One interesting event in Sen. Hillary Clinton’s just-released schedules from the 1990s comes on Nov. 10 1993, when the former first lady was to serve as the closing act during a briefing on NAFTA, the trade agreement she now assails.

11:30 am -
11:45 am

NAFTA BRIEFING DROP-BY
Room 450, OEOB
CLOSED PRESS

PARTICIPANTS: Approx 120 expected to attend
(See briefing book for further info)

FORMAT:
- Alexis Herman intros HRC for brief remarks
-HRC concludes program

(pp. 1375 and 1376)

Two attendees of that closed-door briefing, neither of whom are affiliated with any campaign, describe that event for ABC News. It was a room full of women involved in international trade. David Gergen served as a sort of master of ceremonies as various women members of the Cabinet talked up NAFTA, which had yet to pass Congress.

"It wasn’t a drop-by it was organized around her participation," said one attendee. "Her remarks were totally pro-NAFTA and what a good thing it would be for the economy. There was no equivocation for her support for NAFTA at the time. Folks were pleased that she came by. If this is a still a question about what Hillary’s position when she was First Lady, she was totally supportive if NAFTA.

That first attendee recalls that the First Lady’s office in the East Wing put together "the invitation list, who was invited authorizations and all that stuff."

Read the rest of this entry �

Hillary Rodham Clinton was home in the White House on a half dozen days when her husband had sexual encounters there with intern Monica Lewinsky, according to Sen. Clinton’s schedule, released Wednesday among 11,000 pages of papers from her years as first lady.

The words of the schedules are dry, but they take on emotional weight when coupled with revelations about the sex scandal that eventually came to light. A year later, the first lady’s schedules show her pressing ahead with public events and showing her face as revelations about the scandal upended her life and threatened Bill Clinton’s presidency.

The papers also shed light on her struggle for health care reform early in the Clinton administration, her scaling back when that effort failed, her travels abroad and the legal woes that dogged the Clintons in the White House.

It’s unlikely she would be surprised at this late date to learn that the president was cheating on her while she was at home in the White House. But the release of the documents reminds voters anew about Bill Clinton’s affair and the impeachment proceedings that brought Washington to a halt for a year.

The private crisis came at the most public of times for the first lady.

She had speeches scheduled, at home and abroad. She appeared by President Clinton’s side at an education event where he angrily dismissed the reports of having sex with Lewinsky.

Her schedule has her choosing flowers for a black-tie dinner, congratulating "Guns Aren’t Cool" award winners and reading to kids in the week in January 1998 when allegations of the scandal begin coming out. She denounced a "vast right-wing conspiracy" in a TV interview.

Almost a year earlier, the schedules show, she was home on Feb. 28, 1997, the day when the Kenneth Starr report says Bill Clinton had a sexual encounter with Lewinsky in an Oval Office bathroom in the early evening, staining her blue dress.

Read the rest of this entry �

A majority of Democratic voters say it would be unfair for Hillary Rodham Clinton to win the presidential nomination through the support of "super delegates" if she lags among the convention delegates elected in primaries and caucuses, according to a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll.

If that happens, one in five say they wouldn’t vote for the New York senator in the general election.

The findings in the survey, taken Friday through Sunday, underscore some of the perils ahead for Democrats as the closely fought nomination battle between Clinton and Illinois Sen. Barack Obama continues.

By 55%-37%, Democrats and independents who "lean" Democratic say an outcome in which Clinton lost among pledged delegates but prevailed with the help of super delegates would be "flawed" and unfair" — including 77% of Obama supporters and 28% of Clinton supporters.

Read it all at USA Today

In a speech on Iraq policy delivered Monday at George Washington University, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton recalled facing “sniper fire” on her 1996 trip to Bosnia to visit U.S. troops on a peacekeeping mission. But reporters traveling with the then-First Lady made no reference to any “sniper fire” at the time, and pictures of Clinton arriving at the main air base in Tuzla (see attached video) don’t show anyone ducking or covering.

Read more at Newsbusters with photos!

Hmm I wonder if the morning of the Waco Branch Davidian Fire will be accounted for? Many people have concluded that Hillary might have been the one to force the confrontation - and Reno took the wrap.

The National Archives announced on Tuesday that 11,046 pages of Senator Hillary Rodham’s White House schedules will be released on Wednesday.

The records were the subject of a legal fight between Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group, and the National Archives, which has been slow to comply with a request to release the records, arguing that the vetting process takes time.

Mrs. Clinton’s schedules have attracted close attention throughout the campaign, partly because Mrs. Clinton has frequently held up her eight years as first lady as evidence of her experience.

Judicial Watch announced on March 4 that the National Archives promised to release at least 10,000 pages of the records by March 20.

The Archives said in a statement on Tuesday that the schedules are from the staff files of Patti Solis Doyle, Mrs. Clinton’s former campaign manager who was her chief scheduler in the White House.

“Arranged chronologically, these records document in detail the activities of the First Lady, including meetings, trips, speaking engagements and social activities for the eight years of the Clinton Administration,” the statement said.

Of the more than 11,000 pages to be released, 4,746 pages have redactions, mostly relating to “the privacy interests of third parties,” including Social Security numbers, telephone numbers and home addresses, the Archives said.

Source: Times

Democrats have to be asking themselves how they got to this point. Hopes of a quick and definitive primary have disappeared and they find themselves embroiled in a bitter stalemate punctuated with accusations of racism and sexism while the GOP nominee uses the time to raise money and mend fences.

The irony of course is that Hillary Clinton has gone from being the inevitable and early nominee to waging a desperate battle until the convention; from planning an above the fray campaign with feints to the center to throwing everything she can think of at her opponent no matter the ideological coherence or potential damage to the party.

And with the awkward question of what to do with the delegates from Michigan and Florida still left unresolved, Democrats have to be wondering how far and how ugly this can go.

A few things are clear: Hillary won’t give up as long as there is a slim chance for victory and she will use all available weapons. If there is a remotely plausible scenario where she wins, she will hang on. If a tactic has a chance of giving her an advantage, no matter how temporary, she will use it.

What sometimes gets lost in the mythology and nostalgia surrounding the Clintons, particularly among hardcore Democrats, is that their primary mode of politics is to attack in order to survive.

Read on for more on this pattern and its implications.

The pattern plays itself out with regularity: they overreach politically or refuse to come clean about ethical lapses; their response is to attack the press and their critics; and the goal quickly switches from accomplishment to survival.

The problem is that they have pulled this off so often that they believe they are invincible; that they really are martyrs to a vast conspiracy. Hillary in particular has never been known to reflect on her actions and there inevitable repercussions. Her first response is always: attack!

What did Hillary do when confronted with questions about land deals and investments in Arkansas? She stonewalled, lied, and attacked the press and her critics all the while pretending that she was completely innocent.

Read the rest of this entry �

Not to be outdone by Obama in the “making a fool of myself” arena Hillary comes out with this:

Democrat Hillary Clinton charged on Monday the Iraq war may cost Americans $1 trillion and add strain to the sagging US economy as she made her case for a prompt US troop pullout from a war “we cannot win.”

Jveritas at FR, who translated many of the Saddam Documents, found this nugget in response to her statement that we can’t win:

It did not take long for Ekhlaas, the largest terrorist forum on the internet to rejoice and be all happy with Hillary Clinton defeatist statements today about the war in Iraq. Hillary Clinton said that we cannot win this war even if we stay there for a 100 year. The terrorists were very glad to hear this and below are some of their comments which I translated:

“Zamjari”: Allah is Great Brothers, Hillary Clinton: We cannot win the war in Iraq even if we stay for a hundred year

“Moukhles Moutaalek”: You dogs, you sacrifice the future of your country so you can win a presidential election. If America withdraws from Iraq this will give a clear signal that America can be defeated and America will suffer from attacks all over the world. Taste the flavor of treason you Americans, I am mocking you, may allah put the in authority the traitors from their own skin, the slaves of thrones.

“Younis Al Shami”: In America’s fight against the people of Mesopotamia, America will forget the horrors of Vietnam

“Hode”: Allah protect Sheikh Ossama the conqueror of the Americans from the plots of the enemies

Way to go Hillary! Tell the world that we cannot win a war we are winning already.

More from todays speech:

Now, withdrawal is not risk-free, but the risks of staying in Iraq are certain. And a well-planned withdrawal is the one and only path to a political solution. The only way to spur the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own future and to ensure that we don’t bear that responsibility indefinitely. The only way to spur other countries to do their part to help secure stability in the region. The commitment to staying in Iraq has driven President Bush’s foreign policy. It looks like it would drive Senator McCain’s foreign policy as well, but it will not drive mine. My foreign policy will be driven by what is in America’s national security interests…

The most important part of my plan is the first step, to bring our troops home and send the strongest possible message to the Iraqis that they must take responsibly for their own future. No more talk of permanent occupation, no more policing a civil war, no more doing for the Iraqis what they need to be doing for themselves. As president, one of my first official actions will be to convene the Joint Chiefs of Staff, my Secretary of Defense and my National Security Council and direct them to draw up a clear, viable plan to start bringing our troops home within the first 60 days of my taking office. A plan based on my consultation with the military to remove one to two brigades a month, a plan that reduces the risks of attack as they depart.

And Allah reminds us about how far she would go to get our troops out of Iraq from a year old interview:

In a half-hour interview on Tuesday in her Senate office, Mrs. Clinton said the scaled-down American military force that she would maintain in Iraq after taking office would stay off the streets in Baghdad and would no longer try to protect Iraqis from sectarian violence — even if it descended into ethnic cleansing.

Asked if Americans would endure having troops in Iraq who do nothing to stop sectarian attacks there, Mrs. Clinton replied, “Look, I think the American people are done with Iraq. I think they’re at a point where, whether they thought it was a good idea or not, they have seen misjudgment and blunder after blunder, and their attitude is, what is this getting us? What is this doing for us?”

“No one wants to sit by and see mass killing,” she added. “It’s going on every day! Thousands of people are dying every month in Iraq. Our presence there is not stopping it. And there is no potential opportunity I can imagine where it could. This is an Iraqi problem — we cannot save the Iraqis from themselves. If we had a different attitude going in there, if we had stopped the looting immediately, if we had asserted our authority — you can go down the lines, if, if, if.”

No problem with ethnic cleansing in Iraq to ensure that the war Bush started in Iraq goes down in defeat but she begged her hubby to stop the ethnic cleansing in Rwanda way back when.

Source: Flopping Aces

During Hillary’s Clinton’s New York race for the Senate in 2000, a man in an Uncle Sam suit calling himself ”Tax Man” followed Republican candidate Rick Lazio around, demanding to know why Lazio was so slow in making his income tax returns public.

”The people of New York have a right to know what he’s hiding,” said Howard Wolfson, then a top Clinton aide who often trailed behind ”Tax Man” feeding reporters campaign spin. “Rick Lazio’s 15 minutes are up — he should stop making excuses and come clean with New Yorkers.”

Eight years later, Clinton and her presidential campaign aren’t making her income tax returns public. She’s promised to release her income tax information on or around April 15.

Wolfson, now the Clinton campaign’s communications director, won’t say why Clinton wouldn’t release her tax information earlier. Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., her rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, released his 2006 tax returns last April.

The junior senator from New York isn’t the only presidential candidate who hasn’t made tax records public. Arizona Sen. John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, hasn’t either. His campaign says that he’ll make his records public in the next month or so.

McCain has never made his tax returns public, but Clinton has. In 1994, under political pressure over the Whitewater land deal controversy, the Clintons made public all their tax returns since 1977. The couple also disclosed their tax returns during Bill Clinton’s eight years in the White House, but not since.

The delays by Clinton and McCain perplex some government watchdog groups, which note that past presidential candidates had no trouble producing their tax returns in a timely fashion. Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee, released his tax information in December 2003, for example.

”This is a part of the public record that voters have come to expect. Concern grows when anything is withheld,” said Sheila Krumholz of the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonprofit organization that examines money and politics. “If it means waiting until April 15, we wait until April 15. We just don’t know why.”

Read the rest of this entry �

Is it possible to win the Democratic nomination in such a way as to make winning not worth it?

The Barack Obama campaign thinks so. It thinks Hillary Clinton’s campaign is willing to take any road to the White House, including the low road.

“They would do anything to win, and that means anything,” David Axelrod, Obama’s chief strategist, told me Monday. “There is a frenetic energy around them to commandeer this election in any way they can.”

Axelrod went on: “She is the ultimate Washington inside player. She is always asking, ‘How do we wire the vote? How do we wire the system to get the results we want?’”

From his point of view, the Clinton campaign keeps trying to change the rules.

“When they started off, it was all about delegates,” Axelrod said. “Now that we have more delegates, it’s all about the popular vote. And if that does not work out, they will probably challenge us to a game of cribbage to choose the nominee.”

Another Obama senior aide told me he believed Clinton was willing to “destroy the party” just as long as she ends up with the nomination.

I asked Clinton Communications Director Howard Wolfson for a response.

“I think these apocalyptic quotes are unhelpful,” Wolfson said. “I don’t envision that either side would destroy the party. There is a democratic process here to play out. This process is not over. There are still 10 [contests] left to vote. What is the fear here? Let’s let democracy run its course.”

From the perspective of the Clinton campaign, it has little choice but to go all-out. As a top Clinton aide admitted to me: “Under our projections, if you sat both the Michigan and Florida delegations as they now exist and based on our projections for the remaining contests, Sen. Clinton would still trail narrowly on pledged delegates going into the convention.”

Read the rest of this entry �