podesta_email_01424.txt

podesta-emails 9,151 words email

D6 P17 V11 P18 P22

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- mQQBBGBjDtIBH6DJa80zDBgR+VqlYGaXu5bEJg9HEgAtJeCLuThdhXfl5Zs32RyB I1QjIlttvngepHQozmglBDmi2FZ4S+wWhZv10bZCoyXPIPwwq6TylwPv8+buxuff B6tYil3VAB9XKGPyPjKrlXn1fz76VMpuTOs7OGYR8xDidw9EHfBvmb+sQyrU1FOW aPHxba5lK6hAo/KYFpTnimsmsz0Cvo1sZAV/EFIkfagiGTL2J/NhINfGPScpj8LB bYelVN/NU4c6Ws1ivWbfcGvqU4lymoJgJo/l9HiV6X2bdVyuB24O3xeyhTnD7laf epykwxODVfAt4qLC3J478MSSmTXS8zMumaQMNR1tUUYtHCJC0xAKbsFukzbfoRDv m2zFCCVxeYHvByxstuzg0SurlPyuiFiy2cENek5+W8Sjt95nEiQ4suBldswpz1Kv n71t7vd7zst49xxExB+tD+vmY7GXIds43Rb05dqksQuo2yCeuCbY5RBiMHX3d4nU 041jHBsv5wY24j0N6bpAsm/s0T0Mt7IO6UaN33I712oPlclTweYTAesW3jDpeQ7A ioi0CMjWZnRpUxorcFmzL/Cc/fPqgAtnAL5GIUuEOqUf8AlKmzsKcnKZ7L2d8mxG QqN16nlAiUuUpchQNMr+tAa1L5S1uK/fu6thVlSSk7KMQyJfVpwLy6068a1WmNj4 yxo9HaSeQNXh3cui+61qb9wlrkwlaiouw9+bpCmR0V8+XpWma/D/TEz9tg5vkfNo eG4t+FUQ7QgrrvIkDNFcRyTUO9cJHB+kcp2NgCcpCwan3wnuzKka9AWFAitpoAwx L6BX0L8kg/LzRPhkQnMOrj/tuu9hZrui4woqURhWLiYi2aZe7WCkuoqR/qMGP6qP EQRcvndTWkQo6K9BdCH4ZjRqcGbY1wFt/qgAxhi+uSo2IWiM1fRI4eRCGifpBtYK Dw44W9uPAu4cgVnAUzESEeW0bft5XXxAqpvyMBIdv3YqfVfOElZdKbteEu4YuOao FLpbk4ajCxO4Fzc9AugJ8iQOAoaekJWA7TjWJ6CbJe8w3thpznP0w6jNG8ZleZ6a jHckyGlx5wzQTRLVT5+wK6edFlxKmSd93jkLWWCbrc0Dsa39OkSTDmZPoZgKGRhp Yc0C4jePYreTGI6p7/H3AFv84o0fjHt5fn4GpT1Xgfg+1X/wmIv7iNQtljCjAqhD 6XN+QiOAYAloAym8lOm9zOoCDv1TSDpmeyeP0rNV95OozsmFAUaKSUcUFBUfq9FL uyr+rJZQw2DPfq2wE75PtOyJiZH7zljCh12fp5yrNx6L7HSqwwuG7vGO4f0ltYOZ dPKzaEhCOO7o108RexdNABEBAAG0Rldpa2lMZWFrcyBFZGl0b3JpYWwgT2ZmaWNl IEhpZ2ggU2VjdXJpdHkgQ29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbiBLZXkgKDIwMjEtMjAyNCmJBDEE EwEKACcFAmBjDtICGwMFCQWjmoAFCwkIBwMFFQoJCAsFFgIDAQACHgECF4AACgkQ nG3NFyg+RUzRbh+eMSKgMYOdoz70u4RKTvev4KyqCAlwji+1RomnW7qsAK+l1s6b ugOhOs8zYv2ZSy6lv5JgWITRZogvB69JP94+Juphol6LIImC9X3P/bcBLw7VCdNA mP0XQ4OlleLZWXUEW9EqR4QyM0RkPMoxXObfRgtGHKIkjZYXyGhUOd7MxRM8DBzN yieFf3CjZNADQnNBk/ZWRdJrpq8J1W0dNKI7IUW2yCyfdgnPAkX/lyIqw4ht5UxF VGrva3PoepPir0TeKP3M0BMxpsxYSVOdwcsnkMzMlQ7TOJlsEdtKQwxjV6a1vH+t k4TpR4aG8fS7ZtGzxcxPylhndiiRVwdYitr5nKeBP69aWH9uLcpIzplXm4DcusUc Bo8KHz+qlIjs03k8hRfqYhUGB96nK6TJ0xS7tN83WUFQXk29fWkXjQSp1Z5dNCcT sWQBTxWxwYyEI8iGErH2xnok3HTyMItdCGEVBBhGOs1uCHX3W3yW2CooWLC/8Pia qgss3V7m4SHSfl4pDeZJcAPiH3Fm00wlGUslVSziatXW3499f2QdSyNDw6Qc+chK hUFflmAaavtpTqXPk+Lzvtw5SSW+iRGmEQICKzD2chpy05mW5v6QUy+G29nchGDD rrfpId2Gy1VoyBx8FAto4+6BOWVijrOj9Boz7098huotDQgNoEnidvVdsqP+P1RR QJekr97idAV28i7iEOLd99d6qI5xRqc3/QsV+y2ZnnyKB10uQNVPLgUkQljqN0wP XmdVer+0X+aeTHUd1d64fcc6M0cpYefNNRCsTsgbnWD+x0rjS9RMo+Uosy41+IxJ 6qIBhNrMK6fEmQoZG3qTRPYYrDoaJdDJERN2E5yLxP2SPI0rWNjMSoPEA/gk5L91 m6bToM/0VkEJNJkpxU5fq5834s3PleW39ZdpI0HpBDGeEypo/t9oGDY3Pd7JrMOF zOTohxTyu4w2Ql7jgs+7KbO9PH0Fx5dTDmDq66jKIkkC7DI0QtMQclnmWWtn14BS KTSZoZekWESVYhORwmPEf32EPiC9t8zDRglXzPGmJAPISSQz+Cc9o1ipoSIkoCCh 2MWoSbn3KFA53vgsYd0vS/+Nw5aUksSleorFns2yFgp/w5Ygv0D007k6u3DqyRLB W5y6tJLvbC1ME7jCBoLW6nFEVxgDo727pqOpMVjGGx5zcEokPIRDMkW/lXjw+fTy c6misESDCAWbgzniG/iyt77Kz711unpOhw5aemI9LpOq17AiIbjzSZYt6b1Aq7Wr aB+C1yws2ivIl9ZYK911A1m69yuUg0DPK+uyL7Z86XC7hI8B0IY1MM/MbmFiDo6H dkfwUckE74sxxeJrFZKkBbkEAQRgYw7SAR+gvktRnaUrj/84Pu0oYVe49nPEcy/7 5Fs6LvAwAj+JcAQPW3uy7D7fuGFEQguasfRrhWY5R87+g5ria6qQT2/Sf19Tpngs d0Dd9DJ1MMTaA1pc5F7PQgoOVKo68fDXfjr76n1NchfCzQbozS1HoM8ys3WnKAw+ Neae9oymp2t9FB3B+To4nsvsOM9KM06ZfBILO9NtzbWhzaAyWwSrMOFFJfpyxZAQ 8VbucNDHkPJjhxuafreC9q2f316RlwdS+XjDggRY6xD77fHtzYea04UWuZidc5zL VpsuZR1nObXOgE+4s8LU5p6fo7jL0CRxvfFnDhSQg2Z617flsdjYAJ2JR4apg3Es G46xWl8xf7t227/0nXaCIMJI7g09FeOOsfCmBaf/ebfiXXnQbK2zCbbDYXbrYgw6 ESkSTt940lHtynnVmQBvZqSXY93MeKjSaQk1VKyobngqaDAIIzHxNCR941McGD7F qHHM2YMTgi6XXaDThNC6u5msI1l/24PPvrxkJxjPSGsNlCbXL2wqaDgrP6LvCP9O uooR9dVRxaZXcKQjeVGxrcRtoTSSyZimfjEercwi9RKHt42O5akPsXaOzeVjmvD9 EB5jrKBe/aAOHgHJEIgJhUNARJ9+dXm7GofpvtN/5RE6qlx11QGvoENHIgawGjGX Jy5oyRBS+e+KHcgVqbmV9bvIXdwiC4BDGxkXtjc75hTaGhnDpu69+Cq016cfsh+0 XaRnHRdh0SZfcYdEqqjn9CTILfNuiEpZm6hYOlrfgYQe1I13rgrnSV+EfVCOLF4L P9ejcf3eCvNhIhEjsBNEUDOFAA6J5+YqZvFYtjk3efpM2jCg6XTLZWaI8kCuADMu yrQxGrM8yIGvBndrlmmljUqlc8/Nq9rcLVFDsVqb9wOZjrCIJ7GEUD6bRuolmRPE SLrpP5mDS+wetdhLn5ME1e9JeVkiSVSFIGsumZTNUaT0a90L4yNj5gBE40dvFplW 7TLeNE/ewDQk5LiIrfWuTUn3CqpjIOXxsZFLjieNgofX1nSeLjy3tnJwuTYQlVJO 3CbqH1k6cOIvE9XShnnuxmiSoav4uZIXnLZFQRT9v8UPIuedp7TO8Vjl0xRTajCL PdTk21e7fYriax62IssYcsbbo5G5auEdPO04H/+v/hxmRsGIr3XYvSi4ZWXKASxy a/jHFu9zEqmy0EBzFzpmSx+FrzpMKPkoU7RbxzMgZwIYEBk66Hh6gxllL0JmWjV0 iqmJMtOERE4NgYgumQT3dTxKuFtywmFxBTe80BhGlfUbjBtiSrULq59np4ztwlRT wDEAVDoZbN57aEXhQ8jjF2RlHtqGXhFMrg9fALHaRQARAQABiQQZBBgBCgAPBQJg Yw7SAhsMBQkFo5qAAAoJEJxtzRcoPkVMdigfoK4oBYoxVoWUBCUekCg/alVGyEHa ekvFmd3LYSKX/WklAY7cAgL/1UlLIFXbq9jpGXJUmLZBkzXkOylF9FIXNNTFAmBM 3TRjfPv91D8EhrHJW0SlECN+riBLtfIQV9Y1BUlQthxFPtB1G1fGrv4XR9Y4TsRj VSo78cNMQY6/89Kc00ip7tdLeFUHtKcJs+5EfDQgagf8pSfF/TWnYZOMN2mAPRRf fh3SkFXeuM7PU/X0B6FJNXefGJbmfJBOXFbaSRnkacTOE9caftRKN1LHBAr8/RPk pc9p6y9RBc/+6rLuLRZpn2W3m3kwzb4scDtHHFXXQBNC1ytrqdwxU7kcaJEPOFfC XIdKfXw9AQll620qPFmVIPH5qfoZzjk4iTH06Yiq7PI4OgDis6bZKHKyyzFisOkh DXiTuuDnzgcu0U4gzL+bkxJ2QRdiyZdKJJMswbm5JDpX6PLsrzPmN314lKIHQx3t NNXkbfHL/PxuoUtWLKg7/I3PNnOgNnDqCgqpHJuhU1AZeIkvewHsYu+urT67tnpJ AK1Z4CgRxpgbYA4YEV1rWVAPHX1u1okcg85rc5FHK8zh46zQY1wzUTWubAcxqp9K 1IqjXDDkMgIX2Z2fOA1plJSwugUCbFjn4sbT0t0YuiEFMPMB42ZCjcCyA1yysfAd DYAmSer1bq47tyTFQwP+2ZnvW/9p3yJ4oYWzwMzadR3T0K4sgXRC2Us9nPL9k2K5 TRwZ07wE2CyMpUv+hZ4ja13A/1ynJZDZGKys+pmBNrO6abxTGohM8LIWjS+YBPIq trxh8jxzgLazKvMGmaA6KaOGwS8vhfPfxZsu2TJaRPrZMa/HpZ2aEHwxXRy4nm9G Kx1eFNJO6Ues5T7KlRtl8gflI5wZCCD/4T5rto3SfG0s0jr3iAVb3NCn9Q73kiph PSwHuRxcm+hWNszjJg3/W+Fr8fdXAh5i0JzMNscuFAQNHgfhLigenq+BpCnZzXya 01kqX24AdoSIbH++vvgE0Bjj6mzuRrH5VJ1Qg9nQ+yMjBWZADljtp3CARUbNkiIg tUJ8IJHCGVwXZBqY4qeJc3h/RiwWM2UIFfBZ+E06QPznmVLSkwvvop3zkr4eYNez cIKUju8vRdW6sxaaxC/GECDlP0Wo6lH0uChpE3NJ1daoXIeymajmYxNt+drz7+pd jMqjDtNA2rgUrjptUgJK8ZLdOQ4WCrPY5pP9ZXAO7+mK7S3u9CTywSJmQpypd8hv 8Bu8jKZdoxOJXxj8CphK951eNOLYxTOxBUNB8J2lgKbmLIyPvBvbS1l1lCM5oHlw WXGlp70pspj3kaX4mOiFaWMKHhOLb+er8yh8jspM184= =5a6T -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- *[image: Inline image 1]* *Correct The Record Thursday July 31, 2014 Morning Roundup:* *Headlines:* *The Hill opinion: Lanny Davis: “Lanny Davis: Americans want a dealmaker, not an ideologue” <http://thehill.com/opinion/lanny-davis/213868-lanny-davis-americans-want-a-dealmaker-not-an-ideologue>* “Here are the facts concerning Clinton’s positions on the issues.” *Politico: “Books test market for Hillary Clinton hostility” <http://www.politico.com/story/2014/07/hillary-clinton-books-2016-elections-109573.html>* “Leading the charge against the titles is David Brock, who once made his living attacking the Clintons and Democrats as a conservative writer but is now their chief public defender through the group he founded, Media Matters.” *Toledo Blade (O.H.): “Clinton remains Ohio voters' choice for U.S. leader” <http://www.toledoblade.com/State/2014/07/31/Clinton-remains-Ohio-voters-choice-for-U-S-leader.html>* “Hillary Clinton remains Ohioans' choice for the next president even as their opinion of the current Democratic occupant of the White House remains near an all-time low, according to the latest Quinnipiac Poll released today.” *National Journal: “Should Democratic Candidates Care About Hillary Clinton’s 2016 Timeline?” <http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/should-democratic-candidates-care-about-hillary-clinton-s-2016-timeline-20140730>* “Trying to divine the strategy for Clinton's announcement is like graphing a Punnett square with two variables. The first variable: Will she or won't she run? The second: Will she announce her decision early on, or take her sweet time?” *The Wire: “The NeverEnding Book Tour: 52 Days of Hillary Clinton... And Counting” <http://www.thewire.com/politics/2014/07/the-neverending-book-tour-52-days-of-hillary-clinton-and-counting/375278/>* “Let's take a look back at where Hillary, and her book, have been in the last 52 days.” *The Hill: “Obama pivots to economic legacy” <http://thehill.com/news/administration/213888-obama-pivots-to-economic-legacy>* “Those close to the White House say Obama’s success on the economy could help Hillary Clinton should she run in the 2016 election. And Clinton allies agree.” *Time: “Joe Lieberman: Obama Administration ‘Has Gone Off The Track’ On Israel” <http://time.com/3059340/joe-lieberman-israel-obama-gaza-hillary/>* “He [Sen. Lieberman] said he believes former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would keep the Democratic Party engaged in the world.” *The Week: “Why Mitt Romney is perfectly poised for a comeback in 2016” <http://theweek.com/article/index/265552/why-mitt-romney-is-perfectly-poised-for-a-comeback-in-2016>* [Subtitle:] “Nobody has ever rooted for that scrappy Romney kid to overcome the odds. Until, maybe, now.” *Articles:* *The Hill opinion: Lanny Davis: “Lanny Davis: Americans want a dealmaker, not an ideologue” <http://thehill.com/opinion/lanny-davis/213868-lanny-davis-americans-want-a-dealmaker-not-an-ideologue>* By Lanny Davis July 30, 2014, 7:11 p.m. EDT When it comes to judging someone’s political ideology, many people and pundits end up arguing about labels and characterizations rather than the facts and the objective record. For example, I recall recently reading about someone who attended a Ready for Hillary meeting in Iowa who declared his concern about Hillary Clinton being a “corporatist.” A few recent articles refer to Clinton as a “centrist” or not a genuine “populist,” words meaning different things to different people. Fortunately, polling data show that most people make their judgments based on facts, not labels. So here are the facts concerning Clinton’s positions on the issues. On economic issues during her eight years in the Senate and to the present, Clinton consistently supported increasing the minimum wage (and still does). She opposed former President George W. Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy, favored tax cuts for the middle class and tax credits for student loans. She consistently voted against repealing the estate tax on millionaires. She supported the establishment of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, praising Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) to this day for her leadership on this issue. On social issues, as everyone knows, Clinton led the fight as first lady for the passage of a national health insurance system and was — and is — a steadfast supporter of President Obama’s most important achievement as president: the Affordable Care Act. She consistently supported programs helping the middle class, regulating and preserving the environment, and creating opportunities for the poor and minorities. She has been in favor of comprehensive immigration reform, including the Dream Act. She has always supported affirmative action, privacy rights, human rights, civil rights and civil liberties. One of the great causes of her life is concern about children and education. Like Warren and many other Democrats, she is committed to substantial assistance to public schools and relief to students on their student loans. In short, she believes in an active federal government regulating excesses of the private market for the public interest and public good — the classic definition of Democratic Party liberalism, from Andrew Jackson to Franklin Roosevelt to Bill Clinton. She also believes that the country needs a healthy and vibrant private sector that is the engine of job creation and lifting the poor and the middle class. On cultural issues, the former secretary of State supports choice, gay rights, gay marriage, gun control and strict safeguards to protect the separation of church and state. On income inequality, Clinton has expressed great concern. “This is not an issue that’s going to go away. In fact, it will only get worse unless we address it now,” she said recently. “We’ve got to do a better job of getting our economy growing and producing results and renewing the American Dream so Americans feel ... that the economy and the political system is not stacked against them, because that will erode the trust that is at the basis of our democracy.” Polls prove that most self-described liberal Democrats judge Clinton on the actual facts of her record, not on someone’s labels. In the most recent national polls, 72 percent of liberal Democrats say they would support Clinton for president in 2016 if she were to run. Only 5 percent of Democrats and 6 percent of liberals think she is “too conservative.” It is true that Clinton, despite her liberal voting record in the Senate, was perceived by many Republicans as someone you could work with to get things done — exactly as the liberal icon, former Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), was seen. That may bother the furthest wing of the Democratic base, who prefer confrontation and ideological wars to compromise and real solutions to help people most in need. These are likely the 6 percent of liberals who think Clinton is “too conservative.” But fortunately, most Democrats and most Americans prefer fact-driven, bipartisan solutions rather than confrontation and ideological wars. I believe Clinton currently shows such strong support as a future president not only among Democrats but among all Americans. But there is plenty of time to go. If Hillary Clinton runs for president — and she has said she has not made that decision yet — she will run hard and work hard to earn the support of the all voters: red, blue and purple. *Politico: “Books test market for Hillary Clinton hostility” <http://www.politico.com/story/2014/07/hillary-clinton-books-2016-elections-109573.html>* By Maggie Haberman July 31, 2014, 5:00 a.m. EDT It’s the summer of anti-Clinton books. There may be no clearer sign of Hillary Clinton’s political reemergence than the flurry of new books critical of her — two in the past month alone, with another pair coming soon. It’s all testing the depth of a market for anti-Clinton fare that had gone mostly dormant — and triggering a fierce campaign by her defenders to shame the mainstream media not to write about the books, lest they lend them legitimacy. Sales so far are mixed. A widely disparaged book by former New York Times Magazine Editor Ed Klein, “Blood Feud,” has done well, even knocking Clinton’s own biography from the top spot on the Times’ best-seller list over the past month. But a second book published last week by Weekly Standard writer Daniel Halper, “Clinton Inc.,” has sold just under 3,500 copies, according to Nielsen BookScan, which tracks book sales for the publishing industry. Leading the charge against the titles is David Brock, who once made his living attacking the Clintons and Democrats as a conservative writer but is now their chief public defender through the group he founded, Media Matters. Brock has found himself doing battle with his onetime editor, veteran conservative Publisher Adam Bellow (son of Saul Bellow), who edited “Clinton Inc.” “Conservatives don’t buy books the way other people do,” Brock said in an interview. “I think they buy them as political statements or to see their own prejudices and fantasies in black and white … [Hillary Clinton] called it a cottage industry on ‘The Daily Show’ and that’s right, it’s a business.” It’s not clear how broad the interest is these days for any book about Clinton, pro- or anti-. Her own book about her time at the State Department, which came out in June, has sold just under 250,000 copies, including e-book estimates. That’s a solid figure in a depleted publishing industry but far from the juggernaut her backers hoped for. Klein’s book, meanwhile, has sold just over 100,000 copies so far, also accounting for e-book estimates. After those two, the market may drop off. “Clinton Inc.,” which looks at the Clintons from the impeachment crisis in the late 1990s through today, hit the stands to underwhelming figures (though in a sign of the strength of the book industry and the summer slowdown, it’s still set to land at No. 10 on the Times best-seller list, according to his publisher.) The book, along with an upcoming one by Secret Service chronicler Ronald Kessler, includes rumors about infidelity by Bill Clinton. The Halper book also focuses on Chelsea Clinton’s rise within her family’s foundation. Klein’s book, “Blood Feud,” claims to lay out the messy relationship between Barack and Michelle Obama and Bill and Hillary Clinton, replete with quotes from alleged conversations between the first families. Conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh has been among those who have questioned the material, saying he found some of the book’s dialogue “odd in the sense that I don’t know people who speak this way.” Clinton’s team, and Media Matters, have moved to lump all three books — plus a fourth one, by WND writer Aaron Klein, about the Benghazi attacks, due in September — in the same bucket. Media Matters has taken specific issue with key pieces of Halper’s book, including the author’s reporting on speculation that Hillary Clinton’s health scare in December 2012 was a stroke, not a concussion. “With Klein, Halper and [author Ronald] Kessler, we now have a Hat Trick of despicable actors concocting trashy nonsense for a quick buck, at the expense of anything even remotely resembling the truth,” a joint statement from spokesmen for Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton read. “It’s an insult to readers [and] authors, and should be reserved for the fiction bin, if not the trash.” In a squeeze on mainstream media, the Clintons added of the authors: “Their behavior should neither be allowed nor enabled, and legitimate media outlets who know with every fiber of their being that this is complete crap should know not to get down in the gutter with them and spread their lies. But if anyone isn’t sure, let’s strap all three to a polygraph machine on live TV and let the needle tell the truth.” The attacks on anti-Hillary books is part of Clinton lore. In 1999, Gail Sheehy’s “Hillary Choice” was lambasted by Clinton loyalists as a piece of overreaching psychobabble. In the years since, Clinton allies have frequently deployed a similar effort to undercut unauthorized books about the former first lady, stoking doubt about their credibility by finding, and amplifying, inaccuracies in them. In the current go-around, most of the coverage of the books has been in conservative media outlets. The last surge in the anti-Clinton book market was around 2005. That was when Ed Klein, through Penguin Books, published “The Truth about Hillary.” Brock and other Clinton allies savaged the book, and Penguin. It went on to be a commercial success, but the credibility gap was established. HarperCollins, which published “Clinton Inc.,” dropped plans to publish Ed Klein’s latest Clinton book earlier this year, amid concerns about his reporting. Other books that were printed soon after failed to take off. Marji ­Ross, the president of Regnery — the conservative publishing house that picked up Ed Klein’s latest book — acknowledged there have been “a number of anti-Hillary books that haven’t worked in the years since [she left the White House], and we just felt that the time was right.” As for allegations of a lack of truthfulness and a plethora of quotes that sound suspect in Klein’s work, she insisted, “No one’s ever been able to point to something specific that he had in one of his books that is untrue.” Ross said the release date for “Blood Feud” was moved up, the thinking being that “anyone who wasn’t a fan of hers would be hungering for some kind of news from the other side” after her own book tour. Brock, who gained fame in 1993 for writing a book about Anita Hill that was edited by Bellow, has witnessed the rise and fall of anti-Clinton books up close. His own, which was initially supposed to be a critical book that ended up as a positive look at Hillary Clinton, was also edited by Bellow. “When I started reading [“Clinton Inc.”], I started noticing what I thought were Adam Bellow touches,” Brock said. “He wants his books to be seen as serious and well-researched and he works really hard to give them that patina, and that means sanding down the rough edges to fool mainstream reviewers,” Brock added, explaining that that formula maximized sales of his own book on Hill. In the case of “Clinton Inc.,” though, Brock said the “red meat” got “overcooked by Adam, and then nobody wants it.” Bellow, who declined to be interviewed, wrote in an email that the Halper book is off to “a very good start. We have a tremendous media lineup in place and expect the book to continue to sell well through the summer and into the fall.” As for the criticism from Brock, Bellow added: “I don’t plan on getting into a pissing match with David. However, since he has cast me as some kind of evil conservative publishing wizard I would just like to note that I also published his Hillary book and that I backed him up completely when he turned in a positive portrait instead of the hit job he originally pitched. “We would have been within our rights to cancel the book but I made sure that it got published and that his full advance was paid,” Bellow added. “And I never even got invited to his beach house in Rehoboth!” Halper, who wrote a first-person account for POLITICO Magazine in which he claimed to have been hounded by Clinton allies during the reporting of his book, said his book is a reported work that also takes on some of Hillary Clinton’s critics. “I try my best to be fair to all sides,” said Halper, whose book had a well-timed title, at a moment when people are examining the Clintons’ wealth. “The Clintons have been criticized by a number of people over the years, from both the right and the left. Some of it is rightfully so and some of it is overboard.” Kessler, noting he has broken several stories involving the Secret Service, also took issue with the notion that his book isn’t a serious work of journalism. “The fact is that my book is entirely nonpartisan and presents startling revelations about both Republicans — including some of the saints of the GOP — and Democrats, as well as about Secret Service laxness and corner cutting that threaten the life of the president,” said Kessler, whose book is expected to have a chapter on Hillary and a prologue related to Bill Clinton. He added that the book, which comes out next week, includes positive passages about Barack and Michelle Obama. “Not exactly a political hatchet job!” Regardless of criticism, one publishing source predicted that Kessler’s book would sell, since he has a following based on past books. And Aaron Klein’s book would appeal to a different audience, the publishing source said, a subset of readers deeply interested in the Benghazi attacks and convinced of an administration coverup. Roger Stone, the former Richard Nixon operative and proud political dirty-trickster, predicted that the current market for anti-Clinton books will prove robust. “The one segment of the book market this is thriving is conservatives,” Stone said. “They read. The tabloids also show there is also an insatiable public interest in any gossip about the Clintons.” And “it will only get bigger if she runs.” *Toledo Blade (O.H.): “Clinton remains Ohio voters' choice for U.S. leader” <http://www.toledoblade.com/State/2014/07/31/Clinton-remains-Ohio-voters-choice-for-U-S-leader.html>* By Jim Provance July 31, 2014 COLUMBUS — Hillary Clinton remains Ohioans' choice for the next president even as their opinion of the current Democratic occupant of the White House remains near an all-time low, according to the latest Quinnipiac Poll released today. Ms. Clinton — the former first lady, U.S. senator, and secretary of state — would defeat all Republican comers in hypothetical 2016 match-ups, including one with Ohio Gov. John Kasich. If that election were held today, 47 percent of registered Ohio voters say they'd vote for Clinton compared to 40 percent who say they'd prefer the GOP governor currently seeking re-election to his current job. A Quinnipiac Poll released Wednesday showed Governor Kasich with a 12-point lead over his Democratic challenger, Cuyahoga County Executive Ed FitzGerald, to keep his current job. The best GOP performer against Ms. Clinton is U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, of Kentucky, who would get 42 percent of the vote to Ms. Clinton's 46 percent. That's within the poll's margin of error of plus or minus 2.7 percentage points. In no scenario does she score higher than 50 percent. She does, however, have a 52 percent favorability rating among Ohio's registered voters. "Obviously there is a long way to go until 2016, but at this point the political problems the president is encountering are not rubbing off on her,” said Peter Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac Poll. Thirty-six percent of those questioned approve of the job performance of President Barack Obama, less than two years after the Buckeye State helped to keep him in the White House. Fifty-nine percent disapprove, slightly above the record low of 34 percent-to-61 percent last November, the lowest ever recorded by Quinnipiac in the nine states where the Connecticut-based university poll regularly questions voters. “Only three in 10 men or independent voters approve of his job performance, a far cry from almost two years ago where he won the nation’s most important swing state, and the Democratic approval rating in the low 70s is anemic, at best." Mr. Brown said. The poll has Ms. Clinton defeating former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush 48 percent to 27 percent and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie 46 percent to 37 percent. At one point, Mr. Christie had been one of Ms. Clinton's strongest competitors for the Buckeye vote, but he has fallen in their opinion since the bridge scandal early this year. He is now underwater with 34 percent having a favorable opinion of him compared to 36 percent who do not. Ms. Clinton's numbers are strongest among women, although Mr. Paul is the only Republican who currently beats her in Ohio among independents. The university questioned 1,366 registered voters between July 24 and 28. *National Journal: “Should Democratic Candidates Care About Hillary Clinton’s 2016 Timeline?” <http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/should-democratic-candidates-care-about-hillary-clinton-s-2016-timeline-20140730>* By Emma Roller July 30, 2014 [Subtitle:] Long-lasting question marks around a possible Clinton presidential run could leave Democrats unprepared for 2016. Writing about the choice in front of Hillary Clinton—a hard choice, if you will—is like an advanced course in hypotheticals. Trying to divine the strategy for Clinton's announcement is like graphing a Punnett square with two variables. The first variable: Will she or won't she run? The second: Will she announce her decision early on, or take her sweet time? Either way, Clinton's decision is sure to delight some Democratic politicians and stymie others. If she announces her candidacy too early, that opens the floodgates to conservative attacks. Diametrically, if she announces late in the game that she is not going to run, other Democrats who were waiting on her go-ahead may find it's too late to build up their own campaigns. It's unlikely that Clinton will announce early either way, which leaves us with two options. Option one: She announces late that she is running, thus confirming the idea everyone has been taking for granted for at least the past six months, and sinking every other Democrat's hopes of running a competitive campaign. Option two: Clinton announces in early 2015 that no, she's not running—thus rendering the months of think pieces totally useless, and opening up the nomination to someone you're likely not thinking too much about. If Clinton decides not to run, it could be an enormous boon to one of her fellow Democrats in particular. According to Steve McMahon, a presidential campaign veteran and the cofounder of the political consulting firm Purple Strategies, Clinton's un-candidacy would all but open the door for Democratic Nominee Joe Biden, and the vice president wouldn't hurt for lack of setup time. "It's hers to lose if she wants it, but she may not want it," McMahon said. "If she doesn't run, then there will be a big field, but the longer it takes for the field to materialize, the weaker everybody in it—except Joe Biden—will be." This theory, of course, discounts the fact that while there is a fledgling "Run, Liz, Run" movement there's no "Ready for Joe" movement yet. A recent CNN poll found that 67 percent of likely Democratic voters would vote for Clinton, with Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Biden each trailing her by at least 50 points. Warren received 10 percent to Biden's 8 percent. But what a Biden candidacy lacks in grassroots enthusiasm would be more than made up for with a well-oiled campaign apparatus. "There's no barrier for him," McMahon said. "He's vice president, he's run before, he would inherit the bulk of the Obama campaign machinery and people, and he would be running 60 miles an hour while everybody else was putting on their track shoes." One Democratic consultant noted that the 2016 cycle is odd because of the lack of Democratic candidates who are at least openly flirting with running at this stage. "It's very strange that in 2014, you don't see any of that," the consultant, who asked to be quoted anonymously because of work with potential candidates, said. "And I think it's because many national Democrats are afraid that it will look like they are positioning themselves against Clinton." The general attitude of the Democratic Party leaves Clinton in an enviable position. "I think it's in her best interest to wait," the consultant said. "That doesn't mean it's in the best interest of the Democratic Party." Steve McMahon agrees. "Given the level of organization that's popped up around her, she certainly isn't harmed by waiting," he said. "If I were Hillary Clinton, I would be in absolutely no hurry to decide or announce what I'm doing. If I were somebody else who wants to run for president, I would be desperate to get an answer from her as quickly as possible." That desperation has left Democrats (and political reporters) looking for any tell-tale dog whistles from Clinton—traveling to Iowa or New Hampshire, for instance. But Clinton has been wary not to send any signals. Meanwhile, other national Democrats have used their star power in local races. Warren recently headlined a New Hampshire fundraiser for Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, and Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley has campaigned for candidates in New Hampshire and Iowa. But Warren's campaign work and her rising star in the party—despite her oft-repeated denial that she is running for president—are nothing compared with Clinton's reputation among the well-heeled Democratic donor base. As one New York donor recently told the Daily Beast, "If Elizabeth called me up and said, 'I am thinking of running for president,' I would say, 'Elizabeth, are you out of your [expletive] mind?' " Michael McCurry, a former press secretary to Bill Clinton, said the pressure for Clinton to announce her run could be ratcheted up, depending on the outcome of the midterm elections. "If Democrats lose the Senate in November, then every Democrat will believe that a Democratic president is all that stands between a GOP Congress and reversing some of the progress made in the last generation or so," McCurry said in an email. "Because if she is NOT running, then someone needs time and opportunity to build to her level of national support and name recognition." Joe Trippi, a veteran of Democratic presidential campaigns, says other Democrats who want to run shouldn't hold their breath waiting for Clinton. "There are plenty of people like Martin O'Malley who are out there, going to Iowa, going to New Hampshire, putting the fundraising structure in place if they decide to go," Trippi told National Journal. "And if somebody isn't doing that because they think Hillary Clinton's running ... then they deserve to lose." Clinton has said she would make her announcement (and delete the "TBD" line from her Twitter bio) in "early 2015." But what does history say about when candidates are likely to get into the race? The New Hampshire primary—the first presidential primary in the country—is often used as a benchmark for when candidates should throw their hat into the ring. Before 1972, no presidential nominees declared their candidacy until roughly six months, or 200 days, before the New Hampshire primary. But since 1996, each party's presidential nominee has announced his candidacy earlier, ahead of that six-month mark. In 2008, both John McCain and Barack Obama announced their candidacies more than 300 days ahead of the New Hampshire primary. Some perspective: We are still more than 500 days out from the New Hampshire primary, which will take place on Jan. 26, 2016. So, going by the 300-day benchmark, Clinton has until roughly April 2015 to announce her decision—at least. That could mean eight more excruciating months for pundits and waffling Democratic candidates alike. But Clinton could just as easily wait longer to announce her decision and draw out the suspense. And why not? She has every reason to take her time announcing a decision, and hold off the inevitable oppo-avalanche. "I don't think there are really any real political consequences to her for waiting," Trippi said. "In fact, I think it's to her advantage to wait as long as she wants." *The Wire: “The NeverEnding Book Tour: 52 Days of Hillary Clinton... And Counting” <http://www.thewire.com/politics/2014/07/the-neverending-book-tour-52-days-of-hillary-clinton-and-counting/375278/>* By David Ludwig July 30, 2014, 3:58 p.m. EDT During her four-year tenure as head of the State Department, Hillary Clinton traveled 956,733 miles and visited 112 countries, the most ever by a U.S. Secretary of State. Leaving aside the fact that anyone who served before the airplane didn't have much of a fighting chance, that's still a pretty impressive schedule to keep, and it's one that Hillary looks like she's trying to replicate on her current book tour. For the last 52 days HRC has been the lone competitor in her own Tour de France, peddling from book stores, to universities, to interviews, to book stores in England: Stage 1: Dianne Sawyer; Stage 2: A Costco in Virginia; Stage 3: Okay you get the idea. But unlike the actual Tour de France, this one doesn't seem to have an end date. No, the Tour de Hillary, which started on June 10, is showing no signs of stopping, leaving many of us asking if the eventual sprint to the finish line could include a motorcade traveling down Pennsylvania Avenue during the 2016 Inaugural Parade. Let's take a look back at where Hillary, and her book, have been in the last 52 days. Monday, June 9: Hillary gets off to a rocky start, telling ABC's Dianne Sawyer that the former First Family were "dead broke" after leaving the White House in 2000. Tuesday, June 10: Hillary sits down with Robin Roberts on Good Morning America, then does a book signing at Barnes and Nobles in Union Square in New York City. Wednesday, June 11: Hillary travels to her hometown of Chicago for an interview with Mayor and longtime Clinton supporter Rahm Emanuel at the Harris Theater. Thursday, June 12: Hillary has a tense exchange over gay marriage with NPR's Terry Gross, the same day as her interview on BBC's of Newsnight aired in England. Friday, June 13: Hillary did a book signing at a Philadelphia library at 11:30am, then traveled south to D.C. for a "conversation" at George Washington University at 6pm. Saturday, June 14: While signing copies of her book, Hillary casually ran into her BFF Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor at a Costco in Arlington, Virginia. Sunday, June 15: Hillary looked at pictures from her Wellesley College graduation on CBS Sunday Morning with Jane Pauley. "Yes. Boy, I had long, long hair," she said. Monday, June 16: Hillary traveled north, first to Toronto, Canada in the afternoon and then to the Harvard Book Store in Cambridge, Massachusetts that evening. Tuesday, June 17: Back in Washington D.C., Hillary briefly stops her motorcade to greet an intern from the Republican Campaign Committee who is dressed as a giant squirrel wearing a tee shirt reading "another Clinton in the White House is nuts." She then continued on to a CNN town hall with Christiane Amanpour, wrapping things up with a Fox News interview with Bret Baier and Greta Van Susteren. Wednesday, June 18: Hillary flew to Edmonton in Alberta, Canada to tell more Canadians about her book. Speaking on both a literal and figurative level, Hillary told the packed house "No two countries are closer than we are." Thursday, June 19: Hillary met Glee Star Chris Colfer at a signing in Los Angeles. Friday, June 20: Another day in L.A., another celebrity's book to sign. This time it was music superstar Katy Perry who offered to write Hillary a campaign song. The same day Hillary headed to Austin, Texas where she did another signing at the store BookPeople followed by a speech at the Long Center where she talked about nights spent at the music venue The Armadillo in 1972, The Texas Tribune reported. Saturday, June 21: An interview with Hillary was published in The Guardian. "I wish I had some stock in a scrunchie company," she told Ed Pilkington. Sunday, June 22: Hillary went west to Kansas City, Montana for a speech at The Midland Theater where a ticket came with an autographed copy of Hard Choices. Monday, June 23: Tattered Cover Bookstore in Denver, Colorado hosted Hillary for a book signing. She made no public trips to Colorado's recreational marijuana stores. Wednesday, June 25: Hillary hit up Warwicks in La Jolla, California for a signing, also appearing on the PBS NewsHour in an interview with Gwen Ifill that night. Thursday, June 26: In San Francisco, Hillary got a visit from former Mayor Willie Brown at her Hard Choices signing before doing an event at the Orpheum Theater. Friday, June 27: Hillary spent the morning in Little Rock, Arkansas, then traveled to Dayton, Ohio — Swing state. Cough — for another book signing later that afternoon. Sunday, June 29: Hillary traveled to the town of Chappaqua, New York where she has owned a house since mounting her successful campaign for Senate in 1999. Monday, June 30: Hillary sat down with Aspen Institute CEO Walter Isaacson for a conversation at the Aspen Ideas Festival, which was broadcast live on Facebook. Thursday, July 3: Starting the European portion of her tour, Hillary traveled across the pond, visiting Europe's largest bookstore, Waterstones Piccadilly in London. Friday, July 4: In London, HRC stopped by the set of ITV's This Morning, drawing criticism from Red Alert Politics for "[betraying] the American holiday of July 4." Saturday, July 5: The BBC aired an interview with Hillary on Woman's Hour. Sunday, July 6: At The Schiller Theater in Berlin, Hillary praised German Chancellor Angela Merkel for her style (they both love pant suits) and leadership. "I say in the book I think she is the greatest leader in Europe..." she told the crowd. Tuesday, July 8: On a rainy day in Paris, French President Francois Hollande welcomed Hillary (and her book) to the Elysee Palace with a smile and an umbrella. Tuesday, July 15: Hillary joked with comedian Jon Stewart on The Daily Show. Thursday, July 17: With enough copies of Hard Choices for over a thousand attendees, Hillary signed her book at Bookends in Rigewood, New Jersey. Friday, July 18: Hillary's interview on The Charlie Rose Show aired on PBS. Saturday, July 19: Off to another signing. This time in Madison, Connecticut. Sunday, July 20: Governor Mark Dayton joined Hillary at a signing in St. Paul Minnesota. "I would have waited a week," Hillary enthusiast Shar Anderson told Fox 9 News . "I would have waited out in the sun. I would have waited for anything." Thursday, July 24: Hillary talked about her book with The New York Time's John Harwood in an interview that aired on NPR's "On Point with Tom Ashbrook." Saturday, July 26: Hillary greeted fans at Sam's Club in Seekonk, Massachusetts. Sunday, July 27: Fareed Zakaria's interview with Hillary aired on his GPS on CNN. Tuesday, July 29: The traveling book saleswoman was back in New York yesterday, this time for an event upstate at a bookstore in the town of Saratoga Springs. And there's more to come... Yes, just yesterday the website for Hard Choices added three more scheduled appearances, including one on Martha's Vineyard August 13, four days into President Obama's two-week vacation on the Massachusetts island. Could Hillary's neverending book tour have have a Presidential visit in its future? *The Hill: “Obama pivots to economic legacy” <http://thehill.com/news/administration/213888-obama-pivots-to-economic-legacy>* By Amie Parnes and Peter Schroeder July 31, 2014, 6:00 a.m. EDT President Obama is tying his legacy to a growing economy, seizing on the administration’s successes in boosting the nation during financial woes. Bolstered by a string of positive economic reports, the administration hopes it can increase Democrats’ chances of holding the Senate this fall by highlighting Obama’s stewardship of the economy. More broadly, the White House hopes to ride the wave of an economic recovery to improve Obama’s approval numbers over the final two years of his presidency, setting up a possible Democratic successor at the White House. “It’s the best possible legacy item,” said one former senior administration official. “The elections in 2008 and 2012 were all about the economy and if the nation could bounce back after such terrible times. And look, it shows that, not only did we bounce back, but things are going to an even better place, one where a potential predecessor could build a foundation.” On Wednesday, the Commerce Department said the economy grew at a 4 percent annual rate in the second quarter. The report also included revised figures for 2013 that showed much stronger growth at the end of last year. In the final three months of 2013, the economy expanded at a 3.5 percent rate, up from the previous estimate of 2.6 percent. And in the third quarter, growth was revised to 4.5 percent from 4.1 percent. Hours after the report was released, Obama adopted a confident and fiery tone while making remarks on the economy. For much of his speech in Kansas City, Mo., he ticked off the nation’s economic successes. Since he took over at the helm, millions of new jobs have been added, he said. “Manufacturing is back,” he said. And “our energy, our technology, our auto industries, they’re all booming.” Time and again, he recalled where the nation stood at the height of the financial crisis when he entered the Oval Office at the beginning of 2009. “The crisis that hit near the end of my campaign back in 2008, it would end up costing millions of Americans their jobs, their homes, their sense of security,” Obama told the packed crowd at a theater in the Show Me State. “But we have fought back. We have got back on our feet. We have dusted ourselves off.” The economy has added more than 200,000 jobs per month for the past five months ahead of the release of a new jobs report on Friday, helping to lower the unemployment rate to 6.1 percent. Economists expect that Friday’s report will also be over 200,000 jobs. “None of this is an accident,” Obama said on Wednesday. “It’s thanks to the decisions we made early on. And now America has recovered faster and come farther than just about any other advanced country on earth.” Republicans argue the country is experiencing the slowest economic recovery since a recession on record, and they say Obama’s White House is to blame. Rep. Kevin Brady (R-Texas), chairman of Congress’s Joint Economic Committee, doubled over with laughter when asked about the president’s legacy on the economy. “Seriously?!” he said. The GOP has pointed to ObamaCare and the Dodd-Frank financial overhaul, arguing regulations from those laws have led to economic uncertainties that have slowed the growth of business. Republicans regularly hammer the Senate for not taking up jobs bills passed by the lower chamber. Brady acknowledged that the president was handed a very rough situation when he took power, but said Obama has had more than enough time to put together a recovery that should be far more robust at this point. “The truth is, the weakest economic recovery in President Obama’s lifetime is his own,” he said. “We’re wildly applauding a C-minus economic performance.” But White House aides say Obama will tout the economy as a legacy item in the coming months. “The president will continue to spend time traveling across the country talking to the American people about his domestic priority: expanding economic opportunity for the middle class,” one White House official said on Wednesday. “We’ve made important progress over the last several years,” the official continued, before adding, “but the president believes there is more we can do.” Those close to the White House say Obama’s success on the economy could help Hillary Clinton should she run in the 2016 election. And Clinton allies agree. “I think she will highlight the successful economic initiatives the president has put in place,” one source close to Clintonworld said. “But if she runs, she will run on her own record and will tout her own policy proposals to keep our economy on track and moving forward.” In his speech on Wednesday, a flip Obama had some fun with House Republicans, alluding to the fact that there could be a Democratic president in office after he leaves in 2017. “I know they’re not that happy that I’m president, but that’s OK,” he said. “Come on, I’ve only got a couple of years left. Come on, let’s get some work done. Then you can be mad at the next president.” *Time: “Joe Lieberman: Obama Administration ‘Has Gone Off The Track’ On Israel” <http://time.com/3059340/joe-lieberman-israel-obama-gaza-hillary/>* By Zeke J. Miller July 30, 2014 [Subtitle:] The former Democratic Vice Presidential nominee-turned-independent also says he is watching the rise of Rand Paul "with concern." After 24 years representing Connecticut in the Senate, Joe Lieberman left Washington in Jan. 2013 as a man without a party—a Democrat-turned-independent-turned-GOP-endorser. Speaking to TIME 18 months later, Lieberman is content with his decision to quit the Senate, but still has doubts about Washington’s handling of domestic issues and global crises. “I do feel that the Obama administration has gone off the track in the efforts to broker a ceasefire,” he says, saying that the reported terms of a U.S.-offered agreement would have left Hamas stronger from its ongoing conflict with Israel. The former Democratic vice presidential nominee said he takes issue with the growing “neo-isolationism” within the Democratic and Republican parties, saying he’s watched the rise of Sen. Rand Paul “with concern.” “The world suffers and the American people suffer eventually both in terms of our security and our prosperity—and ultimately our freedom—if we’re not engaged in problems elsewhere,” he says. Lieberman said he has yet to make a decision about who to endorse in 2016, after drawing fire from Democrats for his outspoken support for Sen. John McCain over then-Sen. Barack Obama in 2008. But he said he believes former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would keep the Democratic Party engaged in the world. Lieberman was recently named the inaugural Joseph Lieberman Chair in Public Policy and Public Service at Yeshiva University where he will deliver lectures and teach in the upcoming academic year. Lieberman says he hopes to convince young people to pursue public service despite the gridlock in Washington. The following conversation has been lightly condensed and edited: Looking at the dysfunction in Washington today, are you glad you left Congress? How do you plan on encouraging young people to go into public service in this political climate? I didn’t leave because of the partisanship and the lack of getting anything done, but it made it a lot easier to leave. I will tell you that my last two years was the least productive of my 24 for me and for the Congress really. And I watch it needless to say from here with a sense of, oh, disappointment, frustration, and in some sense embarrassment because I still feel an identity with the institution. And I know how important it is that it gets some problems solved. Notwithstanding all of that, or maybe in some sense because of all the dysfunction in the federal government and government generally, but the federal government particularly, people like me have to try to convince students that it’s worth getting involved and that they can still make a difference and maybe together with others of like mind and heart they can actually change things for the better. I look back on my years in public service with a lot of gratitude for the various things that I was able to do. Part of my message to the students at YU is going to be I never got, honestly, anything significant done without the support of people in the Republican Party. In other words, I never felt that I could do it alone as a Democrat, and obviously in my last term as an independent I needed support of people in both parties. It’s all about a willingness to put—as formalistic as it sounds—to put the interests of country ahead of the interests of party or ideology. How do you view the turmoil in the world today and the American response, particularly to the conflict in Gaza? These events have occurred of their own momentum. They have a life of their own. On the other hand, I’m afraid that the U.S. has sent a message that we’re going to be less engaged in the world than we have been at other times in our history and I’m afraid that encourages some others to try to take advantage of us and our allies. It’s not just President Obama and the U.S. government, I think in many ways it’s the Europeans as well. And I’m afraid that may have encouraged Putin to seize the moment and seize Crimea. So the world suffers and the American people suffer eventually both in terms of our security and our prosperity—and ultimately our freedom—if we’re not engaged in problems elsewhere. So that’s a general statement. I think in the Hamas-Israel conflict, which is just one of a broader series of conflicts going on in the middle east, the administration has been strong in supporting Israel’s right to defend itself against the Hamas missile attacks and the Hamas terrorist attacks. But lately, I do feel that the Obama administration has gone off the track in the efforts to broker a ceasefire, as much as everybody would like to see the violence stop. Because I think those efforts, if they had been pushed any harder—it seems like they have fallen by the wayside now—would have really allowed Hamas to emerge from this much stronger than they went into it and they began this. Israel is our ally and Israel is a democracy and Israel is governed by the rule of law. Hamas is a terrorist organization that is a declared enemy of the U.S. as well as Israel. And the last proposal made by Secretary Kerry, who I greatly admire and like, but nonetheless if the proposal was as it was reported, it really would have strengthened Hamas and weakened Israel. And in some sense coincidentally strengthened Qatar, Turkey, and Iran who are backing Hamas and weakened our other allies in the Arab world like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the UAE and the Palestinian Authority who don’t want to see Hamas strengthened. So I think it was a mistake and I’m glad it seems to have fallen by the wayside and I hope the Secretary tries again but with another plan. Looking ahead to the 2016 election, what do you make of the field. Many Democrats are coalescing around former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, do you think you will as well? I don’t know yet. It’s good to be out of active politics and watching it. I’ve known Secretary Clinton for a long time. We met briefly, though I got to know President Clinton much better, when they were both at Yale Law School. And I’ve known them well. So I have a lot of respect for Hillary Clinton and some of the things that I’ve worried about in both the Obama administration and the drift of the Democratic party which is away from American international leadership, I hope and believe would not be true with Hillary Clinton as the candidate, and if she’s elected, as the president. But it’s much too early for me, anyway, to decide what or whether or if anybody cares I will do in this campaign. The more fascinating part of the campaign, of course, will be the Republican presidential primaries. What do you make of the rise of Sen. Rand Paul and the Republican Party’s isolationist wing. I’ve watched it with concern, because honestly, as a pro-defense Democrat, there’s a way in which I relied for some period of time on the Republicans—and some Democrats, but not other Democrats—to support strong defense, muscular foreign policy, etc. Now there is a certain attrition happening on the Republican side, mostly among the so-called libertarians and to a certain extent among tea party people who are so focused on reducing taxes that they seem more willing than Republicans have in recent years to cut back on support of America’s defense. There is—I don’t think any of us have found the right word for it, so I opt for neo-isolationism. There is a kind neo-isolationism, certainly a retrenchment from internationalism going on in both parties and to me it’s troubling. It’s troubling for the future of the country. How did this appointment come about? What are you hoping to accomplish? It ended up with an unexpected result. Richard Joel, the president of YU, reached out to me last year about wanting to do something in my name at YU in public policy. For the obvious reason, I suppose, that I am both Orthodox Jewish and was involved in public service. I was touched and honored by that. Because I hoped and still do that it’s going to be a permanent, endowed chair, but then they surprised me toward the end of the process asking me to be the first occupant of the chair, which I’ll do for a while as long as it’s working for me and the students, but i’m exciting about it. It’s very much part time. I’m going to give three public lectures in the fall semester in various schools of the university, probably starting with one Yeshiva College, one at Stern [College for Women], and then one at Cardozo [Law School]. And then in the second semester I will teach an undergraduate course in public policy, public service. So I’m looking forward to it. I actually taught this last semester at Columbia law School and I’m going to repeat that course this fall and I enjoyed it immensely, more than I expected actually. It was just very rewarding to try to convey what I experienced and learned to the next generation of students, some of whom, hopefully, will consider public service. I’ve taught college courses way back to the late 70s and early 80s at Yale. So those were residential college seminars and I enjoyed that too. But I must say that I’m at a different stage of my life. I finished my time in elected office, I look back at it with great gratitude that I had the opportunities I did. There is no question I was influenced by people who were in once sense or another teachers of mine. So I view this as an opportunity both to try to inform students today about public policy, but also to hopefully attract some of them into public service. *The Week: “Why Mitt Romney is perfectly poised for a comeback in 2016” <http://theweek.com/article/index/265552/why-mitt-romney-is-perfectly-poised-for-a-comeback-in-2016>* By Matt K. Lewis July 31, 2014, 6:18 a.m. EDT [Subtitle:] Nobody has ever rooted for that scrappy Romney kid to overcome the odds. Until, maybe, now. Perhaps it says something about us that our most interesting presidential candidates swear they won't run for president. This is true of Sen. Elizabeth Warren, and it's increasingly true of Mitt Romney. As regular readers of this column know, I've never been much of a Romney booster. I've also expressed skepticism about the notion he would run again. But let's not let 'a foolish consistency' cloud our judgment. There is reason to believe that a third try wouldn't be an absurd venture. First, in the intervening years since 2012 — and on a range of issues, not the least of which is Russia — Romney has been proven right. And second — perhaps more importantly — one of the reasons so many observers viscerally disliked Romney was the cloying "goody-goody" quality that this fortunate son seemed to ooze. But do you know what the cure for that is? Losing. That's right, Mitt Romney the scrappy underdog — the loser who's out to redeem himself — is a more attractive Mitt. You know the term, "lovable loser?" He should embrace it. There's a reason why Rocky gets knocked out by "Clubber" Lang early on in Rocky III. The rest of the movie is about the comeback. This journey involves Rocky shedding the trappings of fame and wealth — and getting real. Romney would similarly have to get real. No more phoniness. No more telling us what he thinks we want to hear. He would have to be utterly authentic, and he would have to show that losing caused him to encounter pain and reflection. (The good news is that the Netflix film, Mitt, already helped show this side of Romney.) Could Romney III be like Rocky III? Maybe, if the narrative is true and convincing. There's a reason the "comeback" trope resonates with us (aside from Rocky, it's a prevalent theme in almost every boxing movie, ranging from The Fighter to Cinderella Man). These tropes are timeless precisely because they tap into something that we intuitively understand about nobility, courage, and humility. People like comebacks. We can identify with the guy or gal who is struggling to redeem themselves (and nobody has ever identified with Mitt Romney before). Ironically, Romney is almost tailor made to benefit from having lost before. What might be a devastating blow to most political figures — a blight on their resume — actually transforms Romney into a more compelling candidate. Having struggled and stumbled is, for Romney, at least, a feature, not a bug. The same could be said for Hillary Clinton, who only became a compelling candidate in 2008 when she lost her frontrunner status. People who were hated the first time around — when their lives seemed charmed — can, by facing adversity and overcoming the odds, transform into sympathetic figures — heroes, even — that we actually root for (think Robert Downey, Jr.). Nobody has ever rooted for that scrappy Romney kid to overcome the odds. Until, maybe, now. Someone who knows a thing or two about comebacks is Pat Buchanan. In fact, his new book is called The Greatest Comeback; How Richard Nixon Rose from Defeat to Create the New Majority. During a recent discussion, I asked Buchanan about the prospects of Mitt Romney taking a page from the Nixon playbook. After all, George Romney figures prominently into the Nixon comeback story. "First, I admire that Romney is thinking of this," Buchanan told me during a recent podcast discussion, "and he ought to follow what's in his heart." Buchanan, whose sister was a Romney advisor, believes that Romney should take a page from the Nixon handbook. Having lost to Kennedy in 1960, and then having lost the 1962 gubernatorial election in California, Nixon was assumed politically dead. But he was revived by working hard for other candidates — he worked hard for conservative Barry Goldwater in 1964, and backed liberal Republican Nelson Rockefeller's candidacy in New York — just to name two of the many GOPers he hit the hustings for between 1962 and 1968. "If I were Romney, there's no doubt I would do it," Buchanan (who thrice ran for president, himself) continued, adding: "But I'm not him." *Calendar:* *Sec. Clinton's upcoming appearances as reported online. Not an official schedule.* · August 6 – Huntington, NY: Sec. Clinton signs books at Book Revue ( HillaryClintonMemoir.com <http://www.hillaryclintonmemoir.com/long_island_book_signing>) · August 9 – Water Mill, NY: Sec. Clinton fundraises for the Clinton Foundation at the home of George and Joan Hornig (WSJ <http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/06/17/for-50000-best-dinner-seats-with-the-clintons-in-the-hamptons/> ) · August 13 – Martha’s Vinyard, MA: Sec. Clinton signs books at Bunch of Grapes (HillaryClintonMemoir.com <http://www.hillaryclintonmemoir.com/martha_s_vineyard_book_signing>) · August 16 – East Hampton, New York: Sec. Clinton signs books at Bookhampton East Hampton (HillaryClintonMemoir.com <http://www.hillaryclintonmemoir.com/long_island_book_signing2>) · August 28 – San Francisco, CA: Sec. Clinton keynotes Nexenta’s OpenSDx Summit (BusinessWire <http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20140702005709/en/Secretary-State-Hillary-Rodham-Clinton-Deliver-Keynote#.U7QoafldV8E> ) · September 4 – Las Vegas, NV: Sec. Clinton speaks at the National Clean Energy Summit (Solar Novis Today <http://www.solarnovus.com/hillary-rodham-clinto-to-deliver-keynote-at-national-clean-energy-summit-7-0_N7646.html> ) · October 2 – Miami Beach, FL: Sec. Clinton keynotes the CREW Network Convention & Marketplace (CREW Network <http://events.crewnetwork.org/2014convention/>) · October 13 – Las Vegas, NV: Sec. Clinton keynotes the UNLV Foundation Annual Dinner (UNLV <http://www.unlv.edu/event/unlv-foundation-annual-dinner?delta=0>) · ~ October 13-16 – San Francisco, CA: Sec. Clinton keynotes salesforce.com Dreamforce conference (salesforce.com <http://www.salesforce.com/dreamforce/DF14/keynotes.jsp>) · December 4 – Boston, MA: Sec. Clinton speaks at the Massachusetts Conference for Women (MCFW <http://www.maconferenceforwomen.org/speakers/>)