I-Vt., said the U.S. is a "stressed out nation," with nearly one in four workers getting no paid vacation time. It's also the only advanced economy that doesn't guarantee workers some form of paid family leave, paid sick time or paid vacation time, he said. "The idea that people do not have the time to take a few weeks off to be with their kids, to enjoy themselves, to relax, is really not what America should be about and is certainly not a family value," Sanders said in a Wednesday interview. "The bottom line of all of this is to bring reality to the concept of family values." Sanders also is co-sponsoring a bill by Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York to guarantee workers at least 12 weeks of universal paid family and medical leave, and a bill by Democratic Sen. Patty Murray of Washington to guarantee at least seven paid sick days per year. Murray's bill passed the Senate 61-39 in March as an amendment to a budget resolution, but that measure doesn't carry the weight of law. In January, President Barack Obama granted federal employees six weeks of paid parental leave, and he endorsed seven days of paid sick leave during his State of the Union address. Opponents of mandates to provide paid sick and family leave say they would hurt businesses, cost jobs and could damage job opportunities for women. But Sanders said the idea a woman could lose her job because she had a baby is "completely unacceptable." It's "horrendous" that mothers have to rush back to work during the most important bonding time with their babies because they don't have enough money to stay home, he said. "I know that the right wing will oppose all of this," he said. "But the question they have got to answer is, 'How come these ideas can exist in every other major wealthy country on earth except in the United States of America?" *OTHER* *Bayh won’t seek Indiana Senate seat <http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/senate-races/244721-bayh-wont-seek-indiana-senate-seat> // The Hill // Jonathan Easley – June 11, 2015 * Former Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) will not enter the race to replace retiring Sen. Dan Coats (R-Ind.) in Indiana, a source familiar with Bayh’s thinking told The Hill on Thursday. Bayh instead will focus on helping former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton win the White House, according to the source. Bayh would have been a formidable candidate had he run. He has high name recognition and remains popular in Indiana. In addition, he still has nearly $10 million in his campaign war chest. Many Democrats believed Bayh’s entrance in to the race would be a game-changer for their party, but political watchers in the state were doubtful he would take the plunge. In 2010, Bayh decided against seeking a third term in the Senate, citing frustration over gridlock in Congress. With Bayh on the sidelines, the path to the Democratic nomination is currently clear for former Rep. Baron Hill (D-Ind.), who previously served four terms representing Indiana’s 9th district in the House. Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) will host a Washington, D.C., fundraiser for Hill’s Senate bid later this month — a sign that establishment Democrats may be coalescing around his candidacy. However, State Rep. Christina Hale (D-Ind.) has also said she’s considering running. And John Dickerson, the former director of The Arc, a nonprofit that helps Indianans with intellectual and developmental disabilities, is also mentioned as a potential contender. So far, there are two Republicans in the race. Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.), a Tea Party-aligned candidate, will be seeking to rally the conservative base in the state. Coats’s chief of staff, Eric Holcomb, is also running, and considered a more establishment-friendly candidate. Rep. David Young (R-Ind.), who defeated Hill in a 2010 House race, is also believed to be considering a bid. The GOP candidate will likely be favored going into the race. Indiana has only gone for the Democratic presidential candidate once since 1968. *GOP* *BUSH* *Wall Street lining up for Jeb Bush campaign fundraiser in New York // WaPo <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/06/11/wall-street-lining-up-for-jeb-bush-campaign-fundraiser-in-new-york/?postshare=5471434050390682> // Matea Gold – June 11, 2015 * Wealthy hedge fund managers, bankers and private equity investors have signed on to host one of the first official fundraisers for Jeb Bush's soon-to-be-announced presidential campaign, a June 24 breakfast reception in New York that is on track to bring in at least $1 million. Already, three dozen heavyweight players have committed to raise a minimum of $27,000 each for the event, according to a copy of the invitation obtained by the Washington Post. Among them are New York Jets owner Woody Johnson, former Barclays chief executive Robert E. Diamond Jr., private equity executive Emil Henry, investment banker Jeff Bunzel, hedge fund manager Duke Buchan, and Alex Navab, who heads KKR's private equity business in the Americas. New Jersey state Sen. Joseph M. Kyrillos, who chaired Chris Christie’s 2009 New Jersey gubernatorial campaign, is also listed as a co-chair of the fundraiser. He defected to Bush this spring, as The Post previously reported. Co-chairs of the June 24 event, set to be held at a midtown Manhattan hotel, get access to a 7:45 a.m. photo reception, an 8 a.m. host reception and then the larger breakfast event. They also will be invited to a retreat in Kennebunkport, Me., for bundlers who bring in $27,000 in the first 15 days of the campaign. Bush, who spent the last five months stockpiling tens of millions in an allied super PAC, is set to officially announce his White House bid Monday in Miami. After that, he's planning two intense weeks of campaigning and fundraising, hoping to bring in millions for his official campaign committee by the close of the quarter on June 30. *Jeb Bush’s legally nonexistent campaign has had a lot of problems <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/06/11/wonkbook-jeb-bushs-legally-nonexistent-campaign-has-had-a-lot-of-problems/> // WaPo // Max Ehrenfreund – June 11, 2015 * Disagreement, distrust and dysfunction: That's a whole lot of trouble for a campaign that legally does not exist. The Washington Post's Ed O'Keefe and Robert Costa describe how even though former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) has not declared himself a candidate for president, his campaign has already found the time for a few serious internal squabbles. The organization has been "disjointed in message and approach, torn between factions and more haphazard than it appeared on the surface," O'Keefe and Costa report. "Bush's first six months as an all-but-declared candidate have been defined by a series of miscalculations, leaving his standing considerably diminished ahead of his formal entry into the race on Monday." When Bush does formally declare himself a candidate, presumably he and his campaign will stop coordinating strategy with the independent committees supporting him — coordination that is illegal for a candidate for elected office, as Eric Lichtblau and Nick Corasaniti discussed in The New York Times last week. The thing is, the law does not distinguish between candidates who claim they haven't decided whether they're running but secretly (or not so secretly) are running, and candidates who have launched their campaign already (or who have launched it more than once). Even candidates who are just "testing the waters," which is a technical term, are subject to rules. Yes, there are gray areas, and the law isn't completely clear, but here's O'Keefe and Costa's summary of what Bush has been up to over the past few months: Bush revived a 650-member alumni network of aides who worked for him as governor, and he recruited 21 veterans of his father’s and brother’s administrations to advise him on foreign policy. He hired state directors in the first four early states, aides for outreach to evangelical Christians and Hispanics, and a spokeswoman dedicated to fielding questions from the Spanish-language press. As Bush travels the country, he has fielded more than 900 questions from donors, reporters and voters, according to aides. He has maintained a busy schedule that stretches from the early-voting states of Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada — where conservative Republicans remain skeptical — to places visited less frequently at this early stage by presidential candidates, including Denver, Seattle and Puerto Rico. Watchdogs have accused Bush — along with other Democratic and Republican candidates — of violating the law, but given partisan gridlock at the Federal Election Commission, their complaints will probably go unheeded. Bush's non-candidate candidacy isn't just a clever manipulation of obscure election law. Donors have given millions of dollars to the un-campaign — although, as O'Keefe and Costa report, probably not nearly the $100 million his advisers had predicted. The money raises serious questions about whether the only people who can fully participate in American democracy are people who have rich friends. Bush's GOP primary opponents see him as out of touch with the party's base and more concerned about what his donors think. Ideally, good election laws would prevent candidates from relying on exorbitant fundraising dinners to buy their way into races and force them instead to win votes the hard way, by talking to citizens. *In Europe, Jeb Bush sounds like Barack Obama <http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/europe-jeb-bush-foreign-policy-barack-obama-similar-118894.html#ixzz3coaMQQvT> // Politico // Eli Stokols – June 11, 2015 * Jeb Bush, now on the third day of a European tour meant to showcase his foreign policy chops, is sounding a little bit like the man he’s trying to replace: Barack Obama. Stylistically, Bush is a striking a more aggressive posture than the president, warning about Russian encroachment and vowing to more staunchly defend America’s allies in Eastern Europe. But on substance, Bush has offered little to differentiate himself from Obama’s cautious, consensus-driven approach to confronting Russian leader Vladimir Putin — aside from a vague call for “defensive military support” for the Western-backed Ukrainian government. On Thursday, Bush told reporters that his meetings with the Polish president and other government and business leaders here in Warsaw have confirmed his belief that Poland wants America to play a bigger role in Europe and the world and that “it’s really important for the United States to stay active and be clear about the role that we can play. “When there’s doubt, when there’s uncertainty, when we pull back, it creates less chance of a more peaceful world,” Bush said. He repeated his call for bolstering U.S. military forces in the Baltic states, where Obama last year ordered a buildup of air force units. “The numbers are, I understand, in the hundreds, and that doesn’t send a signal of strength. We need to be more robust, and need to encourage our allies to invest more in security,” Bush said. And Bush again went further than Obama has, calling for sending defensive weapons to the embattled government in Kiev. Lawmakers on both sides — as well as many of his own top advisers — have urged the president to arm the Ukrainians with lethal weapons, but he has thus far demurred. “I think we need to provide defensive military support, because it’s very hard to make the structural reforms necessary and grow the economy in a world where there’s a threat of further aggression,” Bush said. “That would be the first step.” But he provided few specific ideas for challenging Putin, calling vaguely for “a strategy” that is “comprehensive” and “forward-leaning.” He reiterated his line that the U.S. “can’t be all things to all people; we can’t be the world’s policeman” — a refrain that echoes Obama’s own September 2013 declaration that “America is not the world’s policeman.” And Bush’s calls for reassuring nervous NATO allies ignored Obama’s Sept. 14, 2014, speech in Talinn, the Estonian capital, in which the president bluntly declared, “We will defend the territorial integrity of every single ally” and warned Putin against further aggression, as he did again during last weekend’s G-7 summit in Bavaria. Nor has Bush differentiated himself much on economic issues. In Berlin, he stressed the importance of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, a U.S.-European trade deal that Obama supports. In Warsaw, he met with the Polish-American Freedom Foundation and lauded the group, which he described as “an offshoot by the way of a U.S. effort investing in the future of this country and it was an extraordinary success”; Obama has hailed the foundation several times. But on the question of whether the U.S. and Europe should invest more foreign aid in Ukraine, Bush was noncommittal. So far, the U.S. has provided Kiev with $2 billion in loan guarantees; the European Union has coughed up $1.8 billion in economic aid, which The Economist has called “contemptible.” Additional economic aid, many believe, could loosen Russia’s grip by helping Ukraine develop its own natural gas resources, making it less reliant on Moscow. Bush also said any future aid should be tied to economic reforms, and that Europe “should play a leading role” in this area. Asked about whether Georgia or Ukraine should join NATO, Bush again agreed with Obama. “There’s a process that these countries need to go through,” he said. “I think that process is established and it’s the right one.” As for whether the U.S. should consider putting permanent military bases in Poland, Bush was careful not to over-commit, pointing out that he’s not yet privy to the intelligence he’d need to decide. “Maybe I should get classified briefings,” Bush said with a chuckle. “I’ll talk to my national security adviser and get back to you, how about that?” *Sean Hannity scores first Jeb Bush interview <http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/06/sean-hannity-scores-first-jeb-bush-interview-208681.html> // Politico // Hadas Gold – June 11, 2015 * Fox News host Sean Hannity continues his streak as conservative king maker, as the network announced Thursday that he will have the first interview with Jeb Bush after his presidential campaign announcement next week. The former Florida governor is expected to announce his presidential campaign Monday in Florida. On Tuesday, Hannity will interview Bush. Bush will also appear on "The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon" that same night. Bush campaign spokespeople confirmed that Bush will not hold any interviews Monday and that Hannity will be his first. Four GOP hopefuls have given Sean Hannity dibs on their first interviews as candidates: former Texas Gov. Rick Perry and Sens. Ted Cruz, Rand Paul and Marco Rubio. Other candidates have tried to land an interview with the conservative host, campaign sources have previously said, only to be turned down — either because they had given their first interview to another media outlet or because they weren't popular enough. The interview with Bush will air next Tuesday at 10 p.m. *Jeb Bush: 'Putin has changed' since brother George saw his 'soul' <http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/10/politics/jeb-george-bush-russia-putin/> // CNN // Tom LoBianco & Dana Bash – June 11, 2015 * Asked his opinion on the Iraq War recently, Jeb Bush struggled to find his footing while supporting his brother. But ask about Russian President Vladimir Putin -- of whom former President George W. Bush once said that he "got a sense of his soul" -- and older brother Jeb gets right to the point: "He's a bully." How does he square that difference? Jeb Bush said Thursday that Putin has evolved over the years. "I think Putin has changed, for sure. He has changed over time and he has been emboldened by, whether it's true or not, the perception is that we've pulled back," Bush said. "So people do change and this is an example of that." READ: Jeb Bush's foreign policy strategy: 'I am my own man' Indeed, George Bush's own relationship with the Russian leader deteriorated over his term, to a point where he and just about every other Republican agree Putin is a threat that needs to be contained. Jeb Bush has not said exactly how he would handle Putin if elected president, but he did say Thursday that the U.S. needs to step up its military presence in Eastern Europe to support allies like Poland. "We need to be more robust, we need to encourage our NATO allies in Europe to invest more in their own national security. We need to do the same In our country. We need to be consistent about what types of actions we will take should there be more aggression," he said. On the crisis in Ukraine, where leaders are begging for more assistance from the West, Bush said they should be provided with more military help. "We need to provide defensive military support. It's hard to make the structural reforms and grow the economy in a world where there is aggression," Bush said. The theme of Bush's trip this week to Germany, Poland and Estonia -- ahead of his expected announcement Monday that he's running for president -- is to highlight what he calls the importance of a "forward leaning" American approach here, one he argues is lacking under the Obama administration. But just how Bush would take the forward leaning concept, and turn it into policy as president, is a work in progress. He would not say, for example, whether former Soviet countries like Ukraine should be accepted into NATO, instead saying he would defer to the process that allows that. Still, he sees plenty of room to attack the current president and implicitly criticize leading 2016 Democratic contender Hillary Clinton for an unsuccessful "reset" with Russia. "I think to deal with Putin, you need to deal from strength. He's a bully," Bush said in Berlin Wednesday, repeating a message he's using throughout his Europe trip this week. "You enable bad behavior when you're nuanced with a guy like that." He continued, "I'm not talking about being bellicose, but saying, 'Here are the consequences of your actions.' And that would deter the kind of bad outcome that we don't want to see." And at the close of separate remarks in Berlin Tuesday, Bush took a final shot at Clinton and Obama. "I think there's lots to do, and we're beginning to realize the 'reset button' didn't turn out so hot," he said. Putin is a perfect whipping boy for Republicans as his support for separatists' hostile takeover of Ukraine combined with his condescending rhetoric toward the United States have revived Cold War rivalries between the two countries. Since then, Western powers have pushed to isolate Putin. At the same time Bush was in Germany, Obama was in the country for a meeting of the G7, which kicked out Russia roughly a year ago. High on the agenda was whether economic sanctions against Russia were working. Back home, the politics are easy for Republicans. Democrats have set the policy for the last seven years and one of the chief architects also happens to be the likely Democratic presidential nominee: Hillary Clinton. "It makes sense that the Republican candidates are out to critique, and Hillary Clinton tries not to say much," said Leon Aron, U.S.-Russia relations expert at the American Enterprise Institute, who consulted with 2012 Republican nominee Mitt Romney but has not signed onto any 2016 campaign yet. Aron noted that he has been contacted by several prospective Republican presidential campaigns and said the fact that candidates have been reaching out to him so early in the election cycle is a clear sign of the importance foreign policy -- and specifically U.S.-Russian relations -- will play in this race. The interest so early in Russia, he said, is part of a broader trend which has American voters focused abroad this cycle, including deep worries about Middle East unrest. But for all the clear advantages of using Putin as a punching bag, that role also has a liability when it comes to the Bushes. In his book "Decision Points," George Bush recounted a meeting with Putin in 2001. At one point he asked if it was true that Putin's mother had given him a cross blessed in Jerusalem. Putin then softened somewhat as he told the story of how he lost the cross in a fire. "I thought of the emotion in Vladimir's voice when he shared the story of the cross. 'I looked the man in the eye,' I said, '... I was able to get a sense of his soul,'" Bush wrote. Bush also assessed then that Putin was "straightforward" and "trustworthy." Even fellow Republicans have criticized the president's comments. As the 2008 GOP presidential nominee, Arizona Sen. John McCain said, "I looked into Mr. Putin's eyes and I saw three things — a K and a G and a B." The 2012 Republican candidate, Mitt Romney, also warned that Putin posed a much more serious threat than was perceived by the Obama administration. Yet by the time George Bush left the White House, he, too, had soured on Putin. In the final year of his term, Bush struggled to decide how to handle Russia's stunning invasion of Georgia. In his book, published two years after he left office, Bush called the invasion a "low point" in his relationship with Putin. He also noted that in the years following his 2001 meeting with the Russian president, "Putin would give me reasons to revise my opinion." That makes it easier for his brother Jeb to take on the Russian leader during his trip to parts of the former Soviet Union this week. And it also helped that George Bush's role in bolstering Eastern European countries is well-regarded in those states, making the Bushes sympatico on their over-arching foreign policy stance toward Russia. Though Jeb Bush's last name can be a negative when he travels abroad, given how disliked George Bush became in most of Europe, his campaign stops on this trip emphasize areas where there is public support for either his brother or his father. Former President George H. W. Bush helped reunify Germany with the fall of the Soviet Union -- a fact son Jeb pointed out to applause during his speech in Berlin. And George W. Bush stood fast with former Soviet states, proposing a missile defense shield in Poland as a means of deterring Iran, which Obama later scrapped. Candidates often spend more time criticizing policies and decrying international villains than spelling out their own course of action. And while Jeb Bush has used tough rhetoric, his actions may prove different. Aron said the usual approach is for U.S. presidents to open their terms with a general policy of détente with Russian leaders before relations deteriorate. He pointed to President John F. Kennedy and Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev as the model and Reagan's encounters with the Soviets early in his first term while they were fighting in Afghanistan as the exception. George W. Bush's ability to see Putin's soul? That fit into the pattern, too. Dmitri Trenin, director of the Carnegie Moscow Center, said that based on what Jeb Bush had said so far, Russians watching America would conclude that "Jeb has said the minimum that is now required in the West" so "he is generally sober." That means he would potentially be welcomed as an alternative to the current man in the Oval Office. "'The U.S. will not turn into a friend if he is elected, but at least we will have a change of partner,'" Trenin said they would assess. "'We are so tired of Obama.'" *Jeb Bush says view on unwed births ‘hasn’t changed at all’ <http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/jeb-bush-says-his-views-havent-changed-all-unwed-births> // MSNBC // Benjy Sarlin – June 11, 2015 * Facing scrutiny over his rhetoric and record regarding single mothers, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush told reporters on Thursday that two-parent homes help children “live lives of purpose and meaning.” In a chapter of his 1995 book ”Profiles of Character” entitled “The Restoration of Shame,” Bush, who is in Europe this week on an international tour, complained that having children outside of marriage had become common because there was “no longer a stigma attached to this behavior” and that “parents and neighbors have become ineffective at attaching some sense of ridicule to this behavior.” Asked by msnbc whether his views regarding the application of shame had changed, Bush suggested his book’s warning had proved prophetic and stressed the importance of encouraging young people to get married before having children. “My views have evolved over time, but my views about the importance of dads being involved in the lives of children hasn’t changed at all,” he said. “In fact, since 1995 … this book was a book about cultural indicators [and] the country has moved in the wrong direction. We have a 40-plus percent out-of-wedlock birth rate.” Bush has talked on the trail about research showing improved economic fortunes for children who are raised with two parents and on Thursday reiterated the importance of family structure. “It’s a huge challenge for single moms to raise children in the world that we’re in today and it hurts the prospects, it limits the possibilities of young people being able to live lives of purpose and meaning,” he said. After a follow-up question on whether the chapter was meant to apply to policy, Bush said that he was “speaking of [marriage] in the policy context and the focus was on men.” In responding to the story, Bush’s staff has pointed reporters to a later passage in the book noting that raising the issue “does not mean we should demean the heroic efforts of single parents who are trying to raise good, decent children.” A number of news outlets and commentators this week are also revisiting a 2001 law Bush allowed to pass that included a so-called “Scarlet Letter” provision requiring mothers who give their children up for adoption to publicly post records of their sexual histories that might alert potential fathers about the birth. Bush raised concerns about that provision at the time but allowed the bill to pass into law without signing it. He later signed a repeal of the controversial section in 2003 after it was struck down by a court. Asked by msnbc whether he had regrets about how the issue was handled, Bush said he could not recall the full details but that the broader law was intended to support single mothers by improving collection of child support from fathers. “To assume you can create a fatherless society and not have bad outcomes I think is the wrong approach,” he said. “I don’t remember what the repeal was, I can remember the purpose of the law was to enhance the ability to collect child support because men have the responsibility of taking care of their children.” Bush’s latest remarks prompted an unsolicited one-sentence response from Democratic National Committee spokeswoman Holly Shulman. “Shame on you, Jeb,” Shulman wrote in an e-mail. *Jeb Hated Easy Divorce. So Did Hillary. <http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/11/dems-weak-jeb-divorce-hit.html> // The Daily Beast // Betsy Woodruff – June 11, 2015 * Sometimes in the course of campaigns, opposing sides circulate information that comes back to bite them. This is one of those times. On Wednesday, Democrats were up in arms over comments Jeb Bush wrote in his 1995 book that expressed criticism of divorce that occurred without a clear cause. “[No]-fault divorce quickly became a tool for those who used the law not to escape physical or mental cruelty but to pursue career dreams and trade in their wives for something more appealing,” he wrote in Profiles in Character. Cue the outrage. “Bush has to hope the book stays out of print,” wrote Joan Walsh, Salon’s editor-at-large. And at the Washington Post, opinion writer Catherine Rampell criticized Bush’s “histrionics about no-fault divorce” and called his views on the issue “strange and/or relatively retrograde.” Behind the scenes, Democratic communicators pushed the “Jeb is anti-divorce” narrative calling it “insane.” But here’s the thing: In her 1996 book, It Takes A Village, Hillary Clinton took the same position. Oops. Let’s compare. Bush argued that no-fault divorce generally hurt kids, and that lawmakers might want to consider making parents to be more circumspect about ending their marriages. In a 1996 Orlando Sentinel op-ed, Bush wrote that Florida’s no-fault divorce law provided important protections for women in abusive situations but also “threw the baby out with the bath water.” “In real terms, divorce meant parents spending less time with their children,” he continued. “According to a number of studies, the absence of one parent in the household has been enough to result in an increased propensity for crime, suicide, out-of-wedlock births, depression and truancy.” He then noted that some argued for “an extended mandatory cooling-off period” before letting parents with minors finalize their divorces, but added he wasn’t sure the cooling-off periods would be good policy. Ultimately as governor, he didn’t move to implement such a rule. The AP reported in 2002 that “Bush said that he does not want that [no-fault divorce] law changed, saying it could lead to abusive situations if it is more difficult for couples to split up.” Now, in her 1996 book, It Takes A Village, Hillary Clinton argued a strikingly similar position. “[W]ith divorce as easy as it is, and its consequences so hard, people with children need to ask themselves whether they have given a marriage their best shot and what more they can do to make it work before they call it quits,” she wrote, echoing Bush’s concerns about how divorce impacts children. “For this reason, I am ambivalent about no-fault divorce with no waiting period when children are involved. We should consider returning to mandatory ‘cooling off’ periods, with education and counseling for partners.” So both Bush and Clinton were open to—but ultimately noncommittal about—policies designed to make it harder for parents of minor children to get divorced. Clinton’s campaign didn’t respond to a request for comment. In one sense, Clinton went even further than Bush on the issue, suggesting in her book that divorce is a public health problem. “I admire the way the Parent Education Program in Columbus, Ohio, treats divorce as a public health issue,” she wrote. And she even invoked Bill Bennett, the Reaganite and conservative culture warrior, to make the case against divorce. “One does not have to agree with all the remarks of former Secretary of Education William Bennett to welcome his acknowledgment before the Christian Coalition that divorce is hard on children,” she wrote. Clinton didn’t leave her anti-divorce rhetoric in the 90’s. During a Senate floor speech in 2004 arguing against a constitutional amendment that would have barred same-sex marriage (she was opposed to gay marriage until 2013), she invoked no-fault divorce again. “Now, if we were really concerned about marriage and the fact that so many marriages today end in divorce, and so many children are then put into the incredibly difficult position of having to live with the consequences of divorce,” she said. “Perhaps 20, 30 years ago we should have been debating an amendment to the Federal Constitution to make divorce really, really hard, to take it out of the states’ hands and say that we will not liberalize divorce, we will not move toward no-fault divorce, and we will make it as difficult as possible because we fear the consequences of liberalizing divorce laws.” Elsewhere in the speech, she was explicit about her concerns over the divorce rate. “We are living in a society where people have engaged in divorce at a rapid, accelerated rate,” she said. “We all know it is something that has led to the consequences with respect to the economy, to society, to psychology, and emotion that so often mark a young child’s path to adulthood.” It just goes to show when your potential nominee has a long record, it might pay to check it before you start questioning the other candidate’s sanity. *RUBIO* *Marco Rubio, like a lot of Americans, is terrible with money <http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/get-there/wp/2015/06/11/marco-rubio-like-a-lot-of-americans-is-terrible-with-money/> // WaPo // Jonnelle Marte – June 11, 2015 * Marco Rubio has been getting a lot of attention for his financial blunders. He once cashed out a retirement account to help pay for a new refrigerator and to cover his kids’ private school tuition, despite having cash on hand. And in a deep dive into his finances, the New York Times reported this week that Rubio has saved very little, even when making a decent amount of money. In addition to paying off his student loans, he used part of his book advance to splurge on an $80,000 boat. Rubio has been talking more openly about his struggles on the campaign trail, using the story to relate to voters. His campaign says that the boat was a fishing boat and that he isn’t like other presidential candidates who came from wealth. The son of Cuban immigrants — his father was a bartender and his mother was a hotel maid — he didn’t grow up with a lot of money, he says. “Like most Americans, I know what it’s like for money to be a limited resource and to have to manage it accordingly,” he told the Times in a statement. Are his mistakes really that different from that of other people who are struggling to pay off student loans, raise their families and pay their mortgages? Here’s what some of the numbers say. Saving rates. Rubio often struggled to save, even during times when he was earning high income, the Times reported. He’s better off than a lot of consumers but still falls within the bottom 90 percent of households when it comes to wealth. By that standard, his saving habits are in line with that of other people who have similar amounts of wealth. As the chart below shows, people in the bottom 90 percent save close to zero percent of their pay each year, according to an analysis by Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman, economists with the University of California, Berkeley. Saving rates jumped to 15 percent for people in the top 10 percent, or those with more than $660,000 in net worth. Cashing out retirement accounts. This is a mistake that financial pros warn about constantly. When Rubio cashed out nearly $70,000 in retirement savings from an IRA last year to buy a new refrigerator and help pay for his children’s private school tuition costs, he likely faced a steep tax bill and set back his retirement readiness. (He has other retirement savings, but he also had other cash on hand, according to reports.) Early retirement withdrawals usually come with a 10 percent penalty and the requirement to pay taxes on the cash that’s taken out. They also puts a dent in retirement income by cutting down on the amount of savings invested that can grow over time. Still, plenty of people dip into retirement savings before they should to pay for more immediate needs like college tuition or to cover the bills after a job loss. About 8 percent of people in their 40s and 10 percent of people in their 50s took early withdrawals from their IRAs in 2013, according to the Employee Benefit Research Institute. Those rates increased as people got closer to retirement age. Income fluctuation. Another part of Rubio’s story is that his income has changed dramatically over the years. Last year he made $174,000 as a U.S. senator last year and earned another $52,000 from book royalties and a teaching position at Florida International University, as my colleague Sean Sullivan reported. But that’s still not as much as he was making when he worked as a lawyer in the private sector. And he’s had other ups and downs: He earned a modest salary as a member of the Florida state legislature, then saw a huge pay raise when he landed a job at a private law firm, before taking a pay cut to join the U.S. Senate. His $800,000 book advance in 2012 was another big windfall. Turns out that a surprising number of Americans see income fluctuate from year to year, or from month to month. While that kind of income volatility is more pronounced for the poor, it’s not limited to them. One in four people saw their incomes rise or drop by 30 percent or more from 2013 to 2014, according to an analysis of 100,000 Chase Bank account holders by the JPMorgan Chase Institute. Still a top earner. To be sure, Rubio is better off than a lot of consumers in a key way. His annual pay, while not in the millions, still put him in the top 5 percent of households when it comes to income. That leaves him in a better position to build wealth and to have enough savings to ride out emergencies when they happen. The majority of households, or 55 percent, do not have enough cash on hand to replace one month’s worth of income, according to a study by Pew Charitable Trusts. People in the bottom quintile of earnings only had enough savings to replace a median of nine days of income. For the top quintile, median savings were enough to stretch for 52 days. *Rubio And Five U.S. Congressmen Voted For Florida's 'Scarlet Letter' Adoption Bill <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/11/florida-adoption-bill_n_7565046.html?1434061537> // HuffPo // Laura Bassett – June 11, 2015* Sen. Marco Rubio (R) was among the Florida state legislators who voted for the so-called "Scarlet Letter" law in 2001 that required single mothers to publish their sexual histories in the newspaper in order to place their babies up for adoption. Five U.S. congressmen -- Reps. Mario Diaz-Balart (R), Lois Frankel (D), Jeff Miller (R), Gus Bilirakis (R) and Dennis Ross (R) -- were state legislators at the time and voted for the controversial bill. Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D), Frederica Wilson (D), Daniel Webster (R) and Bill Posey (R), who were also state legislators back then, voted against it. The law, which passed with overwhelming majorities in the House and Senate, required unwed moms who wished to put their babies up for adoptions to post details about their recent sexual encounters in the newspaper in an attempt to contact the father, even if the woman was a victim of rape or incest. The purpose of the bill was to inform estranged biological fathers that their children were being adopted and give them the chance to intervene. The "Scarlet Letter" law gained media attention this week after The Huffington Post reported that former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) had advocated for the public shaming of unwed parents in his 1995 book. Bush allowed the controversial law to go into effect in 2001, but signed a repeal of it two years later after it was successfully challenged in court. The fact that Rubio, a 2016 presidential candidate, supported the bill could inoculate Bush from criticism that he allowed it to go into effect if Bush decides to throw his hat in the ring. The Gainesville Sun reported in 2002 that some lawmakers -- including Frankel, a longtime women's right activist -- did not realize the newspaper publication provision was in the bill when they voted for it. "I have to admit I'm horrified that I voted for this," Frankel told the Sun at the time. Rubio and the other current members of Congress who supported the bill did not immediately respond to a request for comment. *Is the GOP heartland ready to embrace Marco Rubio? <http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-marco-rubio-heartland-20150611-story.html#page=1> // LA Times // Lisa Mascaro – June 11, 2015 * Marco Rubio sliced through a pork roast at an Iowa fairgrounds, not even a softball question about his family's beloved Cuba could get the Republican presidential hopeful to veer from friendly chit-chat to engage in a more substantive political conversation. The Florida senator, who is beginning to introduce himself to the American heartland, preferred to stick to safe topics like the deliciousness of the Iowa-made pork seasoning or roasting techniques. Had this been his hometown of Miami, there would have almost certainly been a reference to carnitas, a favorite Latino pork dish. But this being Iowa, Rubio hardly breathed a word of Spanish throughout the event, which brought together several GOP presidential candidates hoping to make an impression in the state with the nation’s first presidential caucus. Asked by a reporter to address more serious issues, Rubio again brushed questions off with a smile, keeping his eye on the roast pork. “We’re working here,” he said cheerfully. Rubio’s candidacy has steadily and quietly ascended in the complicated Republican primary field. Even though he rarely tops the polls, Rubio seems to be everyone’s first pick as a second choice, reflected in a recent Des Moines Register poll. Strategists say that gives Rubio the potential to emerge as a strong consensus candidate in a GOP field that already features nearly a dozen aspirants. Rubio, 44, has a youthful, upbeat message that he hopes will contrast not only with Democratic favorite Hillary Rodham Clinton, but also with former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and other Republican contenders. Rubio’s potential appeal to minority voters, particularly Latinos, is another key selling point as the Republican Party struggles to broaden its base. But it’s unclear whether he can parlay boyish charisma and soaring rhetoric into a viable presidential bid, and some voters and strategists are asking the same disarmingly simple question about Rubio: Is there any there there? And as he moves his campaign into Midwestern and early nominating states with less diversity -- Iowa is about 92% white -- it remains to be seen whether Rubio’s appeal will translate with traditional GOP voters. “I really need more information on him,” said Janelle File, a retired bank vice president, after listening to Rubio speak. “He’s really well-spoken and has a great background. But I really want to see more.” Last weekend's pig roast and motorcycle ride, hosted by Republican Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst in Boone, could have been Rubio’s moment to shine. It was his second trip to the state, and highly anticipated. With his message of economic conservatism, Christian values and a strong national defense, Rubio was poised to capitalize on his early support for Ernst, the popular senator elected last November. Marco Rubio enters 2016 race touting youth, avoiding messy issues Marco Rubio enters 2016 race touting youth, avoiding messy issues But Rubio didn’t seem to impress the crowd as much as he has in other settings. In pressed khakis and a starched-collar shirt, Rubio could barely compete with Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and former Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who swaggered into the roast-and-ride event wearing blue jeans and leather. Rubio skipped the motorcycle ride and politely declined Ernst’s offer to ride on the back of her bike. He joked that he would do better at a Jet Ski race. In many ways, Rubio is an outsider here in middle America, and he takes care not to come off as too youthful, urban or ethnic. In telling his family’s immigrant story here, he didn’t mention his parents' journey from Cuba, as he usually does. Rubio instead presented himself as someone just like them: a dad who pays the mortgage, sends his kids to Christian school and believes the new generation will do better. “I had some people say I’m not old enough or haven’t been in government long enough,” he told the crowd. “I’m 44 years old, but I feel 45, and I’ve been in government long enough to know that what we’re doing now doesn’t work. If we keep promoting the same people, we will get the same result and the future will leave us behind.” Rubio’s aides characterize his campaign strategy as “lean and mean,” and deny any desire to push Rubio more out front than he is, preferring a come-from-behind strategy. He has yet to hire a director for his Iowa operations, as others have, though aides insist the campaign is ramping up and more staff is coming. Iowa voters are a famously persnickety bunch, both aggressive in their expectation that every candidate will court their vote and passive in their unwillingness to commit to any one presidential hopeful too soon. That might be in part because Republicans here have picked a string of losers recently in a statewide caucus that prides itself on being the first testing ground for presidential candidates. Their past GOP choices, Mike Huckabee in 2008 and Rick Santorum in 2012, failed to win the party’s nomination, let alone the White House. That could provide an opening for Rubio as Iowans look for a viable alternative to likely front-runners Bush and Walker. “Many of us Iowans are super-sensitive to this: We’re tired of being the angry white-guy party,” said one senior Republican in the state, granted anonymity to speak frankly about the choices. “It doesn’t hurt that [Rubio is] a different face.” Younger voters in particular call Rubio a favorite, and at the Iowa event the few Latino voters in the predominantly white crowd dashed over to Rubio for selfies. “You’re going to be all over Facebook,” shouted one fan. “That’s great; we need to be!” Rubio responded. “I love Rubio,” swooned Laurie Millam, who runs the business school at an online university. She said she particularly liked how the Latino candidate smoothed racial and partisan distinctions with a “one America” message. Recent media scrutiny about Rubio’s personal debt and his family’s many traffic tickets may only be helping him among ordinary Americans. At the speech, one Iowan jokingly offered driving lessons. The campaign has taken it all lightly, starting the satirical Twitter hashtag, #RubioCrimeSpree. They attribute nearly $100,000 in online donations over the last few days to people sending money in response as a gesture of support. At some point, Rubio will need to sit down at the kitchen table and display the skills and resources necessary to tell voters his vision for the nation, much like he did when he was a long-shot Senate candidate going door-to-door five years ago in Florida. Cornered by one young voter with questions about the future of federal spending, Rubio broke from script and launched into a discourse on the economics of Medicare costs and need for entitlement spending reforms. But several Iowans were less than impressed with Rubio’s performance. When asked about Rubio’s speech, Joe Wells, a retired aviation services manager from Cedar Rapids, responded in a distinctly Iowa-nice way: He changed the subject. “I never heard from Carly before,” he said, referring to Carly Fiorina, the former Hewlett-Packard executive turned presidential candidate, who also attended the event. When pressed for his views on Rubio, Wells gave a lukewarm assessment: “He’s certainly better than Bush or Christie,” a reference to the New Jersey governor. Brenda Remsing, a homemaker from Corydon who rode to Boone on the back of friend’s motorcycle, likes Sen. Ted Cruz, the firebrand Texas Republican, but she puts Rubio as her second favorite. “He’d be a good No. 1 -- if I can’t have No. 1,” she said. For Rubio, for now, that might be endorsement enough. *Liberals defend Marco Rubio against blistering New York Times attacks <http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/politics/2015/06/11/liberals-defend-marco-rubio-against-blistering-new-york-times-attack-on-him/> // Fox News – June 11, 2015 * It’s not often that Jon Stewart, host of “The Daily Show,” defends conservatives, but that is what he did Wednesday. Stewart became the latest critic of The New York Times recent stories attacking presidential contender Sen. Marco Rubio, a Florida Republican, for everything from having four traffic tickets in almost 20 years to having had a large student loan and buying expensive items. "I can't think of a single person who would be bothered by this," Stewart said on his show, in reference to the condemning tone of the Times stories against the senator’s tickets and how he used money from his book to lease an Audi, and buy a fishing boat. The Washington Post quoted some of the Times’ findings – which included announcing that Rubio’s wife had gotten 13 traffic tickets – and noted, sarcastically, “Outrageous!” Rubio has somewhat turned the Times seeming hatchet job in his favor, mocking it in emails to supporters and the press, and even getting campaign donations because of the newspaper’s attacks. Said the Post of the Rubio campaign: “Now, they've even got ‘The Daily Show’ on their side for the moment.” Some publications cast the Times’ stories as elitist and gossipy. “If the Times wanted to make Rubio look relatable to the average American—more like them than his potential opponents—they couldn’t have come up with much better than show he has had financial problems,’” wrote a Bloomberg News writer. “Rubio took out $100,000 in student loans that he just paid off three years ago; most of his opponents have probably never even seen a tuition bill. These are points in Rubio’s favor. People will like this about him.” *PAUL* *How Rand Paul Has Already Changed the 2016 Race <http://time.com/3917723/chatty-and-thoughtful-rand-paul-has-already-changed-the-2016-race/?iid=toc_061115> // TIME // Joe Klein – June 11, 2015 * Rand Paul has been a bad, bad boy. Just ask him. “I’m not very popular in Washington right now” was his opening line at a series of town-hall meetings in New Hampshire, two weeks after he had filibustered and, temporarily, crashed the bulk collection of phone data by the federal government. “I messed up their Memorial Day plans.” The line drew laughter and applause in the great state of New Hampshire, a flinty and skeptical province. Anything that gums up the federal machine is a good thing, it seems, even if it involves national security. “One of my colleagues asked, ‘What do we do if the authority to collect data lapses?'” he continued. “I told him, ‘Well, we could rely on the Constitution for a few hours.'” More applause–but weaker this time. This was relatively esoteric stuff, and Paul had to explain himself: He’s in favor of using search warrants to collect the phone data of suspected terrorists, just not bulk collection of all the phone records of all the people, which he believes is unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment of the Bill of Rights, which prohibits unreasonable search and seizure. He goes all the way back to the colonial lawyer James Otis, who fought unwarranted search procedures by the British. His audiences stay with him as he explains all this. He speaks plainly and well, without bombast or frills. He knows his stuff. But this is not the sort of thing Republican audiences expect from their candidates. It’s more educational than emotional. He doesn’t speak in any detail about Obamacare, immigration, Iran, abortion or gay rights. By the time his 15-minute stump speech is over, he has delivered a tutorial about the First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Ninth and 10th amendments to the Constitution. “We Republicans won’t be successful as a party,” he says, “until we support the entire Bill of Rights as enthusiastically as we support the Second Amendment”–that is, the right to bear arms. Rand Paul has a following in the GOP, just as his father Ron Paul did. But he’s a far more interesting candidate. Paul the Elder had cranky tendencies, railing against the Federal Reserve and in favor of hard currency. Paul the Younger has softer edges; he is an ideologue, but a supple and eclectic one–he talks about things his father never did, and his party doesn’t much, like the justice system in poor black neighborhoods (Sixth Amendment: right to a trial by jury). He tells his Republican audiences the outrageous story of Kalief Browder, a black teenager who was arrested in New York City for allegedly stealing a backpack–he claimed he was innocent, refused to plea-bargain–and spent 1,000 days in jail awaiting trial. Browder committed suicide in early June. “No wonder people in those neighborhoods are pretty angry,” he says. Paul drives his fellow Republicans crazy with his foreign policy views, which are the opposite of the frothing militarism of the John McCain wing of the party. He’s not an isolationist, but not exactly a “realist” either. “We should arm the Kurds,” he told me, sipping water at a diner in Derry. “They’re about the only ones who are really fighting ISIS.” I pointed out that the Egyptians were fighting ISIS too, in Libya and Sinai. He considered this for a moment, then said, “Yeah, but they put thousands of people in jail for dissent.” It was a purist answer: he wasn’t ready to support an oppressive state, even if it was fighting on our side against a mortal enemy. The current conventional wisdom is that Paul doesn’t have much of a chance to win the nomination–even though, according to a recent poll, he runs stronger against Hillary Clinton than any other Republican does. But his message is fresh and consequential. It throws a klieg light on the deficiencies of the two major parties: the mindless Republican war-silliness and the utter failure of the Democratic welfare state to alleviate intergenerational poverty. “I was on the South Side of Chicago a few weeks ago,” he said. “And the people there know the current system isn’t working. They’re about ready to try something new.” But what? His “solutions”–like lower taxes on businesses in poor neighborhoods–are insufficient, and his libertarianism doesn’t begin to address the deficit of individual responsibility that plagues our communities, poor and rich alike. I’d love to hear what he has to say about what democracy demands from its citizens. Still, he is attempting something that few candidates will risk–an intelligent conversation, on issues that really matter. I’m thrilled he’s in the race. *Rand Paul Signs on to Amendment Barring Ground Troops Against ISIS <http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-11/rand-paul-signs-on-to-amendment-barring-ground-troops-against-isis> // Bloomberg // David Weigel – June 11, 2015 * Kentucky Senator Rand Paul has had a devil of a time with his amendments related to foreign policy. This week, the Foreign Relations Committee rejected Paul's amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that would have cut off U.S. aid to the Palestinians. The prospects look better, but not much better, for Paul's co-sponsorship of an amendment to strengthen the 1971 Non-Detention Act. On the campaign trail, Paul likes to talk about his amendment that would have paid for higher military funding with cuts to foreign aid. The story ends with most senators voting against him. Thursday, Paul took on another uphill and telling battle. He co-sponsored an amendment from Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy, a Democrat, that would bar funding for ground troops being sent to the Levant to fight ISIS. The amendment's text: No funds appropriated by this Act may be used to support the deployment of the United States Armed Forces for the purpose of ground combat operations in Iraq or Syria, except as necessary- For the protection or rescue of members of the United States Armed Forces or United States citizens from imminent danger posed by ISIL; or To conduct missions not intended to result in ground combat operations by United States forces, such as- intelligence collection and sharing; enabling kinetic strikes limited operations against high value targets; operational planning; or other forms of advice and assistance to coalition forces fighting ISIL in Iraq or Syria Questions to Paul's office and presidential campaign went unanswered, but he's left no confusion about his ISIS stance. Since last fall, he's favored attacks on ISIS positions that threaten American interests. He's also favored arming the Kurds as they fight ISIS, telling an audience this weekend in Merrimack, N.H., that America should take the military equipment that's unused and "rusting" in Afghanistan and "airlift it" to any Kurds who need them. At the same event, Paul spoke about giving the Kurdish minority a state of its own after the defeat of the Islamic State. All of this, according to Paul, would require a new Authorization of Military Force, and new funding votes. That's Murphy's position, too, and the position of several progressive co-sponsors. Paul, for now, appears to be the only Republican (and only Republican presidential candidate) taking this stance via the NDAA amendment. *WALKER* *Scott Walker Says Supporters Have Suggested Walker-Rubio 2016 Ticket <http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-11/scott-walker-says-supporters-have-suggested-walker-rubio-2016-ticket> // Bloomberg // John McCormick – June 11, 2015 * Some who have talked to the governor privately about a possible pairing say they have been surprised by how seriously he seems to be taking the prospect. Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker on Thursday talked positively about a Republican presidential ticket—potentially announced even before the first nomination balloting—that would include himself and Senator Marco Rubio of Florida. In a Bloomberg Politics interview, the likely candidate also expressed agreement with President Barack Obama on the pressing issue of fast-track trade legislation. Walker, 47, isn't expected to formally enter the race until early July, after his state has completed a two-year budget plan. Still, he's apparently given some consideration and had discussions already about a potential running mate, with the focus on Rubio. “I've actually had quite a few people, grassroots supporters, donors, and others who have made that suggestion,” he said when asked about a Walker-Rubio ticket. “For now, you know, Marco is a quality candidate,” Walker said. “He's going to be formidable in this race as things progress. And if we were to get in, we'd be as well, and we'll see where things take us.” Walker was in Utah to meet with potential financial supporters and to speak at a summit hosted by 2012 Republican nominee Mitt Romney that's attracted six declared and likely presidential candidates. The full interview will air Thursday at 5 p.m. ET on With All Due Respect on Bloomberg TV and BloombergPolitics.com. Walker said both he and Rubio often hear the suggestion that they should combine forces, potentially even before the first nomination voting in Iowa in February 2016, as a way to stand out amid a crowded field. “We'd just probably have to arm-wrestle over who would be at the top of the ticket,” he said. Some who have talked privately to Walker about a possible pairing with Rubio say they have been surprised by how seriously the Wisconsin governor seems to be taking the prospect. At this phase of presidential campaign, the norm would be for a White House hopeful to summarily dismiss such a move, in public and in private. Walker said he likes governors and their executive experience better than senators as potential presidents and vice presidents, but that Rubio stands out. “I do like Marco Rubio,” he said. “I think he and I have similar thoughts on national defense and foreign policy.” Walker noted how he tweeted greetings to Rubio, 44, for his birthday last month, a move that also underscored his own relative youthfulness amid a mostly older Democratic and Republican field. “Marco, happy birthday from one 40-something to another,” Walker said of his greeting. “There’s certainly a generational issue there.” In the most recent Bloomberg Politics/Des Moines Register Iowa Poll, Walker led in the state that starts the nomination process, while Rubio was the most popular second choice among likely Republican caucus participants. Trade, tax policy Walker said he supports giving Obama the authority to submit trade agreements to Congress for an expedited, up-or-down vote without amendments. “If we don't go down this path, we're going to be at a competitive disadvantage, and so I think it just makes sense,” he said. At the same time, like many Republicans who support granting the trade authority recent past presidents have had, Walker said the deal would allow the Republican-controlled Congress to review Obama's actions. “If this president were to give them a bad deal, they should hold him accountable and vote it down,” he said. “They have every right to do that under the proposal.” On taxes, Walker said he'd look for ways to lower them especially for those in “the middle of the bracket” as well as for businesses. “I certainly wouldn't be talking about anybody paying any more,” he said. The popular home-mortgage deduction is not a place where Walker would look for additional revenue to balance the cuts he'd like to see made, he said. “We're going to look at the entire tax code and what the best way to reform is, but I think homeownership is an important part of living the American dream,” he said. He expressed similar views about the popular deduction for charitable contributions. *CRUZ* *Ted Cruz under fire for Tennessee campaign chairman <http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/ted-cruz-kevin-kookogey-tennessee-118883.html#ixzz3coi0uZDQ> // Politico // Adam Lerner – June 11, 2015 * Ted Cruz’s presidential campaign is pushing back against criticism that the Texas senator named an anti-Islamic politician as his state chairman in Tennessee. On Wednesday, Cruz spokesman Rick Tyler called the reaction to the appointment “absurd.” Tyler’s comments came in response to a prominent Muslim-American advocacy group’s complaints about the Cruz campaign’s new state chairman, Kevin Kookogey. Announcing the move, Cruz hailed Kookogey’s “experience and knowledge of both the landscape in Tennessee and the issues that matter to Tennesseans,” such as “American sovereignty, defense, and religious liberty.” As chairman of the Williamson County Republican Party in 2012, Kookogey pushed a resolution condemning Republican Gov. Bill Haslam for hiring Samar Ali, a practicing Muslim, and for appointing a council on Islamic affairs in the state. “RESOLVED that the Williamson County Republican Party hereby opposes Tennessee Governor Bill Haslam’s recent appointment of a Shariah compliant finance expert to the Tennessee Department of Economic and Community Development,” the resolution said. The Haslam administration swatted down the allegations at the time. “Samar Ali was hired to be ECD’s international director. Her job duties are to manage the TNTrade export program and to supervise our four international offices in Germany, Japan, China and Canada,” Clint Brewer, an official with the state’s Department of Economic and Community Development, told Politifact. “There is no part of her job — or any department operations — that involves Shariah compliant finance or Shariah law,” Brewer said. Ali stayed in office for 18 months, and is now a private attorney at a Nashville law firm. But the bruised feelings remain: On Tuesday, the Council on American-Islamic Relations demanded that Cruz end its affiliation with Kookogey for his “longstanding support for anti-Muslim and Islamaphobic causes.” Tyler, the Cruz spokesman, pushed back in a statement to the Tennessean on Wednesday. “It is absurd to suggest that being a defender of American law under the United States Constitution is somehow anti-Muslim,” Tyler said. Ali, a former White House fellow and Obama administration counterterrorism adviser who was born in Nashville and grew up in Tennessee, told the Tennessean last year that the sharia law flap was a “very painful experience.” “It also made me realize how fast one can be dehumanized,” Ali added, “and I definitely felt dehumanized.” *Ted Cruz fights GOP approach on Obamacare subsidies <http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/ted-cruz-fight-obamacare-subsidies-supreme-court-118875.html#ixzz3coiOGULb> // Politico // Manu Raju – June 11, 2015 * Ted Cruz is planning to battle his party over Obamacare again — this time, if Senate Republicans seek to extend subsidies that could be killed by the Supreme Court as soon as this month. In an interview with POLITICO, the 2016 presidential candidate weighed in on the high-stakes Supreme Court case that could end subsidies for millions of people who receive their health insurance through the federal exchange. A majority of Republican senators have endorsed an approach to keep those subsidies in place until September 2017, but Cruz flatly said “no” when asked if he’d sign on as well. “I think the best legislative option is to allow states to opt out,” Cruz said in the Capitol. “I am cautiously optimistic that the Supreme Court will conclude in King vs. Burwell that the Obama IRS disregarded the plain language of the statute and acted lawlessly. And when that occurs, it will be a real opportunity for Congress to lead.” He added: “In a perfect world, we would take that opportunity to repeal Obamacare. At a minimum, we should allow states to opt out.” Cruz’s comments underscore the challenges for Republican leaders if they win the Supreme Court case: They’ll have to find a way to help the millions who could immediately see their health care costs skyrocket without appearing to endorse a law they universally despise. And it’s bound to grow more complicated with the injection of 2016 politics: Republican senators in blue-states facing reelection will be eager to avoid a public revolt and find a way to keep federal dollars flowing to people who rely on the subsides to defray their health care costs; conservatives running for president will be eager to renew their demands to kill the controversial law once and for all. There are several proposals aimed at addressing this dilemma, with one leading option proposed by Sen. Ron Johnson, a conservative up for reelection next year in Wisconsin, which has a federal exchange. While Johnson’s approach would extend the subsidies through the summer of 2017, it would also kill the law’s individual and employer mandates and repeal insurance industry reforms, a proposal backed by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) with 31 co-sponsors. Other Republicans have proposed their own version, including freshman Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), who wants to allow financial assistance through tax credits over 18 months but gradually reduce them over that timeframe. And Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), another freshman, has a plan that would not keep the subsidies, though he’s signaled he’d be open to extending them depending on how the court rules. Cruz has been open to some transition period in the past. In February, Cruz offered his own bill to repeal Obamacare. But his bill says the current law would stay in place for six months after the measure’s enactment date. It’s not unlike Cruz to battle his party over health care; he did it in 2013 after a 21-hour speech demanding that the GOP use a must-pass spending bill to defund Obamacare. When the end result was a government shutdown, he became a scourge of Republicans in Washington. Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), a member of Republican leadership, said it’s unfair to contend that Republicans are seeking to protect the law if they were to temporarily extend the subsidies. “Republicans will have a response to protect the people who have been hurt by the president’s illegal action, but we are not going to protect the law,” he said. *Cruz ramps up attack on ObamaCare <http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/244746-cruz-ramps-up-attack-on-obamacare> // The Hill // Sarah Ferris – June 11, 2015 * Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) is ramping up his attacks on ObamaCare — but in a way that will likely put him at odds with Republican leadership. In two separate interviews on Thursday, Cruz said he would oppose a GOP strategy to extend ObamaCare subsidies that could be struck down by the Supreme Court later this month. Instead, he said he wants a bill that would let states “opt-out of Obamacare” altogether, he told The Washington Post. “I think the best legislative option is to allow states to opt out,” the presidential candidate told Politico. The King v. Burwell case, which could result in an estimated 6.4 million people losing their subsidies, is the Republican Party’s biggest healthcare challenge before the next election. In Texas alone, 832,334 people stand to lose their subsidies. The majority of Senate Republicans — Cruz not included — have signed onto a plan from Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) that would temporarily continue the subsidies, while also repealing the individual and employer mandates. Two other presidential candidates in the Senate, Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), also declined to co-sponsor the bill, though it did earn the backing from a fourth candidate, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). If the court rules against ObamaCare, Republicans will need to act fast to prevent millions of people from dropping out of their healthcare plans. If no plan is enacted, Democrats are likely to cast the blame on Republicans, who had widely backed the case initially. But the prospect of a conservative win in King v. Burwell has caused friction among congressional Republicans, who have sharply disagreed on how to avert a healthcare meltdown. Last month, House and Senate leaders disclosed that they will not be releasing their contingency plans for the court case until after the decision. *CHRISTIE* *Chris Christie Lays Out Education Plan <http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/11/bernie-sanders-demands-hillary-clinton-take-trade-stance-right-now/> // NYT // Nick Corasaniti – June 11, 2015 * Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey leaned on the podium with his right elbow, his standard let-me-give-it-to-you-straight stance, and gave one of his classic blunt warnings, this time setting up a nearly hour long speech laying out his educational platform. “It’s time we had a conversation about education that isn’t defined by ideological dogma or by narrow, personal, institutional interests,” Mr. Christie told the packed room at Iowa State University in Ames, Iowa. “Lets talk about what real educational reform for America looks like.” But notably, Mr. Christie never touched on his recent abandonment of the Common Core, the set of nationwide educational standards that many conservatives abhor. He has previously denied that his new position against the standards is related to his presidential aspirations. Instead, Mr. Christie spoke at length on his educational record in New Jersey and how that would inform his vision for the country. And, although the speech was billed as focused on kindergarten through 12th grade, Mr. Christie spent the majority of his time tackling the issue of student debt in higher education, another frequent talking point on the campaign trail. “Entire generations are being saddled with debt,” Mr. Christie said. “There has not been a town hall meeting I’ve had, in New Jersey or outside of New Jersey, since the beginning of the year, where someone hasn’t raised the issue of student debt.” He called for an expansion of Pell grants and other federal education funding, saying Congress should expand student aid programs for people at the bottom of the economic ladder. But he criticized President Obama’s plan to make community college free, saying, “We know there is nothing free in the world.” He proposed “income share agreements” as an alternative to student loans. His proposal would give students the option of paying a percentage of their income for a set amount of time to whomever fronts the cost of college. “With an income share agreement, there’s no lump sum to pay, so there’s no downside,” he said, also arguing that investors in the program would have more incentive to help the student succeed to recoup their money. He also called for more transparency in college billing and spending, joking that students and parents had a right to know if a tuition increase was going toward building a new rock-climbing wall. And, like his speech Tuesday in Washington where he argued for a less rigid school calendar, he made the case for universities to offer both night and weekend classes, to let students who need to work their way through college hold down a steady job. His proposals for reforming kindergarten through 12th-grade education centered on a common theme for the New Jersey governor: confronting the teachers’ union. He spoke early and often of how he restructured teacher tenure in his home state and introduced merit pay for them. He lamented that he was unable to convince the union to agree to change the “last in, first out” layoff policy for teachers. “The power of the teachers’ union has prevented us from using quality based layoffs,” he said. “It’s the worst policy that money can buy.” He also pointed to his expanded school choice in New Jersey as another victory over the teachers’ union. “This is a program driven by a simple principle — I think parents are better suited to make decisions about their children’s education than union leaders,” Mr. Christie said. But as he based many of his recommendations on his education record in New Jersey, reviews in his home state were mixed, most notably in the city of Newark, which has the largest school district in the state. In 2010, Mr. Christie helped secure, along with former Mayor Cory Booker, a $100 million donation from Mark Zuckerberg, the chief executive of Facebook, to help Newark’s floundering schools. Mr. Booker is now a United States senator representing New Jersey. The plan, executed in conjunction with Mr. Booker under the banner of “One Newark,” contained some of the important elements of Mr. Christie’s education platforms, like eliminating neighborhood public schools in favor of a lottery to give parents more choice over which schools their children attend. But that had the unintended effect of leaving some families with children attending multiple schools across the city, and led to an uprising in Newark that helped elect Ras J. Baraka as mayor last year. He was a vocal critic of the plan. Despite these issues, Mr. Christie, the product of New Jersey public schools himself, still seems to be sticking to school choice and other reforms he has made in New Jersey. As he said in his closing remarks, “When we dare to innovate and fight the status quo, we give our children a fighting chance in this new world.” *Top Chris Christie Aide Goes to His Political Action Committee <http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/11/bernie-sanders-demands-hillary-clinton-take-trade-stance-right-now/> // NYT // Maggie Haberman – June 11, 2015 * Maria Comella, the long-serving communications director to Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, will move over to the governor’s political action committee in a senior role, the latest move that indicates he will run for president. Ms. Comella will become senior adviser to Leadership Matters for America PAC, according to another spokeswoman for Mr. Christie, Samantha Smith. Her move to Mr. Christie’s political arm is taking place as he appears on the verge of announcing a presidential campaign for 2016, seeing a void in the current Republican field that is as much stylistic as policy-driven. Ms. Comella has been almost constantly by Mr. Christie’s side since he became the governor of New Jersey after defeating the Democratic incumbent, Jon Corzine, in 2009. She has advised him on a range of issues, but has also been deeply involved in a social media strategy that helped make the governor a mini-celebrity on YouTube through clips of his famously combative town hall meetings. “Maria understands messaging and the fast-moving and ever-changing media landscape better than anyone in the country,” said Mike DuHaime, the top political adviser to Mr. Christie, who hired Ms. Comella when both worked on the Rudolph W. Giuliani’s presidential campaign in the 2008 election cycle. “She is smart, fierce, respected and effective.” On that campaign, Ms. Comella, a New York native and George Washington University graduate who also worked on Capitol Hill, oversaw about 20 staff members. Her most recent title was deputy chief of staff for communications and planning for Mr. Christie. *Christie: Debt-free college is 'wrong' <http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/chris-christie-no-debt-free-college-118879.html> // Politico // Allie Grasgreen – June 11, 2015 * New Jersey Gov. and Republican presidential contender Chris Christie laid out a multi-pronged higher education agenda Thursday, and a key part — unsurprisingly — is college affordability. The issue has shot into the spotlight in recent weeks, both in Congress and on the campaign trail. Christie delivered his address at Iowa State University, in Ames, Iowa. Setting the stage with the story of his father — a top high school student who enlisted in the Army because he couldn’t afford to accept an offer to attend Columbia University, then returned to Rutgers University on the G.I. Bill — Christie proposed “a system where we all need to take personal responsibility to grasp the opportunities in higher education, but also one where we can get a leg up when we need it.” Debt-free college, Christie said, is not the answer. “That is a typical liberal approach. It is wrong,” he said, according to prepared remarks. “If college graduates are going to reap the greater economic rewards and opportunities of earning a degree, then it seems fair for them to support the cost of the education they’re receiving.” Democratic candidates Hillary Clinton, Gov. Martin O’Malley and Sen. Bernie Sanders have all expressed varying levels of interest in the increasingly popular debt-free college concept. However, Christie said Congress should “properly fund and expand” financial aid programs for low-income students, noting that Pell grants have expanded while Supplemental Education Opportunity Grants and Perkins Loans have tapered off. Christie also wants to consider approaches like tax credits for donors to higher education grant organizations, and income-share agreements, where students repay private financing received in college with some percentage of their income in the future. (Sen. Marco Rubio has introduced legislation for such plans). *Christie slams rival for 'scaring' voters <http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/caucus/2015/06/11/chris-christie-iowa-rand-paul-polk-county/71103698/> // The Des Moines Register // Jennifer Jacobs – June 11, 2015 * New Jersey governor Chris Christie was the keynote speaker at the Polk County GOP's spring fundraiser Thursday night, where he stressed that the world is "an unstable, dangerous, ugly place" when America pulls back from its place as the dominant force. He said that he, as a former U.S. attorney who prosecuted terrorists and put them in jail in New Jersey, speaks from a position of knowledge. "Something unique in politics," he said. "I actually know what I'm talking about." Without singling out presidential candidate Rand Paul by name, Christie blasted the Kentucky U.S. senator for sending out fundraising solicitations noting his opposition to U.S. surveillance programs. "To raise money off those speeches and then brag how much money they raised by scaring people about their civil liberties – it's disgraceful. And it's dangerous," Christie said. "You need to decide as you pick a new national leader: Do you want someone who wakes up every morning saying, 'My first job is to make sure I protect the lives of the American people and I will do everything that I can within the law to do that,' or another college professor?" The country doesn't need another inexperienced leader "with theories about things they've never done and never experienced," Christie said. Christie told personal stories about how his mother, Sondra, told him before she died in 2004 that if he ever ran for president, he'd better be direct with the American people. "I'm one of the most psychoanalyzed national political figures in the world. We now end the mystery. You now why I am the way I am," he said, to laughter. "There will be some days where you like what I say and there will be other days where you sink your head and you say, 'I cannot believe he just said that.' But here's what you'll never have to say: You'll never have to say, 'I wonder what he's thinking. I wonder what he feels and I wonder what he's thinking and I wonder what he's willing to fight for.'" Iowa will be a tough proving ground for Christie, who was in ninth place in a field of 16 GOP presidential contenders in a recent Des Moines Register/Bloomberg Politics poll of likely caucusgoers. When the Register asked him Thursday if he could win the Iowa caucuses, he answered: "Listen, the only reason to get in is to win. ... What I know is if I get into a race, I'll compete." He said he intends to "be who I am. And if my ideas are good enough and people connect with me, I'll change minds." Several Iowans at the Polk County dinner, including Liz Van Zomeren, a Johnston Republican, said Christie exceeded their expectations by far. *GRAHAM* *Sen. Mark Kirk calls Lindsey Graham a 'bro with no ho' <http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/mark-kirk-lindsey-graham-bro-118882.html#ixzz3cm7wmffB> // Politico // Nick Gass – June 11, 2015 * According to his Senate colleague Mark Kirk, Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) is a “bro with no ho.” Kirk made the remark about Graham during a Senate Appropriations Committee markup session on Thursday. The Huffington Post, which first reported on the comment, posted audio of the hot mic incident. “I’ve been joking with Lindsey,” Kirk said, according to the audio. “Did you see that? He’s going to have a rotating first lady. He’s a bro with no ho.” Kirk’s office told HuffPost that the Illinois Republican had been “joking around with his colleagues.” Graham has made light of his bachelorhood, joking this week that if he wins the presidency, he would have a “rotating first lady.” The 59-year-0ld South Carolina senator has never married and has no children. *Lindsey Graham Introduces Abortion Bill <http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/06/11/lindsey_graham_introduces_abortion_bill_126946.html> // RealClearPolitics // Andrew Desiderio – June 11, 2015 * In what some consider a play for votes on the right, Sen. Lindsey Graham introduced an abortion bill Thursday on Capitol Hill, where the South Carolina Republican was flanked at a news conference by leaders in the pro-life movement. The legislation, titled the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, would ban abortions past 20 weeks, unless the life of the mother is in jeopardy or the woman was the victim of rape or incest and received medical treatment or counseling at least 48 hours before the abortion. Additionally, the bill would allow women to file a lawsuit against an abortion provider who violates provisions outlined in the act. Graham, a 2016 presidential candidate, said it is the government’s duty to “protect the most vulnerable” in America. Having a debate over when life starts and ends is long overdue, he said, and the issue is something that deserves to be discussed on the campaign trail. “I don’t believe abortion, five months into pregnancy, makes us a better nation,” he added. “I have no doubt the legislation will one day be passed by Congress and signed into law.” But the bill’s prospects of becoming law with President Obama’s signature are slim. According to the latest Gallup polling, half of Americans consider themselves pro-choice, while 44 percent say they are pro-life. But Graham says his legislation should appeal to the former, calling it a “reasonable position” to take. Abortion-rights groups are casting Graham’s efforts as an assault on women’s health and a campaign ploy. “Sen. Graham’s bill is not about policy. It’s about politics,” NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse Hogue said in a statement. “He is choosing to use his position in the Senate to advance an abortion ban to bolster his long-shot White House bid in a shameless play to early state ultra-conservative voters.” Graham dismissed that assertion. “Just look at my history in the pro-life movement,” he told RealClearPolitics after the news conference. “I was here long before I thought about running for president.” But the 2016 presidential candidate may need to shore up his support among social conservatives, as he has said he would not fight a Supreme Court decision that upholds same-sex marriage, and argued the Republican Party should welcome Caitlyn Jenner, formerly Bruce Jenner, and other transgender Americans. “I’m into addition,” Graham argued Sunday on CNN. “I can only imagine the torment that Bruce Jenner went through. I hope she has found peace.” Hogue also said the influence of anti-abortion groups is “dwindling.” But leaders of those groups – the Family Research Council, National Right to Life Committee, Americans United for Life, and Concerned Women for America – disagree. NRLC President Carol Tobias disputed assertions by the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists that scientific evidence invalidates arguments for a ban on abortions after 20 weeks. (“Legislative efforts to limit abortions after 20 weeks represent an obvious attempt to restrict the ability of American women to get the care they need, when they need it,” ACOG President Mark S. DeFrancesco said in a statement.”) Tobias called that argument “willful ignorance at its best.” She accused the media of serving as “amplifiers of misinformation” brought forth by groups like ACOG and Planned Parenthood. “A baby at five months has developed organs and can feel pain,” CWA President Penny Nance said. “They deserve our legal protection.” Graham promised debate on the measure this year, and told reporters that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell supports it. *SANTORUM* *Rick Santorum, moderate Republican? <http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/11/politics/rick-santorum-caitlyn-jenner-support/> // CNN // Alexandra Jaffe – June 11, 2015 * He was conservatives' pick to take on Mitt Romney in the 2012 GOP presidential primary, but in an exclusive interview with CNN's Erin Burnett on Thursday night Santorum seemed ready to turn over a new leaf. The former Pennsylvania senator once compared homosexuality to beastiality. But he showed a more accepting tone on Thursday, saying he would accept an endorsement from transgender icon Caitlyn Jenner. (Jenner said in an interview she is a Republican). "If that's the way she feels about my candidacy, sure," he said. When Jenner went public with her decision, Santorum said he accepted her as a woman and that his "responsibility as a human is to love and accept everybody." He struck a similar tone on Thursday night, but suggested he still doesn't agree with her decision. "My job as a human being is to treat everybody with dignity or respect -- period, stop, full stop, no qualification to that," he said. "Do I have to agree with their positions on issues or how they see America? Of course not." Santorum also said he was open to the idea that humans are contributing to climate change. "Clearly the earth has warmed," he said. "I do have questions about what role man plays in this warming. I think there are a lot of folks who do question that." He said, however, the scientific consensus is still out on that and that, more importantly, the policies arising from the belief that humans are contributing to climate change are "very damaging to the United States of America." Santorum's made strengthening the American family a centerpiece of his second bid for the White House, but said Sen. Lindsey Graham's single-dom shouldn't disqualify him from the presidency. "I think you elect the person to be president," he said when asked whether the fact Graham has never married should impact his bid. "We've had bachelors before in the White House." And though he's drawing piddling crowds to Iowa diners, compared to his stunning first-place finish in the 2012 caucuses there, Santorum is totally unfazed. One-on-one contact with as many Iowans as possible, Santorum says, is all part of the plan. "People can mock and say, 'Oh, you know, it's only four or five people.' In small rural counties, four or five people make all the difference," he said on CNN. Santorum raised eyebrows when he encountered only two diners at a stop at a restaurant in Iowa on Monday, but he said his team felt "really good" about signing them both up as volunteers, and that one will advocate for him at the caucuses next year. And he said he was willing to go to "every county in Iowa to recruit three or four people," which he called a "pretty good hit rate" for a campaign. "We feel really good that if you go to a town with 350 people, if you get four, five, that's actually not a bad percentage of the folks in town," he said. *Rick Santorum Says Economic 'Stagnation' Will Help Him Win in 2016 <http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-11/rick-santorum-says-economic-stagnation-will-help-him-win-in-2016> // Bloomberg News // Mark Niquette – June 11, 2015 * To hear Rick Santorum tell it, the nation's tepid economic recovery may be his key to winning the Republican presidential nomination. Interviewed Thursday on Bloomberg's With All Due Respect, Santorum was responding to comments from Iowa voters asking what's different in 2016 after the former Pennsylvania senator won that state's caucus but lost the nomination to Mitt Romney in 2012. "What's different is the country has been in stagnation four more years,'' Santorum said. "I recognize what the core of that problem is, and we have an economic platform that's going to not only unite America but win this election.'' “What's different is the country has been in stagnation four more years.” Santorum said he has a "pro-worker immigration policy" and plans to release an economic and tax plan soon that will focus on manufacturing, construction and energy jobs. It will appeal to disaffected Democrats and "folks in middle America who are seeing their wages flat-lined, income falling, and neither political party addressing that,'' he said. The former Pennsylvania senator had 6 percent support in a Bloomberg Politics/Des Moines Register Iowa poll released May 30 with former Florida Senator Marco Rubio, behind Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker at 17 percent, Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky and retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson at 10 percent, with former Florida Governor Jeb Bush and former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee next at 9 percent each. *Rick Santorum signs ATR tax pledge <http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/11/rick-santorum-signs-atr-tax-pledge/> // The Washington Times // David Sherfinski – June 11, 2015 * Former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, a 2016 GOP presidential candidate, has signed Americans for Tax Reform’s Taxpayer Protection Pledge committing to oppose and veto any efforts to raise taxes, the group said Thursday. “By signing the Taxpayer Protection Pledge to the American people, Senator Santorum continues his tradition of protecting American taxpayers against higher taxes,” said ATR President Grover Norquist. Mr. Santorum signed the pledge as a U.S. Senator and as a presidential candidate in 2012. He joins Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Marco Rubio of Florida, as well as former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina and former Texas Gov. Rick Perry as 2016 presidential candidates who have signed the pledge. Mr. Norquist has also offered praise for former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, another presidential candidate, who took his own pledge not to raise taxes. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who is announcing his 2016 plans Monday, has indicated he does not plan on signing any such pledges, but his team has said his record on taxes is clear. With each announcement of the 2016 presidential contenders who have signed the pledge, ATR has pointed out that the lone Republican presidential candidate in 2012 who did not make such a pledge was former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, who dropped out of the race shortly after a third-place finish in New Hampshire. *KASICH* *Is John Kasich Too Cranky To Be President? <http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/john-kasich-too-cranky-be-president-n373291> // NBC News // Perry Bacon – June 11, 2015 * He could be a top contender for the GOP nomination. But first, he might want to get people to stop calling him a jerk. Republican insiders say that Ohio Gov. John Kasich, who is planning to officially enter the 2016 campaign next month, is an experienced swing state governor who could ultimately emerge as one of the party's leading candidates. But Republicans both privately and publicly say that Kasich's style is grating, and they are skeptical of whether it can be effective in a long presidential campaign. In private settings and sometimes even in public ones, Kasich is known to be brusque, confrontational and dismissive of others' views, even fellow conservatives. Fred Barnes, the executive editor of the conservative Weekly Standard and an influential voice in GOP politics, said this week Kasich could be the party's nominee if "he stops acting somewhat like a jerk." "He spends a lot of time criticizing other Republicans ....and that doesn't make any sense," Barnes said in a radio interview this week with Hugh Hewitt, a conservative radio host. Mark Souder, a former Indiana congressman who served in the House with Kasich, said his former colleague's "lack of patience" would be a "big challenge." "His mannerisms, his expressions, his sarcasm, etc. can be off-putting at times," said Souder. Souder added, "If he can survive the initial beating in the early states, and keep his cool without lecturing people or implying they aren't smart enough to understand, I think he has an excellent chance." Jeb Bush's struggles have potentially created an opening for Kasich, another Republican governor in his 60's. After flirting with a run for most of the year, Kasich has now hired a senior team of advisers that includes one of the men who helped John McCain nearly beat George W. Bush in 2000. He's beginning to get the kind of exposure a potential candidate needs, too. The Ohio governor, along with several other candidates, will speak on Friday in Park City, Utah at Mitt Romney's annual gathering of influential GOP donors and other figures. Kasich could be an appealing alternative to Republicans who like Jeb Bush's political approach but are wary that he could be derailed because of the baggage attached to the Bush name. The Ohio governor, like Bush, was twice elected in a key swing state that Republicans desperately need if they want to win the White House. Kasich is also a more moderate conservative in the Jeb Bush mold. He is a supporter of the Common Core education standards and an occasional critic of Tea Party conservatives. He also backs a path to legalization for undocumented immigrants. "I think he is smarter and has more knowledge of the issues than Walker and Rubio," said John Feehery, who was a top aide on Capitol Hill when Kasich ran the House Budget Committee. Kasich is to the left of even Bush on some issues. He has set a goal that at least 15 percent of the companies hired for contracts by the Ohio state government be minority-owned. And his decision in 2013 to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act remains a deep concern on the right. Conservatives are bitter that Kasich not only expanded Medicaid, as President Obama has urged governors across the country to do, but has cast those who opposed the move as being insufficiently Christian. He told National Journal earlier this year, "the conservative movement—a big chunk of which is faith-based—seems to have never read Matthew 25." (In this chapter of the Bible, Jesus urges his followers to care for the poor.) Erick Erickson, the conservative activist who runs the RedState blog, argues Kasich's comments are akin to saying, "Jesus wants him to expand government." But other Republicans find Kasich's demeanor a welcome change from overly cautious political rhetoric. "John's a Baby Boomer and tends to a little irreverent in conversation. I think it's kind of refreshing," said Tom Davis, a former Virginia congressman who also served in the House when Kasich. "Some people think it's not appropriate decorum. I don't look at that as being a jerk. I like candid," Davis added. Feehery agreed Kasich could overcome questions about his temperament. But he argued that even with Bush's struggles, the ex-Florida governor and the other candidates have spent months courting the GOP's major donors, making it hard for Kasich to raise money. "I would put him in the top tier, if he can get the money," said Feehery. But Kasich's personality is already emerging as an issue. After the Ohio governor met with journalists from the Concord Monitor last week, the New Hampshire paper noted, "the prickly Republican began with a tone of irritability." Fifty minutes into the interview, Kasich suggested that he was bored, even though a key part of his campaign strategy is winning in New Hampshire, where voters are more moderate. "I'm getting ready to be done with this," he told the reporters. "Are we getting close?" *CARSON* *Ben Carson doesn’t want to talk about ‘the gay issue’ <http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/ben-carson-doesnt-want-talk-about-the-gay-issue> // MSNBC // Adam Howard – June 11, 2015 * Dr. Ben Carson, the retired neurosurgeon and conservative candidate for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination, is sick and tired of discussing “the gay issue.” During an appearance Wednesday on CNN, Carson brushed aside questions regarding discrimination against the LGBT community, arguing that there are “more important” subjects worth delving into. “I don’t really want to talk about the gay issue,” Carson told CNN’s Brianna Keilar. “Except maybe you can get the answer for this question: ‘What position can a person take who has no animosity toward gay people, but believes in the traditional definition of marriage that would be acceptable?’” “I think the Constitution protects every single American,” he added. “Everybody has equal rights, nobody has extra rights.” Carson has a history of making incendiary remarks about the LGBT community. Earlier on Wednesday, he told Fox News’ Bret Baier that he gets “irritated” when people equate gay rights with equal rights. In March, he was widely ridiculed for suggesting that men who enter prison straight can “come out” gay, while insisting that homosexuality is a choice. Although Carson eventually walked back those remarks, he has consistently sparked controversy with his off-the-cuff musings about the sex lives of LGBT people. Earlier this year, he even suggested that bakers might poison wedding cakes if they were forced to make them for same-sex couples. In 2013, after he publicly compared same-sex marriage to bestiality and pedophilia, Carson was forced to withdraw from a planned commencement speech at his alma mater, John Hopkins University. “Someday in the future, it is my hope and prayer that the emphasis on political correctness will decrease and we will start emphasizing rational discussion of differences so we can actually resolve problems and chart a course that is inclusive of everyone,” Carson said at the time. On Wednesday on CNN, Carson said that “Every group faces some type of discrimination,” adding, “Christians face a lot of discrimination. I wish we would talk more about that.” *Ben Carson’s hot mess of a campaign: A predictably dysfunctional mish-mash of fire-breathing rhetoric and insane policy ideas <http://www.salon.com/2015/06/11/ben_carsons_hot_mess_of_a_campaign_a_predictably_dysfunctional_mish_mash_of_fire_breathing_and_insane_policy_ideas/> // Salon // Simon Maloy – June 11, 2015 * Ben Carson’s presidential campaign continues to flawlessly meet expectations, which is to say that it is a fiery catastrophe of failure, greed, and embarrassment. There was really no other way this situation could play out. Carson’s political celebrity was never rooted in anything meaningful – conservatives fell in love with him because he insults President Obama and refuses to be “politically correct.” The Wall Street Journal editorial board encouraged Carson to run for the White House for no other reason than his willingness to say things that are “un-PC.” And, not surprisingly, Carson’s attempt to transform this crude, superficial appeal into an actual political movement has been disastrous. Carson has officially been in the 2016 race for just over a month, and already his candidacy is falling apart. The Washington Post reported last week that several top staffers have already resigned from the campaign, which “has been marked by signs of dysfunction and amateurism.” A big part of that dysfunction seems to be that Carson’s political orbit is populated by opportunists who are at least as interested in cashing in on the Carson boomlet as they are in electing him president. Instead of working in sync, Carson’s aides and supporters fighting with each other with as they work to grab as much cash as they can: Two independent super PACs designed to help Carson are instead competing directly with Carson’s campaign for donations and volunteers, while campaign chairman Terry Giles resigned last month with the intention of forming a third super PAC. Giles said he intends to try to persuade the other two super PACs, called Run Ben Run and One Vote, to cease operations so that all outside efforts can be coordinated through the new group. But with Carson’s brand a galvanizing force on the right, there are potentially millions of dollars to be raised off his name, and the other super PACs are said to be reluctant to shut down. As for Carson himself, he’s apparently none too interested in the toxic internal fights that are sabotaging his campaign apparatus. “Carson occasionally drops by his Alexandria campaign headquarters,” the Post noted, “but his main interaction with staffers is once a week, at 10 a.m. on Sundays, when he participates in a conference call.” He’d rather be out on the trail, talking to voters, and proposing bad, confusing policy ideas that aren’t really tethered to any sort of ideology, or even to common sense. Yesterday, according to MSNBC, Carson floated the idea of a “covert division” of government employees that would “monitor what government people do” and make sure they’re doing their jobs, or something. It’s an idea that’s rooted in a conservative caricature of government employees as parasitic loafers who just sit in their cubicles all day laughing as they count the money they’re stealing from hardworking taxpayers who have real jobs. If you’re a conservative who has a problem with the size and complexity of the federal government, I’m not sure why you’d support an expansion of the federal workforce (and an extra layer of bureaucracy) as a means to fix it. A spokesman for Carson tried to clarify what he meant: “Covert division? More like Secret Shopper, a quality control strategy used worldwide to improve customer service and customer care.” It’s not immediately apparent how a strategy used to improve customer service would apply to people in white-collar jobs, but whatever. It’s an idea. But again, this idea isn’t meant to conform to ideology and it’s not intended as a serious policy proposal – it’s just another of the crude appeals to right-wing resentment that seems to be Carson’s sole political talent. The question that arises from all this dysfunction and nonsense is: how long can he keep this up? Right now he’s pulling decent crowds at Iowa events and his national poll numbers are, for the moment, inching upwards. But that won’t last with a shambolic campaign apparatus and a platform based entirely on generating outrage. Carson’s approach to campaigning doesn’t seem to diverge too significantly to his life as a Fox News pundit: just go out there and be “un-PC” and something something congratulations President-Elect Carson. *Ben Carson: ‘The people are frustrated — they’re waking up’ <http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/11/ben-carson-people-are-frustrated-theyre-waking/> // The Washington Times // David Sherfinski – June 11, 2015 * Retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson appears to be heartened by recent polling on the 2016 GOP field that’s put the political neophyte near the top of a crowded set of contenders. “The people are frustrated — they’re waking up, and they have a lot more brains than people think they do,” Mr. Carson told Fox News’ Bret Baier. “I can’t tell you how many times [I’ve] faced situations where people say, ‘He can’t do that. No one’s ever done that.’ If I listened to that stuff, I wouldn’t be talking to you right now.” Mr. Carson is currently fourth in RealClearPolitics’ average of recent public polling on the Republican field at 9 percent, behind former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush at 11.3 percent, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker at 10.8 percent and Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida at 10.3 percent. “As you can see from the polling, the people are convinced to a large degree, and 40 percent of ‘em still don’t even know who I am,” Mr. Carson said. *FIORINA* *Fiorina's campaign-trail attacks leave out her own ties to Clinton <http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-fiorina-clinton-ties-20150611-story.html> // LA Times // Joseph Tanfani – June 11, 2015 * In a crowd of Republican presidential contenders hammering away at Hillary Rodham Clinton, no one has been more relentless than Carly Fiorina. In speeches and media interviews, some of them while shadowing Clinton on the campaign trail, the former Hewlett-Packard chief executive has attacked the Clintons’ family foundation for a lack of transparency amid reports that it accepted money from foreign governments. “She is not trustworthy,” Fiorina says in a video on her website, itself named ReadytoBeatHillary.com. In a Facebook post, Fiorina excoriated the Clintons for accepting donations from foreign governments “while making promises about transparency that they never intended to keep.” What else don’t we know? What don’t we know about your donors?” she asked Wednesday on Fox News about the Clintons’ charitable efforts. “What don’t we know about the conflicts of interest that those donors represent?” But in Fiorina’s own philanthropic ventures, one of the key points of her resume as a White House hopeful, she has had a friendlier relationship with the Clintons and their foundation than she highlights on the campaign trail. And, in pressing for help for women around the globe, Fiorina is more similar to Hillary Clinton than she admits. The discrepancies show how personal and professional ties can complicate life on the campaign trail for well-connected people like Fiorina, who also unsuccessfully ran for Senate in California in 2010. One Fiorina charitable effort, a campaign to fund women’s empowerment projects around the globe, went forward with help from the State Department when Clinton was secretary. And Fiorina has roles in two charities that participated in projects that became commitments with the Clinton Global Initiative, one of the organizations in the Clintons’ worldwide philanthropic network in which charities and companies announce partnerships to pledge action on social projects. She has also twice participated in Clinton Global Initiative events. In 2013, she spoke on a small panel that discussed how to boost female entrepreneurship. Last year, she appeared with former President Clinton and three other people on a televised panel discussion on how best to pull people out of poverty. Fiorina at times sparred with the former president and criticized Democratic economic policies, saying that the Obama administration “made the rich much richer.” But she also argued for the role of small business and praised the organization's work. “Seed capital, support, tools, energy -- all of the initiatives that the Clinton Global Initiative invests in to try and build Main Street entrepreneurship -- it has always been the hope of this country,” Fiorina said. A spokeswoman for Fiorina said she was “delighted” to participate in a session advocating for women who are entrepreneurs, and characterized the second discussion as “a debate with Bill Clinton.” Fiorina has contrasted her belief in transparency with Clinton’s, saying last month: “Unlike Hillary Clinton, I am not afraid to answer questions about my track record or beliefs.” She did not respond to follow-up questions about her involvement with the foundation or her work with the State Department. Bill Clinton, speaking at a Clinton Global Initiative conference on Wednesday, said the foundation had always considered itself nonpolitical and had hosted a number of Republican politicians, including Mitt Romney and John McCain. He didn’t mention Fiorina. Fiorina helped spark a charitable drive in 2008 called the One Woman Initiative, targeting women’s empowerment groups, mostly in Muslim countries. According to the organization, she set it up with help from the State Department, the U.S. Agency for International Development and then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. It took about a year to raise the money. By the time the approximately $500,000 in grants was released, in June 2009, President Obama was in the White House and Clinton was secretary of State. The initiatives included a microfinance program in Pakistan, a conflict-resolution program in the Philippines and an economic development program in India. The initiative aimed to distribute grants with the help of corporate sponsors, and with support from the Department of State and USAID. The agencies also declined to comment on the initiative. The Clinton Global Initiative draws together corporate and charity leaders for networking and to announce commitments to complete projects together. Fiorina is connected to two groups that participated in such programs. She is board chairman of Good360, a Virginia-based group that connects companies who want to donate goods with charities that need them. Hilton Worldwide made that program a Clinton Global Initiative commitment in 2013. Fiorina also is on the advisory board of the National Center for Entrepreneurship and Innovation, a group that wants to open a center celebrating inventors and entrepreneurs on the National Mall in Washington. That too was announced as a Clinton initiative commitment in 2013. But the plans have stalled, in part because the Smithsonian decided it couldn’t devote resources to the project, said Philip Auerswald, the group’s board chairman. The advisory board and Fiorina didn’t play a role in the decision to announce the project as a Clinton initiative commitment, he said, adding: “Carly has been nothing but supportive throughout this process.” *Carly Fiorina blasts media focus on her Hillary Clinton trolling <http://m.washingtonexaminer.com/carly-fiorina-blasts-media-focus-on-her-hillary-clinton-trolling/article/2566078> // The Washington Examiner // Ashe Schow – June 11, 2015 * GOP presidential candidate Carly Fiorina has been a tough critic of Democratic presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton, but to those who think she's spending too much time going after the former secretary of state, she says it isn't where the "bulk" of her attention goes. Fiorina noted during a press call Thursday that she has answered hundreds of questions since she announced she was running for president and has addressed any subject. "So it's simply not accurate to say that all I do is attack Hillary Clinton," Fiorina said in response to a Washington Examiner question. "That may be what the media pays attention to, but that certainly isn't where the bulk of my attention goes, either in my remarks with voters, or my conversations with voters, or my speeches or my Q&A." Fiorina also said that it didn't matter who the Democratic nominee for president ends up being, she'll oppose them on their policies. "And if, like Hillary Clinton, another nominee lacks a track record of leadership — I will point that out. And if, like Hillary Clinton, another nominee lacks a track record of transparency, I will point that out as well," Fiorina said. "Every single one of those things is fair game and it has nothing to do with her gender or my gender." Fiorina has received some criticism in recent weeks for her continued trolling of Clinton. Marc Ambinder of The Week said that Fiorina needs "to move beyond Clinton." Two weeks ago, reporters in South Carolina — where Fiorina gave a press conference outside of a Clinton event — wondered if she had more to offer than just bashing Clinton. Fiorina was defensive of the suggestion that she just attacks Clinton, adding that she will continue to address any and every issue. "The fact the media pays more attention to one thing than another is nothing I can do about that," Fiorina said. "I will continue to talk about all of the issues and continue to raise up a contrast between the policies that I think work best for this nation and the policies that the leftwing of the Democratic Party is pursuing." *OTHER* *Fox News Adds G.O.P. Candidate Forum Amid Criticism of Debate Plans <http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/11/obama-makes-surprise-trip-to-nats-park-to-lobby-pelosi/> // NYT // Maggie Haberman* Fox News has decided to add a “candidate forum” before the first Republican presidential debate on Aug. 6, after the network came under criticism for its criteria to winnow down the number of people onstage. The announcement from Fox News on Wednesday night came as The Union Leader, a New Hampshire newspaper, said it would host its own forum with C-Span amid concern over the debate rules. “As we noted when we first announced the debate criteria, our intention has always been to provide coverage to the wide field of Republican candidates and we are glad to present these details today,” said Michael Clemente, the executive vice president of Fox News. The forum will be moderated by two of the network’s anchors, Bill Hemmer and Martha MacCallum. The criteria for making it into the 90-minute forum is scoring 1 percent “or higher in an average of the five most recent national polls.” It will air in the afternoon, well ahead of prime time. Fox News has been heavily criticized by lower-polling Republicans for debate criteria for allowing only those among the top 10 in an average of polling onto the prime-time stage. Candidates have also expressed concern about the rules established by CNN, which is hosting the second debate in September. But CNN is planning a second debate as well, which will be shown in prime time for the lower-polling candidates. Joe McQuaid, publisher of The Union Leader, announced that the newspaper’s forum with C-Span will be held the same night as the Fox News debate. He indicated the new forum was in response to the limited debate rules planned by Fox News, which has already prompted some Republicans to consider maneuvers to try to maximize their polling numbers nationally but force them to bypass time spent in Iowa and New Hampshire, the first two early voting states in the nominating contest. “What Fox is attempting to do, and is actually bragging about doing, is a real threat to the first-in-the-nation primary,” Mr. McQuaid told The Union Leader. *The Koch brothers and the Republican Party go to war — with each other <https://www.yahoo.com/politics/the-koch-brothers-and-the-republican-party-go-to-121193159491.html> // Yahoo News // Jon Ward – June 11, 2015* The Republican National Committee’s data arm last yearcalled it a “historic” occasion when it struck a deal to share voter information with the Koch brothers’ rapidly expanding political empire. It was an uneasy détente between the party committee, which views itself as the rightful standard-bearer for the GOP, and the behemoth funded by Charles and David Koch, which is free of the campaign finance restrictions that bind the RNCand plans to spend almost $900 million in the 2016 election cycle to elect a Republican to the White House. Party leaders, including the current chief digital officer for the RNC, hailed the deal as an important step forward in the GOP’s attempt to modernize itself. But after the fall midterm elections, the deal was allowed to expire without being renewed. Since then, relations between the two sides have soured, turning into what one Republican operative described as “all-out war.” Interviews with more than three dozen people, including top decision-makers in both camps, have revealed that the Kochs’ i360 platform for managing voter contacts — which is viewed by many as a superior, easier-to-use interface than what’s on offer from the RNC — is becoming increasingly popular among Republican campaigns. The RNC is now openly arguing, however, that the Kochs’ political operation is trying to control the Republican Party’s master voter file, and to gain influence over — some even say control of — the GOP. “I think it’s very dangerous and wrong to allow a group of very strong, well-financed individuals who have no accountability to anyone to have control over who gets access to the data when, why and how,” said Katie Walsh, the RNC’s chief of staff. The Koch brothers and the Republican Party go to war — with each other The fight between the RNC’s chairman and the political operatives affiliated with Charles and David Koch over who controls the rich treasury of data on likely Republican voters has raised fundamental questions about what role the party’s central committee — even under the best management — can hope to play in the age of super-PACs. And it raises an even more fundamental question of how you define a political party. Super-PACs emerged as a major new force in the wake of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling in 2010. They now populate a political landscape that has been radically changed, leaving political parties weaker than they have ever been. Presiding over the RNC in this new era has been Reince Priebus, who by all accounts has had a successful run as chairman since 2011. He brought the committee out of debtand has been a prolific fundraiser. He has worked hard toreform the party primary calendar to prevent a protracted fight similar to the 2012 primary that exhausts the eventual nominee. He has exerted control over the presidential primary debates, taking a hard line against moderators from media outlets who are perceived to be biased against Republicans, though he is experiencing pushback over his attempts to limit the number of participants in debates. And he has infused the building with young, digital-savvy staffers and elevated the importance of data, analytics and new technologies inside the committee. Priebus believes the RNC is the proper custodian of the Republican Party’s master file on the nation’s electorate, which is used as a starting point for campaigns, who then use that information to build lists — called voter universes — of the people in a state or district that they want to target for both turnout and persuasion. Volunteers and donors are also targeted for recruitment using such lists. The core issue, from Priebus’ point of view, is one of loyalty and allegiance. The RNC is a permanent entity, committed to the Republican Party without question. The Koch network is too independent from the party to be trusted with possession of the GOP’s most valuable core assets. If the Kochs — whose political history is steeped more in libertarianism than it is in any loyalty to the Republican Party — decided next week to use their database to benefit only their massive multinational corporation, they could do so. The RNC, Walsh said, “has one job: to elect Republicans.” The Kochs’ political arm, Freedom Partners, which oversees i360, views the issue as one of capability. Koch aides — several of whom used to work at the RNC — want to win elections, and in their view the RNC has inherent challenges to helping the party win. Party committee fundraising is severely limited by federal election law, while building, maintaining and enriching a database is expensive. Michael Palmer, president of i360, emphasized in an email that his firm is a “private company that provides data, technology and analytical services to dozens of candidates, campaigns and other organizations that promote free market principles.” “Our clients own their own data and are free to share it as they see fit. We believe that a robust marketplace of political technology and data is a healthy way to advance past the single monopoly model that has failed the Republican Party in recent presidential elections,” Palmer said. Some in the Republican Party agree with Priebus’ point of view, believing the issue of allegiance to be fundamental. Others in the GOP, even some in highly consequential positions, think Priebus and the RNC are crying wolf. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) have been reluctant to conclude that i360 represents a threat to the party. And the problem for the RNC is that while it has political data going back roughly two decades, you need more than just data in order to be the data hub for a political party. And that is where the RNC has fallen short. Its data is good, and it has continued to enrich it and even to help campaigns and key battleground states build sophisticated voter universesthrough the work last year of a company called TargetPoint. But campaigns need to use data, not just have it on the shelf. “You can have all the data in the world, but if you can’t use it to go engage people, it’s not worth that much,” said Mike Moschella, vice president at NationBuilder, a nonpartisan company that specializes in building “communications systems” to talk to volunteers and voters through email, social media and targeted advertising. This is where companies like i360, as well as companies like NationBuilder, have gained an edge. In 2013 the RNCpromised to build a next-level system called Beacon. But so far Beacon is being used by only a small handful of state parties, Walsh said. About 40 state parties are still using the RNC dashboard that Beacon was built to replace, GOP Data Center, which was designed a few years ago by a company called FLS Connect. The most common complaint from those who do not like Data Center is that it is not easy for the average volunteer or field staffer to use. The RNC now acknowledges that it was slow to respond to the rise of i360. “There was a time when the party itself had not made the investments it needed to make and had rested on its laurels,” said one source who had firsthand knowledge of the RNC’s data operation. RNC chief strategist Sean Spicer and Walsh also said the RNC was not competitive enough with i360 over the past few years in giving campaigns and state parties tools to use the data. For as long as anyone could remember, the RNC had dispensed voter information to campaigns and state parties like a pharmacy, upon request. In modern campaigns, however, operatives want to manipulate the data themselves. “People were calling to get access to data and were being told just call us and we’ll send you a CD-ROM,” Spicer said. The source with firsthand knowledge of the RNC’s operations said that “the Koch world groups saw an opportunity where they were filling a vacuum.” After the 2012 election, i360 and others gained market share in Republican politics because the RNC spent much of 2013 deliberating over what it planned to do, and state parties and campaigns who wanted to start recruiting volunteers and building a universe of target voters needed a system to work with immediately. In addition, i360 was developed with user experience in mind; it built up an enriched voter file as time went on and its client list grew, providing more inputs. Like some of the most successful tech companies, from Facebook to Snapchat, it built an audience first and then expanded its offerings. During the 2014 election, a number of Senate campaigns used i360; i360 said it was 11 campaigns in all. This cycle the group says eight Senate campaigns are using its programs, including those of two of the most vulnerable Republican Senators up for reelection in 2016: Rob Portman (Ohio) and Kelly Ayotte (N.H.). It’s not clear, however, how many of those campaigns used i360 for most or all of their voter contact. Among the GOP presidential primary candidates, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) are using i360 data services exclusively, while former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) are building their own voter files. Former RNC chief technology officer Andy Barkett is a key player in the Bush operation, and his performance will be closely watched, since he was charged with building Beacon at the RNC. Barkett has told contemporaries that he was undermined at the RNC by FLS Connect and other private companies who didn’t want to lose business from the RNC. The RNC has signed data-sharing agreements with most of the 2016 candidates or likely candidates. And the RNC — as itdid in 2014 — is trying to discourage campaigns and state parties from signing up with i360, according to numerous conversations with people who have knowledge of such conversations. This was a tactic that irritated many people in 2014. But Walsh, the new chief of staff, appears to be setting a different tone that admits past shortcomings and focuses on the philosophical argument that the GOP’s data should be housed at a party committee, not at a private business empire. The RNC is now confronting the Kochs more openly than before, by having Walsh speak on the record for this article and by making other key players available for interviews. Their decision to take their dispute with i360 public shows the level of alarm inside the RNC at the growing clout of the Koch political empire. They have concluded that the Koch political machine wants to replace them and to essentially become a shadow party. “It’s pretty clear that they don’t want to work with the party but want to supplant it,” the source close to the RNC said. Adding to the rivalry, in January i360 poached the RNC’s chief digital officer, Chuck DeFeo, who had played a senior role within the party committee’s digital operation in 2013 and 2014. DeFeo’s departure was a surprise to the RNC, and his decision to work for a direct rival was not well-received in the fifth-floor suite of offices that house the committee’s top decision-makers. There was talk of having him escorted by security from the building, though that did not materialize. Palmer, the head of i360, said that his organization simply wants to be helpful to the Republican Party at large. “We have repeatedly expressed a willingness in working with the RNC, and we will continue to work with any organizations interested in advancing free markets and a free society,” he said. But Spicer said that i360 is trying to marginalize DataTrust — the RNC’s private sector arm — by offering to share information only with the RNC and not DataTrust. Cutting DataTrust out of the picture would possibly cement i360 as both the main platform provider to operatives in the field doing voter contact. As long as i360 and the RNC worked together, both entities would receive the same data from operatives and volunteers in the field knocking on doors and making calls. But if i360 achieved dominance as the user platform of choice for Republican operatives, and if its relationship with the RNC ever went south and data-sharing ended, the Kochs would continue to get the bulk of ongoing fresh data collection, while the RNC would have to scramble and might find itself well behind i360. The fear at the RNC is that this would give a private business empire the master voter file in Republican politics, and the party’s main committee would be reduced to that of playing a bit role. The RNC is currently telling state parties and campaigns that it is updating GOP Data Center to make it more user-friendly. Walsh said this would be ready in three to four weeks. However, critics of DataTrust, the RNC’s data arm, say that it is in serious financial trouble, and multiple sources — from Koch world to a major party committee to a source intimate with Republican congressional leadership — said that Priebus asked McConnell and Boehner to have their campaign committees give $1 million each to DataTrust to help with paying off debt. Both leaders were unreceptive, these sources said, believing a soft-money committee should be able to raise that kind of money from a few donors rather than having money from the committees — which is raised in much smaller amounts and harder to come by — transferred. A source close to the Republican congressional leadership said that DataTrust “has barely existed for the last two cycles” because of its inability to raise money. In mid-April, the RNC transferred $1.5 million to DataTrust. RNC and DataTrust officials characterized this transfer as routine business and denied that DataTrust has had any fundraising or debt problems. McConnell and Boehner, according to the congressional source, do not share Priebus’ concern that the Koch brothers could own the GOP’s master voter file in any way that held the party hostage. It would not be “as difficult as it sounds” for the GOP to reassemble its own file and its own voter contact apps if the partnership with i360 dissolved for some reason, the source said, adding, “Everybody needs to take a deep breath on this thing.” Walsh, the RNC chief of staff, had a different version of events. She said there was a meeting held last year where DataTrust president John DeStefano updated a room full of Republicans on the latest business plan for his organization and that one idea discussed was to have the National Republican Senatorial Committee and the National Republican Congressional Committee contract directly with DataTrust as a show of support for the organization. “One of top bullet points was, ‘i360 is gaining market share and how do we publicly show that the federal party committees are behind the DataTrust model?’” Walsh said. “It was not, ‘We’re out of money.’” Prior to 2010, the NRSC and NRCC had contributed $1 million each to the RNC for data infrastructure costs, and Walsh said that prior model was interpreted by some to be what DeStefano and others were proposing. But, she said, “there was no dollar amount” mentioned. “By no means did that imply a $1 million contribution,” Walsh said. The result of all this infighting is that for the moment, Republican campaigns and even state parties are Balkanized between different approaches on which database to use and how to use it. The Kochs’ i360 is the superior user platform with a rapidly growing adoption rate among campaigns, while the RNC’s data is available to all who want it and is the de facto database for RNC field personnel who are placed in key states. DataTrust has an exclusive agreement to swap data with the RNC and has a client relationship with outside groups such as American Crossroads, the American Action Network and the National Rifle Association. Even some state parties have chosen to use i360 instead of, or in addition to, the RNC’s system in their elections. “We used i360 a lot. We didn’t really get into the DataTrust issue,” said Joe Cluster, executive director of the Maryland Republican Party, which helped get Gov. Larry Hogan elected in a deep blue state last fall. “Maryland wasn’t one of the states [the RNC was] prioritizing for getting that data up to speed.” “Every time I sent [the RNC] a voter file, it took them three weeks to upload,” Cluster said. “They weren’t updating our data as quick as other people.” In Florida, another key battleground state, the state party is using NationBuilder for some of its needs and is also getting some predictive models from i360. But Florida is one of the clearest examples that there is a belief among some in Republican politics that the data they glean in the field should go back to the Republican National Committee. They are going out of their way to make sure that any information they collect using NationBuilder goes back to DataTrust. And while they are using some of the i360 information, they are intentionally not using the Koch brothers’ tools for voter outreach, because they want to use the RNC’s Data Center. Florida’s choices are driven in large part by a belief that the RNC is the more appropriate repository for political data than the Kochs, according to a source with knowledge of the state party’s thinking. Other state parties are using the RNC’s voter file but have built their own dashboards to use instead of FLS Connect’s Data Center, the clearest indication that for those who have the money, time and expertise, the RNC’s user interface of choice has not been as good as some would like it to be. The Michigan Republican Party last cycle spent between $500,000 and $1 million to build its own dashboard. Ohio’s GOP hired a close friend of Gov. John Kasich, venture capitalist Mark Kvamme, to build a system for them. Both systems bypassed the FLS Connect product and accessed the RNC’s file at DataTrust directly. One Republican data operative who worked in Florida during the 2012 election said that because FLS Connect’s Data Center is “not a good user interface, [the RNC doesn’t] get enough credit.” “They have really good data. And they’re making it really easy for people who know what to do with it to get at it,” he said. The challenge for most state parties and campaigns is that they don’t have the money or the expertise to build their own dashboard systems with which to access the RNC’s data. The relevance of these questions to who wins and loses elections is often debated. In a wave midterm election like 2014, it may be insignificant. But in a presidential election, when the presidency can be decided in one or two swing states, or in a closely contested Senate or congressional race, a superior data and technology operation can be an important advantage. Many Republicans believe that having a presidential nominee will solve most of the problems with infighting over data and bring coherence and cohesion. In 2008, President Obama insisted that Democrats get onboard with a company called NGP VAN and use their Votebuilder system — which is built on top of the master voter file housed at the Democratic National Committee — to interact with voters, building a more concerted system of inputs into one voter file. But it could be that the GOP may not get on the same page until there is an incumbent Republican president who has the time and money before a reelection campaign to insist that the party row in the same direction. *'16 At 30 Thousand <http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/lid-bush-staunch-conservative-n373941> // NBC // Carrie Dann & Andrew Rafferty – June 11, * *2015* In a crowded Republican presidential field composed of candidates like Ted Cruz, Ben Carson and Mike Huckabee, Jeb Bush often gets painted as a moderate. After all, he's the (expected) candidate who supports Common Core and has taken a softer stance on immigration than nearly any other Republican running in 2016. But recent reporting on passages in his 1995 book "Profiles in Character" -- and his response to questions about it today -- is a good reminder that the former Florida governor is very conservative when it comes to social issues. Bush wrote in 1995 that single mothers are on the rise because there is "no longer a stigma attached to this behavior" and "parents and neighbors have become ineffective at attaching some sense of ridicule to this behavior." And in 2001, he declined to veto a bill that required unwed mothers who did not know the paternity of a child to publish their sexual histories in the newspaper before being able to put their child up for adoption.(He did sign the bill with the understanding that the publication provision would be changed, and he later signed a repeal of the law after it was challenged in court.) Asked about the issue while in Warsaw today, Bush said, "My views have evolved over time, but my views about the importance of dads being involved in the lives of children hasn't changed at all." Remember, this is the governor who intervened to keep Terri Schiavo alive on life support in the early 2000s. From a GOP primary perspective, Bush may look like a moderate for his views on education and support for a path to legal status for undocumented workers. But from a general election perspective, if Bush ever makes it that far, aspects of his record on social issues would put him squarely on the right. *With Clinton bound for Sioux City, GOP piles on <http://siouxcityjournal.com/blogs/politically_speaking/article_cc58f953-86df-53bd-9d5b-ea0635e0fb1b.html#.VXnz4gC_Yrw.twitter> // Sioux City Journal // Bret Hayworth – June 11, 2015 * With Hillary Clinton bound for her third trip in Iowa, Republican Party officials are working to offset the message of the former first lady many presume will end up as the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee. Clinton on Saturday will hold a house party at a Sioux City residence, then on Sunday will hold her first traditional town hall meeting of the cycle in Des Moines. The Republican National Committee is ramping up with a 30-second ad, titled "Wrong For America," that will hit Facebook and other digital options in Sioux City and Des Moines. The RNC says Hillary's latest swing, coined as a campaign launch rally with a New York City event prior to coming to Iowa (she first became a candidate on April 12), shows she has had a clunky start to her campaign. "Hillary Clinton’s latest campaign reset won’t change a thing. She still refuses to answer the serious questions surrounding her finances, her family foundation, and her secret email server," said RNC Chairman Reince Priebus said. Additionally, the Iowa Republican Party will hold a Saturday event in Sioux City, where Central Committee Member Cody Hoefert, of Lyon County, will describe why he thinks Clinton would be a poor president. Clinton's Iowa Press Secretary Patrick Burgwinkle said Clinton is enthused to see more Iowans, via her first stop in 2015 in Northwest Iowa. It may not handle a huge crowd, but the house party will undoubtedly pack as many local Democrats as possible. It also will be simulcast nationally. "From Day 1 this campaign has said that we value Iowa and we want to get out there and listen to Iowans," Burgwinkle said. *Republicans release anti-Hillary Clinton ad ahead of her Charleston visit next week <http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20150611/PC1603/150619883> // The Post & Carrier // Schuyler Kropf – June 11, 2015* The Republican National Committee is releasing a second digital ad targeting Hillary Clinton in advance of her second campaign trip to South Carolina. Clinton will be in Charleston on Wednesday. The 30-second GOP ad targets Clinton for “her clunky rollout and how she’s dishonest, out-of-touch, and untrustworthy.” “The ad is part of a campaign by the RNC to target and recruit voters who want to Stop Hillary Clinton,” promotional material says. The ads are slated to run in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada when Clinton travels to those states. “Hillary Clinton’s latest campaign reset won’t change a thing. She still refuses to answer the serious questions surrounding her finances, her family foundation, and her secret email server,” said RNC Chairman Reince Priebus. Clinton’s South Carolina campaign, meanwhile, issued a status update that included assembling 2,484 signed commit to vote cards, and 120 grassroots campaign events, including 59 phone banks. “What she said basically was put families first and if you do that and if you do what’s right for families the rest of it will follow,” said Clinton supporter Jane Pulling of Pinopolis. The Clinton campaign has not confirmed where her Charleston appearance will be but it is expected to have a college education theme. *Romney Hosting GOP Hopefuls at Utah Retreat <http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/06/11/romney_hosting_gop_hopefuls_at_utah_retreat_126945.html> // RealClearPolitics // Courtney Such – June 11, 2015 * The climbing trip is just one of the many activities planned for Romney’s annual E2 Summit – a networking event being held Thursday-Saturday for current and future candidates to mix and mingle with business executives, possible campaign donors, and each other. (E2 stands for “experts and enthusiasts.”) Sens. Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio, Govs. Chris Christie, John Kasich, and Scott Walker, and Carly Fiorina are either already there or will be soon. Walker was among the first to arrive but did not look dressed for an adventure. The guest list also includes New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte, former Obama adviser David Axelrod, newswoman Katie Couric, former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, General Electric CEO Jeffrey Immelt, Walmart CEO Lee Scot; former NBA Commissioner David Stern, and Hewlett-Packard CEO Meg Whitman, according to an AP report. “It’s a good chance for 2016 candidates. … We brought in a lot of our donors; they can meet people, get to know them, and sell them on why they think they’re the best candidate,” the Boston Globe reported Romney’s son Tagg saying Wednesday night in preparation for the event. Aside from networking, this year’s E2 agenda includes flag football, skeet shooting, yoga, horseback riding, and a hot air balloon ride, according to ABC News. Romney also hopes to share a little bit of campaign wisdom on what not to do during the presidential race. “I think there’s a lot you can learn from talking with a candidate who has run and won, but there’s also a lot you can learn from a candidate who has run and lost,” Craig Robinson, former political director of the Republican Party of Iowa, told The Hill. “There were clearly problems with the Romney campaign, but if you get into [an event like this] you can really expand your knowledge base,” he added. Although Romney’s days as a candidate are behind him, his efforts to have an influence on the nation’s leadership are not over. “I have come away more optimistic about America. It is the failing of White House leadership that concerns me, and that must change. I lost the election, but I will continue to fight,” Romney said in his 2013 E2 Summit address. As for what the presidential hopefuls want to get out of the retreat, they’ve largely been mum. “The Governor is attending on behalf of Leadership Matters for America PAC,” and the trip is “not a part of a campaign,” Samantha Smith wrote RCP in an email on behalf of Gov. Christie. Marco Rubio’s team did not wish to comment, either, due to the private nature of the event. A spokesman for Graham, however, told RCP in an email the South Carolina senator “is looking forward to discussing the importance of American leadership in the world and how a strong global presence keeps our nation safe.” *TOP NEWS* *DOMESTIC* *Trade Fight Goes to the Wire <http://www.wsj.com/articles/left-and-right-line-up-against-fast-track-trade-legislation-1434015003> // WSJ // Siobhan Hughes, Kristina Peterson & William Mauldin – June 11, 2015 * Supporters and foes of President Barack Obama’s bid to craft a sweeping Pacific trade deal waged furious, last-ditch campaigns hours before decisive votes set for Friday in the House. The vote over whether to grant the president the power to expedite trade pacts looks set to be razor-thin, with serious consequences for all sides. Victory would mark a triumph for the White House, Republican congressional leaders and the business community, and a sharp blow to the unions who have pulled out all stops to defeat the bill. The chief opponents in the fight—labor unions and progressive groups on one side and the Obama administration on the other—converged on Congress Thursday to appeal to a Democratic caucus torn over the benefits of trade and its impact on American jobs. Capital Journal is WSJ.com’s home for politics, policy and national security news. After that, AFL-CIO Chief Richard Trumka, who represents millions of union workers, urged Democrats to vote against both the fast-track bill and a worker’s aid program that pays to retrain workers who lost their jobs to trade—aid labor has favored for decades. “Nothing is off the table” in the trade fight, Mr. Trumka said earlier this week. Labor opposes the assistance as it appears in the current bill for a larger aim: because ending it would likely scuttle the elaborate package designed to grease passage of the fast-track legislation Mr. Obama needs to complete the Pacific deal. Unions say that deal would promote inadequate labor standards, threaten U.S. jobs and give companies incentives to move jobs abroad. The battle between the White House and the party’s progressive wing overshadowed the first step in a multipart plan by House Republican leaders aimed at getting to a Friday vote on the fast-track bill. Approval of fast-track would give Mr. Obama the authority to submit trade deals to Congress for an up-or-down vote without amendments, as previous presidents have done. Such power would ease passage of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a deal among the U.S. and 11 other nations to liberalize trade across nearly 40% of the world economy. “I have talked to the president,” House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio) said Thursday. “He’s working at this. And I hope his efforts are successful.” Supporters of the trade bill overcame an initial hurdle Thursday when the House overwhelmingly passed a trade preferences bill that was designed to accommodate new concerns among Democrats about how the workers’ aid program—known as Trade Adjustment Assistance—was to be funded. But the party’s progressive wing wasn’t assuaged, raising a fresh set of concerns and setting up another obstacle for a fast-track bill that has already faced many of them. Democrats had earlier threatened to vote against the workers-aid program because it was to be paid for with cuts to Medicare providers. Under a deal negotiated over the course of the week by Mr. Boehner and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.), a new funding mechanism was included in the package of trade preferences for sub-Saharan Africa. It set out that the aid would be paid for by cracking down on tax fraud and boosting tax compliance. The new provision was aimed at allowing Democrats to vote for trade legislation on Friday without worrying that they would be criticized for voting for Medicare cuts. Mr. Trumka, the labor leader, worked to undercut the strategy, at one point likening Democrats who voted for the workers’ aid program to lost souls. “He didn’t get into any hard-line threats,” said Rep. Peter DeFazio (D., Ore.) “He just thanked those who were with him…and he said he would pray for the rest.” The White House made its own tough case, arguing that unless Democrats voted for the workers’ aid program, the program would expire at the end of the fiscal year. “We need to treat this moment for what it is: a life-or-death moment for TAA,” Mr. Lew told Democrats, according to an aide in the room. “If you’re a member of Congress, and you vote against Trade Adjustment Assistance this week, you are adding your name to the death certificate of Trade Adjustment Assistance because it will go away,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest said later. Thursday’s scuffles in the House are just one front in a much larger, district-by-district fight that has targeted lawmakers across the country. Fierce opponents of the trade bill on the left and right have sent notably similar messages in a bid to thwart the legislation. Unions and progressive groups are emphasizing arguments that also appeal to conservative organizations, accusing the Obama administration of undue secrecy, stretching the limits of executive power and undermining U.S. sovereignty. “The left is using the language I use,” said Richard Manning, president of Americans for Limited Government, a conservative group that is working to defeat fast-track legislation. The Stop Fast Track coalition, backed by unions and groups such as the Sierra Club and the American Civil Liberties Union, is asking the public to call members of Congress and tell them the legislation is “undemocratic”—a message that appeals to voters of both parties. “There are some areas where the guys on the left—unions and others—get it right, and this is one of those issues,” said Judson Phillips, head of Tea Party Nation, one of the main tea party organizations. Leaders of left-leaning and conservative groups aren’t working hand in hand—an approach that would likely backfire in today’s polarized capital—but their combined message is forcing Mr. Obama and Republican leaders who back the fast-track bill to fight a two-front war as they seek to corral the final votes. Backed by Republican leadership, Mr. Obama says the Pacific pact, which includes Japan and Vietnam, would increase U.S. influence in the fast-growing region, promoting U.S.-favored commercial rules of the road as an alternative to China’s economic system. The plan is for the House to hold two fast-track votes Friday, one on the portion of the Senate bill that deals with worker aid legislation—funded by cuts to Medicare providers—followed by one on the part of the bill providing fast-track powers to Mr. Obama. The two issues were split up in a procedural maneuver known as “dividing the question” to allow conservatives opposed to the workers aid to vote against it. If the worker aid portion is defeated, the fast-track vote wouldn’t be held and House leaders would have to regroup. That scenario loomed larger on Thursday, alarming the White House and setting off a scramble to avoid that defeat. But if the House passes the aid portion, it would then move on to fast-track, which promises to be one of the most suspenseful—and consequential—votes of Mr. Obama’s second term. House passage of the two parts of the Senate-passed measure would send it directly to Mr. Obama for his signature. *Democrats block cyber bill, leaving measure in limbo <http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/democrats-cybersecurity-cyber-bill-block-limbo-gop-amendments-118890.html> // Politico // Tal Kopan – June 11, 2015 * Democrats made good on their threats to block a bipartisan cybersecurity bill on Thursday, after they were infuriated by Republican procedural moves to pass the bill with only limited amendments, something Democrats called a “cynical ploy.” The partisan blowup marked a stunning turn for legislation that’s enjoyed broad support. The measure had gained new urgency after the Office of Personnel Management announced 4 million federal employees’ records had been breached — at the hands of Chinese hackers, according to anonymous federal officials. Privacy advocates in both parties had wanted to strengthen personal data protections in the measure, but Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s (R-Ky.) procedural gambit made it next to impossible to make those changes. So Democrats and libertarian-leaning Republicans banded together to defeat McConnell’s plan to attach the cyberthreat information sharing legislation to the National Defense Authorization Act days. The procedural vote was 56-40, with McConnell needing 60 votes to advance the cyber bill. The majority of Democrats were joined by several Republicans, including Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Dean Heller (R-Nev.), to block the bill from moving forward. On the other side, a handful of Democrats, including Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), Mark Warner (D-Va.) and Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), voted with McConnell to advance the cyber measure. Senate Intelligence Committee ranking member Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) was the bellwether for Democrats on the bill. Despite having co-authored the measure, she opposed cloture and emerged from Thursday party lunches confident Democrats were closely aligned against advancing the amendment. “We don’t oppose the bill, we just want it to come separately,” Feinstein said. “I think putting it on the defense bill doesn’t really make any sense. The cyber bill will take time. You just can’t pretend it’s an amendment that you can do in an hour. You can’t do it. It’s going to take debate, members want to express themselves, concerns want to be raised, and some of us want an opportunity to be able to say why certain things were done so that everybody knows.” What happens next for the bill is unclear. The information sharing bill was expected to come to the floor as a standalone measure toward the end of the month before the McConnell move this week to attach it to the NDAA. Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas) told reporters he wasn’t sure what would happen after Democrats sustained a filibuster: “We have a Plan A and a Plan B, and Plan B is Plan A,” he said. “I am astonished that just after, what, it’s 4 million Americans’ records have been hacked at the Office of Personnel Management that they would not recognize the cyberthreat as real and something we need to deal with,” Cornyn added. “The president, as I recall, was just recently chastising Congress for not dealing with this, so we are, we have and we are, and I think it’s irresponsible to try to block it.” Both sides accused the other of playing politics. Republicans said Democrats were being hypocrites for opposing cybersecurity legislation and Democrats threw the charge back at the GOP for attaching cybersecurity to a bill that has earned a presidential veto threat — though the NDAA has become law each year for decades. Emotions ran high on the floor Thursday morning, as McConnell and Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) fired increasingly harsh criticisms at each other. “Most Americans would find it awfully cynical for Democrat leaders — in the wake of the Administration’s inability — inability — to stop such a massive cyberattack — to vote against the very same cybersecurity legislation their own party vetted and overwhelmingly endorsed in committee,” McConnell said. “This speech that my friend gave, I would suggest he walk into his office, his little bathroom there, walk in and look in the mirror, because over that mirror, he should be able to see the words hypocrisy and cynicism,” Reid fired back. Reid called the move to attach the amendment to the bill a “cynical” and “deceitful ploy.” In fact, the cyber bill isn’t as controversial as Thursday’s rhetoric would suggest. The basic idea is to give companies protections from lawsuits so they can share cyberthreat data with each other and with government. The House overwhelmingly passed similar legislation in April. But some Democrats and libertarian-leaning Republicans have opposed the bill as written, calling it a surveillance measure masquerading as a cybersecurity bill. While none have believed they have the votes to stop the bill’s passage outright, even some of the Democrats who voted to advance the bill in the Intelligence Committee believed there would be an opportunity to offer amendments bolstering the privacy protections in the bill when it came to the floor. *Dennis Hastert pleads not guilty on all counts <http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/09/politics/dennis-hastert-arraignment-appearing-in-court/index.html> // CNN // Chris Frates, Bill Kirkos and Tom LoBianco – June 11, 2015 * Former House Speaker Dennis Hastert has pleaded not guilty to all charges related to lying to the FBI about $3.5 million he agreed to pay to an undisclosed subject to "cover up past misconduct." Hastert was arraigned in court in Chicago on Tuesday afternoon, amid reports he allegedly sexually abused former students. The former House speaker has hired high-profile white collar crime lawyer Thomas Green to defend him in court. Green has defended clients involved in Watergate, Iran Contra and Whitewater. Judge Thomas Durkin is allowing Hastert to be released on a pretrial release. Hastert had to sign and appearance bond of $4,500 which he forfeits if he fails to appear. He was also barred from carrying firearms, had to surrender his passport and cooperate in giving a sample of DNA. Hastert faces charges of lying to federal investigators and hiding bank transactions as part of a plan to pay $3.5 million in hush money to one of his victims, identified only as "Individual A". Law enforcement sources confirmed a second alleged victim was interviewed by them and the sister of a third alleged victim told ABC that her brother had been molested by Hastert. Hastert worked as a high school teacher and wrestling coach before starting his career in politics. By the time he retired, in 2007, Hastert was the third most powerful public official in the U.S. (behind the president and vice president). During his time atop the House, Hastert oversaw an internal investigation of then-U.S. Rep. Mark Foley, who had been accused of sexually harassing male pages. A few years after he left the House, according to the indictment against Hastert, he was approached by "Individual A" and agreed to pay $3.5 million to cover up "past misconduct". From 2010-2014, Hastert paid $1.7 million to the person, avoiding bank reporting requirements in the process. Hastert returned to his Plano, Ill. home Monday night. ABC News reported that Hastert had been at his Wisconsin vacation home before returning to Illinois. *INTERNATIONAL* *Obama Looks at Adding Bases and Troops in Iraq, to Fight ISIS* <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/12/world/middleeast/iraq-isis-us-military-bases-martin-e-dempsey.html>* // NYT //Peter Baker, Helene Cooper & Michael r. Gordon – June 11, 2015* President Obama is open to expanding the American military footprint in Iraq with a network of bases and possibly hundreds of additional troops to support Iraqi security forces in their fight against the Islamic State, White House officials said on Thursday. As Iraqi forces struggle on the battlefield, aides said Mr. Obama would consider establishing a series of outposts where American advisers would work with Iraqi troops and local tribesmen. The bases would be run by Iraqis, and Americans would still not engage in ground combat, but they would play a more active role closer to the front lines. White House officials stressed that no proposal has been presented to Mr. Obama and added that they anticipated no decision in the next few weeks. But the prospect of further escalation came a day after the administration announced the opening of a new base in Anbar Province, an Islamic State stronghold, with an additional 450 American troops, bringing the total in Iraq to 3,550 — the size of a typical Army brigade. Administration officials said they would evaluate whether that new Anbar base makes a difference in coordinating the war effort and, if it does, would consider replicating the approach in other parts of the country. Although officials said it was possible other bases could be opened without again sending more American troops, they acknowledged that more bases could require additional deployments. For Mr. Obama, who has long resisted being drawn into another ground war since pulling out all forces in 2011, the latest developments represented another incremental step back into a sectarian conflict he had once hoped to be done with by the time he left office. Supporters of a more robust effort against the Islamic State called it a welcome if inadequate step to make good on the White House’s vow to defeat the Islamic State, while critics warned of sliding into a broader, bloodier and ultimately ineffective campaign. “The reason that we would consider expanding the training operation and the advise-and-assist operation that’s underway will be because it’s been an effective element of our strategy,” said Josh Earnest, the White House press secretary. But Mr. Earnest emphasized that it was still “very hypothetical” and that “there are no immediate or specific plans to do that.” Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, publicly raised the idea of establishing a network of what he called “lily pads” in Iraq while on a trip to Italy on Thursday. He said he did not envision another military base in Anbar, but Pentagon planners were looking at more northern areas for additional sites. “You could see one in the corridor from Baghdad to Tikrit to Kirkuk to Mosul,” General Dempsey told reporters aboard his plane. The model would be the new base already being built at Al Taqqadum, an Iraqi post near the town of Habbaniya in eastern Anbar. The American troops being sent there are to set up the hub primarily to advise and assist Iraqi forces and to engage and reach out to Sunni tribes in Anbar, officials said. One focus for the Americans will be to try to accelerate the integration of Sunni fighters into the Iraqi Army, which is dominated by Shiites. As the arrangements at Al Taqqadum show, even deploying small teams of advisers at a new base can involve much greater troop commitments. The number of Americans actually involved in advising the Iraqis at the base would be just a small fraction of the 450 announced by the administration. While American officials said earlier this week that 110 would be directly involved in training and advising, on Thursday they said there would be just 50 advisers. They will be split into two teams, Special Forces who will work with Sunni tribes, and advisers who will work with the 8th Iraqi Army Division. The rest are to provide support, logistics and force protection. Although the goal is to retake the city of Ramadi, which fell to the Islamic State last month, General Dempsey indicated that an effort may be months away. He said it would take several weeks for the initial command and control center to be set up at Al Taqqadum. “Timetables are fragile,” he said. “They are dependent on so many different factors.” For the Pentagon, the timing has been a difficult issue as the United States Central Command and the Iraqi government have clashed over the pace of efforts by Iraqi security forces to retake areas captured by the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL. While the American military once forecast recapturing Mosul this spring, the fall of Ramadi less than 70 miles from Baghdad put that city much higher on the priority list. Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, at a graduation and commissioning ceremony at the United States Military Academy at West Point, N.Y., last month. Credit Mike Groll/Associated Press General Dempsey said the United States was still hoping the Iraqi government would find a way to engage Sunnis to beat back the Islamic State, but he also talked of what he called a “Plan B” in case that never happens. “We have not given up on the possibility that the Iraqi government could absolutely be whole,” he said, but added that “the game changers are going to have to come from the Iraqi government itself.” “If we reach a point where we don’t think those game changers are successful,” he added, “then we will have to look for other avenues to maintain pressure on ISIL, and we will have to look at other partners.” Mr. Obama discussed the Taqqadum plan with Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi of Iraq during a meeting in Germany earlier this month. But other Americans and Iraqi officials said they have also talked about expanding the concept beyond Al Taqqadum to other locations. Some of President Obama’s statements about the American strategy to confront ISIS and its effectiveness. Both sides have been deliberate about the idea. Sensitive to their own domestic politics, the Iraqis have said that any new American footholds in Iraq should be determined on a case- by-case basis. As a general rule, the Obama administration has conditioned American support on steps toward political inclusiveness and reform in Iraq. Benjamin J. Rhodes, a deputy national security adviser to Mr. Obama, noted that with Al Taqqadum the president has already approved five hubs for American troops in Iraq, but has no specific plans for others at this point. “It’s more like notionally we may want to do more of that,” he said. Mr. Rhodes acknowledged what he called the concern of “a steady drip, drip, drip of personnel,” but added that it was possible new bases could be established by moving troops around rather than sending more. Mr. Obama, he said, was not especially concerned about specific numbers of troops. “What he’s been more focused on is what they are doing,” Mr. Rhodes said. “He’s been more focused on not getting drawn into a combat role for U.S. forces.” The so-called lily pad bases could provide the American military with a way to advise and support Iraqi troops charged with protecting supply lines, towns and infrastructure if they do try to reclaim Mosul. And they could signal increased focus on supporting local tribes and fighters, as urged by the State Department. “The closer the U.S. military is to the action on the ground, the better the chances of influencing positive outcomes, especially in building trusted relationships with the Sunni again,” said Richard D. Welch, a retired Special Forces colonel who spent more than six years in Iraq. At the same time, it is not clear the approach can be effective if advisers stay on bases. Many former American military officers argue the best way to help the Iraqis retake Ramadi and other cities is to have small American teams advise Iraqis on the battlefield and call in airstrikes. Even keeping troops on base may have risks. In February, eight suicide bombers tried to get into an air base west of Baghdad where hundreds of American Marines were training Iraqi counterparts. Officials said the bombers were killed almost immediately by Iraqi forces. Anthony Cordesman, a military analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said the latest moves may have some merit. “But creeping incrementalism is rarely a way of correcting a failed or inadequate strategy,” he said, “and this approach certainly is not a new strategy or a way of addressing the problems that the existing strategy does not address.” *OPINIONS/EDITORIALS/BLOGS* *Republicans must stop derailing the Benghazi committee <http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/republicans-must-stop-derailing-the-benghazi-committee/2015/06/11/8c6e5486-0e26-11e5-9726-49d6fa26a8c6_story.html> // WaPo // Elijah Cummings – June 11, 2015 * Now that the State Department has released former secretary of state Hillary Rodham Clinton’s e-mails relating to the attacks in Benghazi, the American people can see for themselves that there is not a scrap of evidence to back up claims that Clinton issued a “stand-down” order, or any of the other baseless allegations that Republicans have been making about her for years. This is exactly what Reps. Adam Smith (Wash.), Adam Schiff (Calif.), Linda Sanchez (Calif.), Tammy Duckworth (Ill.) and I — the Democratic members of the Select Committee on Benghazi — have been saying since we obtained Clinton’s e-mails in February. And it’s why all five of us believe the time has come to voice the grave concerns we share over the extremely partisan and misguided direction this committee has taken. For those keeping track, the committee has spent more than a year and more than $3 million trying to find evidence to damage Clinton and her presidential campaign, even as it continues to come up empty-handed. Already, the committee has lasted longer than the investigations of the Iran-Contra affair, the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, the attack on Pearl Harbor and Hurricane Katrina. Yet the committee’s chairman, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), may not release his findings until just months before next year’s presidential election, according to news reports. At this glacial pace, the Benghazi investigation will last longer than the Watergate investigation and the 9/11 Commission, and it will squander more than $6 million in taxpayer funds. But that has not stopped Republicans from dragging out the committee’s work, offering new excuses at every turn, and — in an astonishing and disgraceful display — seeking to raise campaign funds off the deaths of four brave Americans. Now, House Republicans want to withhold nearly $700 million from the State Department’s operational budget in an Orwellian attempt to improve the department’s document production processes. That simply makes no sense. Withholding two-thirds of a billion dollars from the department’s budget — more than all of the salaries of all of the employees working on document production — would only grind the process to a halt. The committee should stop blaming others for its own delays. It waited more than six months to send a request for new documents to the State Department and nearly a year to send new document requests to the Pentagon and the CIA. The committee has not held a single hearing in 19 weeks, despite the chairman’s assertion that there would be public hearings on a monthly basis. It refuses to set a date for Clinton’s testimony, although she has been willing to appear since last year. Pushing this taxpayer-funded political attack further into election season sacrifices any chance that the American people will see it as serious or legitimate. As Greta Van Susteren of Fox News has warned, the committee’s findings “will forever be plagued by allegations of unfairness, and politics.” Recognizing this fact, Republicans are becoming more desperate to justify the committee’s existence, and they are resorting to strong-arm tactics straight out of the partisan playbook of discredited GOP investigations of the past. For example, the committee majority recently issued a completely unnecessary subpoena without first contacting the witness. It clearly leaked this news before the subpoena was served and sent armed marshals to the witness’s home to confront his wife — all just to get a cheap headline. These actions directly contradict the spirit of the chairman’s previous statement that compelling the testimony of cooperative witnesses such as Clinton “just seems a little heavy-handed,” as well as his claim that “serious investigations do not leak information.” After nine reports on the Benghazi attacks from seven congressional committees and the independent Accountability Review Board, how many more times will Republicans investigate Clinton — and how much more will we be forced to spend — before they stop trying to prove that she engaged in some sort of conspiracy? This slow-walked and abusive political charade on the taxpayers’ dime is exactly the opposite of what we promised the families of those who were killed in Benghazi. If there is any minuscule chance left to salvage the Benghazi committee’s place in history, we need to return immediately to our core mission of implementing concrete reforms designed to help protect our diplomatic corps around the world. *The Battle for the 2016 Middle Ground <http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-battle-for-the-2016-middle-ground-1434064200> // WSJ // Daniel Arbess – June 11, 2015 * America is not as polarized as it might seem from the noise level that in recent years has propelled into office candidates from both parties who hold marginal views. Nonpartisan independents, including the majority of Americans 18-30, are now by far the largest group of voters, representing up to 45% of the total and rising, according to the Pew Research Center. The question is how the presidential candidates in 2016 will engage and try to persuade this critical block of moderates. Institutional momentum favors the Republicans, whose party is about a decade ahead of Democrats in the disintegration-reinvention cycle, having hit the polarized bottom with the tea party around 2009. Republicans now appear ready to come back toward the center, while Democrats seem to be marching to the left. Hillary Clinton is unlikely to cede the party’s liberal base to economic redistributionists like Bernie Sanders, and the next generation’s version, Martin O’Malley. Any remnants of the Clinton centrism that marked her husband’s tenure in the White House may have vanished by the time Mrs. Clinton becomes, as expected, the Democratic nominee. The Clinton brand remains more popular than the Bush brand, however, suggesting that moderate Republicans will need a fresh face and new ideas that appeal to the party’s base. Jeb Bush has reportedly talked about how to win the general without winning the primary—in other words, without aggressively courting the tea party and evangelical wings. But returning to the politics of compromise and collaboration has to start at home: The Republicans will have to find a formula and ticket that makes space in the big tent for the fired-up base and the more-moderate establishment. A candidate like Ted Cruz could play a pivotal role. The senator from Texas is assiduously cultivating what he calls the tea party and evangelical “brackets,” yet despite his early filibustering antics, he has experience as a Supreme Court litigator and seems to understand the importance of engaging the other side. He shows Reagan-quality conviction and willingness to state reality in foreign policy and, while his personal beliefs on social issues are on the far side of the tent, he seems above all willing to honor Supreme Court decisions and the legislative will of the states. The 44-year-old Sen. Cruz is definitely young and fresh, yet he might come to realize that, on the evidence of the past eight years, another presidency for a newcomer to the national scene is unlikely. Right-wired players like a Sen. Cruz or Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker might still be kingmakers if they manage to get centrists to accept their tea party and evangelical supporters as patriots dedicated to those most-American values of liberty, entrepreneurial initiative and family; moderate their own approach on domestic policy; and deliver their support to a more centrist candidate for a place on the ticket or in the cabinet. Ted Cruz might make an excellent partner for Jeb Bush. Meanwhile, Marco Rubio, also 44, has more experience than Barack Obama did before he entered the 2008 race, and he is more collaborative than President Obama has ever been. The senator from Florida needs to do something creative to offset his own relative inexperience and lack of financial clout compared with the Bush family machine. An alliance of 40-somethings—Sen. Rubio and Sen. Cruz or the 47-year-old Gov. Walker—might well offer enough experience, generational freshness, vision and broad support to secure the Republican nomination. There is also the chance for a true wild-card—a ticket led by the hugely accomplished centrist independent Michael Bloomberg. But his candidacy, even if he hasn’t ruled out a run, would probably, by his own estimation, be a long shot. In any case a reunified Republican Party would be in the best position to reach across the aisle and lead a return in Washington to the bipartisan collaboration and compromise envisioned by the Constitution. We saw it during the presidencies of Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton, two of the most effective American leaders of the past 50 years, and it might come to pass that the silent plurality will let us see it again, beginning in 2016 *How Bill Clinton and Teneo duped the State Dept. ethics dummies <http://www.leaderandtimes.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=21516:how-bill-clinton-and-teneo-duped-the-state-dept-ethics-dummies&catid=29:opinion&Itemid=58> // Leader & Times // Dick Morris – June 11, 2015 * In 2011, Bill Clinton had a problem. He had already figured out how to parlay his reputation into income by giving speeches. But, now, with his wife serving as Secretary of State and a Democrat in the White House, he wanted to take things to the next level and actually solicit relationships with major companies and foreign governments. He envisioned a network of corporate and foreign clients who would give him speaking fees, generate consulting income in which he could share, and give to his Foundation whose assets and income he could use as he wished. But to realize this grand vision, he needed an intermediary that would get clients and nurture the web he envisioned. So, working through his top aide and protégée, Doug Band, he set up Teneo. Band, for his part, realized this was the way to cash in on the relationship with his boss. But Doug and Bill faced a problem. They needed the approval of the State Department Ethics Office that Obama had made Hillary set up to monitor the business dealings of her peripatetic husband. So they scrubbed the application. Band’s role as a principal of Teneo was omitted and he was identified just as the Clinton aide who submitted the application. The real purpose of the new company was hidden and the application claimed it was only designed “to study geopolitical, economic and social trends.” In fact, it was a deal to hire Bill using his name and relationship with Hillary to attract global corporate and government clients. In return, Teneo paid him handsomely, solicited donations for the Clinton Foundation and set up lucrative speaking engagements for Bill. Win-win Teneo and Clinton. He’d get them clients; they’d get him speaking gigs. Team Teneo desperately wanted Bill Clinton to head its Advisory Board – so it could hold out the former President and husband of the Secretary of State as part of its team. For its part, Teneo planned to tell corporations and governments about how to fashion a positive relationship with the US government and the State Department to get what they wanted. Teneo itself described their company’s mission: “In the US, we use our deep relationships to provide strategic counsel and help clients navigate policy debates in Washington and state capitals as they look to find support, amplification and clarity around the issues that they care about.” Who better to do so than the former president and current husband of the Secretary? But Teneo couldn’t tell the Ethics Officers that this was the real substance of the deal. An earlier application by the Clinton Foundation requesting approval of a business relationship between Bill Clinton and billionaire Clinton supporter and donor Haim Saban had been rejected. The Ethics Officer turned it down “based on the fact that Haim Saban, a founder of this entity, is actively involved in foreign affairs issues, particularly with regards to the Middle East, which is a priority area for the Secretary.” Since Teneo and its clients intended to be involved in global affairs that were a priority for the Secretary of State, there was a likelihood that the Teneo request would be denied, too. Clinton and Band did all they could to hide the real nature of Teneo and make it seem like a routine application for State Department review. But it was anything but routine. The big red flag was out there in plain view for the Ethics Police to see: For the first time in two years and hundreds of submissions to the Ethics Board, this application came directly from Doug Band and not from the normal channels at the Clinton Foundation. And, again, for the first time, the request was not copied to the Clinton Foundation, but only to Cheryl Mills. The inner circle was keeping things tight. But the State Department missed that one completely. And, according to documents released to Judicial Watch, the State dupes never raised a question as to who was running Teneo and how Clinton would function. Had they done so, they would have discovered that Band’s other partner was Declan Kelly. As a kind of pre-cursor to Teneo, Hillary had appointed Kelly to the newly created job as the State Department’s Special Economic Envoy to Ireland. A major donor, supporter, and financial bundler for Hillary the job put Kelly in touch with corporations in and out of Ireland on behalf of the U.S. State Department. Translation: he networked for future clients. Now he was leaving the State Department to do the same thing for Teneo. But that conflict of interest eluded the State Department ethics dummies too. In fact, his role begs the question of why would the State Department appoint an Irish citizen as its “economic envoy” to Ireland? Why would we even have an economic envoy to Ireland? The answer is simple — because the Clintons saw the future value — for them. And then they grabbed it. According to Irish Central, (Kelly’s) “connection and bond to President Clinton has opened up major avenues to him. In a business where power and influence is everything he has the 800-pound gorilla in his corner.” And Kelly made sure that gorilla was well fed. The Ethics Police never asked exactly what Clinton would be doing for Teneo. They just rubber-stamped the request. But Bill made clear exactly what was going on when he announced that, the next year, that he had “changed his relationship” with Teneo. “Because of the invaluable help I continue to receive with my business relationships and speaking engagements, as well as with CGI and other philanthropic activities, like the Ireland investment conference, I felt that I should be paying them, not the other way around.” And that valuable help has been seen in his overseas and corporate speaking engagements and the millions given to the Foundation. Bill Clinton had the deepest of relationships in the U.S. and around the globe and perfectly fit Teneo’s needs. A match made in heaven. And no worries about the State Department. *Alexandria Phillips* *Press Assistant | Communications* Hillary for America | www.hillaryclinton.com