Subject: H4A News Clips 5.20.15
From: Alexandria Phillips <[email-masked]>
To: Alexandria Phillips <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 07:40:37 -0400
List-Id: <hrcrapid.googlegroups.com>

*H4A Press Clips*

*May 20, 2015*

SUMMARY OF TODAY’S NEWS

Hillary Clinton was in Cedar Falls, Iowa yesterday and spoke with small
business owners about small business growth in America, the economy and
American families. She also took questions from members of the press corps
in attendance. The Iowa press coverage focused on her commitment to small
businesses while the national coverage focused on the Q&A.

The campaign released information about campaign trips to Missouri, Texas
and Florida where Hillary Clinton will campaign and the stories ran in
those markets before fundraising invitations leaked about those trips.

NBC News Latino and La Opinoin are reporting that Hillary for America hires
DREAMer Lorella Paeli to be the campaign Latino outreach director. Praeli,
who was undocumented for almost 13 years and became an outspoken advocate
during that time, will be the Clinton campaign's main point person with
Latino communities around the country.

USA Today did a profile piece about the Hillary for America strategy saying
that the early phase of the campaign has worked while the AP has a story
about the campaign strategist sticking to plans or structure of the
campaign and not changing after most recent news.

LAST NIGHTS EVENING NEWS

All three networks had segments on HRC's trip to Iowa and answering
questions from reporters. ABC focused on how HRC could relate to voters
despite her vast wealth and went on to discuss her State Department emails,
including the clip of HRC stating that she wants her emails to be released
as soon as possible. CBS focused on the State Department emails noted HRC
urged the State Department to speed up its timeline; said HRC kept the
emails on her home server for two years before Republicans on the Benghazi
Committee demanded them; reported HRC had been avoiding answering questions
about emails she deleted and foreign donations to The Clinton Foundation.
NBC had a short segment on HRC's Iowa roundtable and taking questions from
the press reported Republicans slammed HRC for her use of private emails;
showed Christie’s comments from The Kelly File last night in which he said
her use of a private email server was “incredible”; shifted into HRC’s
answer on Iraq.

SUMMARY OF TODAY’S
NEWS.......................................................................
1

LAST NIGHTS EVENING
NEWS...................................................................... 1

TODAY’S KEY
STORIES...................................................................................
4

*Iowa shrugs off Clinton controversies* // CNN // Eric Bradner - May 19,
2015.................................. 4

*Clinton touts small business in Cedar Falls, Independence stops* // WCF
Courier // Christinia Crippes - May 19,
2015...........................................................................................................................................
6

*Clinton campaign aims for style, substance points amid scrutiny* // USA
Today // Martha T. Moore - May 19,
2015..................................................................................................................................................
9

*Hillary Clinton Taps DREAMer Lorella Praeli As Latino Outreach Director*
// NBC News Latino // Sandra Lilley – May 20,
2015.............................................................................................................................
12

*Hillary Clinton will host an Atlanta fundraiser next week* // AJC // Greg
Bluestein - May 19, 2015. 13

*Hillary Clinton to travel to Florida, Texas and Missouri* // MSNBC // Alex
Seitz-Wald - May 19, 2015 14

SOCIAL
MEDIA...............................................................................................
14

*Joshua Green (5/19/15, 11:53 AM)* Elizabeth Warren on @BloombergTV asked
about Hillary's refusal to take position on TPP: "I’d like to see her be
clearer on
that"................................................................ 14

*Speaker John Boehner (5/19/15, 2:49 PM)* Revealed: “Hillary Received Memo
Describing #Benghazi As Planned Terror Attack Within Hours,” reports
@DailyCaller *http://j.mp/1HsrfLo
<http://j.mp/1HsrfLo>*......................................
15

*Howard Kurtz (5/19/15, 4:09 PM)* Hillary's pal & Clinton foundation guy
Sid Blumenthal emails about Libya while trying to do business with Libya.
Will discuss w
@megynkelly.................................................... 15

*Charlie Mahtesian (5/19/15, 4:04 PM)* Hillary Clinton will hit the
fundraising trail June 5 in Greenwich, CT, at a $29.7 million Roman villa
http://blog.ctnews.com/politics/2015/05/19/hillary-clinton-to-hit-fundraising-trail-in-greenwich/
…........................................................................................................................
15

*Correct the Record (5/19/15, 4:00 PM)* @woodhouseb will join @erinburnett
on @outfrontcnn tonight to talk about @HillaryClinton's visit to
Iowa.........................................................................................
15

*Martin Chavez (5/18/15, 8:05 PM)* Hillary to join us in Albuquerque June
3rd for a fundraiser breakfast!  We've got to raise money early to make...
http://fb.me/6DtQ396Xa......................................................
15

*Martin O'Malley (5/19/15, 6:20 AM)* I've got exciting news to share about
my upcoming announcement on May 30th. Follow me on Snapchat at
GovernorOMalley to find out @ 12pm ET!................................... 15

*Jonathan Topaz (5/19/15, 5:45 PM)* Hm: @BernieSanders: "I don't think six
debates are enough...we will be interacting with the DNC to try [for] as
many debates as possible"............................................... 15

*Michael Barbaro (5/19/15, 6:19 AM)* Possible explanation for why Christie
wouldn't address immigration for months? Was preparing to change his
position:
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/05/19/chris-christie-citizenship-for-undocumented-immigrants-extreme/
…............................................................. 15

HRC NATIONAL
COVERAGE.........................................................................
15

*Howard Dean urges NH Democrats, progressives to back Hillary Clinton* //
WMUR // May 19, 2015 15

*New report claims al-Qaeda-Benghazi link known day after attack* // USA
Today // Oren Dorell - May 19,
2015.................................................................................................................................................
16

*GOP fumbles latest attack on Hillary Clinton's email use* // CBS News //
Jake Miller - May 19, 2015 17

*Hillary Clinton on her emails: I want them out, too!* // Politico // Josh
Gerstein and Gabriel Debenedetti - May 19,
2015..........................................................................................................................................
19

*Clinton's "Second Email Address" Was Explained Months Ago, But Fox Missed
The Evidence* // Media Matters // Hannah Groch-Belgey - May 19,
2015.........................................................................................
21

*Hillary Clinton says her Iraq war vote was a 'mistake'* // Politico //
Adam Lerner – May 19, 2015... 23

*Hillary Clinton’s State Department Staff Kept Tight Rein on Records* //
WSJ // Laura Meckler - May 19,
2015................................................................................................................................................
24

*Hillary talks tough on Wall Street regulation* // CNN // MJ Lee - May 19,
2015............................. 28

*Republicans Very Troubled By Clinton Donors See No Conflict With Their Own
Dark Money* // Huffington Post // Paul Blumenthal - May 19,
2015.................................................................................................
29

*Half of Hillary Clinton’s Speaking Fees Came From Groups Also Lobbying
Congress* // TIME // Philip Elliott - May 19,
2015....................................................................................................................................
30

*From ‘dead broke’ to multimillionaires* // WaPo // Kennedy Elliott,
Alexander Becker, Philip Rucker, Tom Hamburger, Peter Wallsten, and
Rosalind Helderman - May 19, 2015..........................................
31

*Hillary Clinton’s hypocrisy* // WaPo // Dan Milbank – May 19,
2015............................................. 31

*Hillary Clinton downplays Sidney Blumenthal's influence* // Politico //
Adam Lerner – May 19, 2015                33

*Hillary Clinton Tamps Down ‘Third Term’ Chatter* // NYT // Maggie Haberman
- May 19, 2015..... 34

*Hillary’s launch delay* // Politico // Annie Karnia - May 19,
2015.................................................. 37

*Hillary Clinton vows help for small business* // McClatchy DC // Anita
Kumar - May 19, 2015....... 38

*Clinton pops in on small business owners* // Des Moines Register // Tony
Leys - May 19, 2015..... 40

*Iowans wonder: How long can Clinton's big campaign stay small?* // CNN //
Eric Bradner - May 19, 2015         41

*The 6 questions Hillary Clinton answered in Iowa* // Des Moines Register
// Jennifer Jacobs - May 19, 2015   44

*After media drought, Hillary Clinton takes some questions in Iowa* // WaPo
// Robert Costa and David Fahrenthold - May 19,
2015........................................................................................................
47

*Hillary Clinton finally takes questions, defends speech income* // WaPo //
Robert Costa - May 19, 2015           49

*Hillary Clinton Talks to Small-Business Owners in Iowa, Then Gives
Reporters a Turn* // NYT // Amy Chozick - May 19,
2015.............................................................................................................................
50

*Hillary Clinton Finally Takes Reporters' Questions in Iowa* // National
Journal // Emily Schultheis - May 19,
2015................................................................................................................................................
53

*In Iowa, Hillary Clinton Takes A Question About Her Questions* // Buzzfeed
News // Ruby Cramer - May 19,
2015................................................................................................................................................
54

*After A Month, The 7 Questions Hillary Clinton Answered From The Media* //
NPR // Amita Kelly – May 19,
2015................................................................................................................................................
57

*Even when flying with the public, Hillary Clinton keeps it private* //
MSNBC // Alex Seitz-Wald - May 19,
2015................................................................................................................................................
60

*Rand Welcomes Hillary to the Felon Voting Rights Cause–But She's Been
There for Years* // Bloomberg // David Weigel - May 19,
2015................................................................................................................
61

*On Trade Deal, Hillary Sits on the Fence* // US News // David Catanese -
May 19, 2015................ 63

*Clinton finds problems with Obama TPP trade proposal* // CNN // Eric
Bradner - May 19, 2015..... 64

*Clinton, White House spar over trade as fast-track vote looms* // Reuters
// Amanda Becker - May 19, 2015   65

*Hillary Clinton Is Pitching Herself To Millennials* // Huffington Post //
Howard Fineman - May 19, 2015         66

*Hillary Clinton's top campaign aides in Nevada* // Ralston Reports // Jon
Ralston - May 19, 2015. 67

*Hillary Clinton to hit fundraising trail in Greenwich* // CT News // Neil
Vigdor - May 19, 2015....... 68

*Nurtured by Clinton Network, O'Malley Now Becomes 2016 Rival* // ABC News
// Lisa Lerer and Ken Thomas, Associated Press - May 19,
2015.................................................................................................
70

*Clinton Super PAC Executive Director Exits Amid Shake-Up* // BuzzFeed //
Ruby Cramer –May 21, 2015        72

*Iowa Democrats: Flawed Clinton Our Only Hope* // Bloomberg // David
Knowles – May 20,2015.. 73

*Amid criticism, Clinton sticks to low-key campaign strategy* // AP //
Julie Pace – May 20, 2015.... 74

*Fundraiser puts spotlight on Clinton Foundation finances* // Politico //
Gabriel Debenedetti....... 76

OTHER DEMOCRATS NATIONAL
COVERAGE............................................ 78

*O'Malley announces 2016 launch details* // Politico // Jonathan Topaz -
May 19, 2015.................. 78

*O'Malley picks Federal Hill to announce next move* // Baltimore Sun //
John Fritze - May 19, 2015 79

*Elizabeth Warren Wants Hillary Clinton To 'Weigh In On Trade'* //
Huffington Post // Dana Liebelson - May 19,
2015.........................................................................................................................................
80

GOP.................................................................................................................
81

*Marc Lasry Says Jeb Bush Would Be ‘Reasonable’ President* // Bloomberg //
Saijel Kishan - May 19, 2015      81

*Marco Rubio Coming To Nevada Later This Month* // CBS Local // May 19,
2015........................... 81

*Seth Meyers Mocks Marco Rubio’s ‘Bumpy Sunday’ on Iraq* // Mediaite //
Matt Wilstein - May 19, 2015           82

*CNN Asks Rand Paul What He Would Do If ISIS Entered Baghdad* // Real Clear
Politics // Tim Hains - May 19,
2015.........................................................................................................................................
82

*Carly Fiorina coming to Palm Beach County; Rand Paul cancels to fight
Patriot Act* // Palm Beach Post // George Bennett - May 19,
2015..............................................................................................................
83

TOP
NEWS.....................................................................................................
84

DOMESTIC..................................................................................................
84

*White House Says Would Veto Trade Bill If Currency Amendment is Added* //
TIME // Maya Rhodan - May 19,
2015.........................................................................................................................................
84

*Lenny Curry defeats incumbent Democratic Mayor Alvin Brown in Jacksonville*
// Tampa Bay Times // Alex Leary - May 19,
2015..................................................................................................................
84

*Beau Biden, vice president's son, hospitalized* // USA Today // Gregory
Korte - May 19, 2015....... 85

*Upgrades finalized for Roaring Brook Road rail crossing* // Lohud // Hoa
Nguyen - May 18, 2015.. 85

*Senate outmaneuvers hard-line abortion foe in passing 20-week ban with
exceptions* // Post and Courier // Cynthia Roldan - May 19,
2015...................................................................................................
86

*SC Republican: Abortion Ban Doesn't Keep Rape Victims Pregnant Enough* //
Jezebel // Anna Merlan - May 19,
2015.........................................................................................................................................
88

INTERNATIONAL.......................................................................................
89

*Iraq’s Sunni Strategy Collapses in Ramadi Rout* // NYT  // Tim Arango -
May 19, 2015.................. 89

*U.N. chief: North Korea cancels visit* // CNN // Steve Almasy - May 19,
2015................................ 92

*Gay Marriage on Ballot Shows Shift in Irish Attitudes* // NYT // Douglas
Dalby - May 19, 2015...... 92

OPINIONS/EDITORIALS/BLOGS..................................................................
95

*Markos Moulitsas: Clinton a true liberal* // The Hill // Markos Moultisas
- May 19, 2015............... 95

*Hillary Clinton’s Iraq Dilemma* // New Yorker // John Cassidy - May 19,
2015.............................. 97

*I Don't Believe Hillary Clinton* // National Journal // Ron Fournier - May
19, 2015....................... 99

*Hillary Clinton wants to allow felons to vote. That could mean a lot in a
state like Florida.* // WaPo // Philip Bump - May 19,
2015.........................................................................................................................
100

*Ohio Gov. John Kasich is right to "ban the box": editorial* // Cleveland
// Editorial Board - May 19, 2015          102

*What I Told College Graduates* // Medium // Vice President Biden - May 19,
2015...................... 102

*Lifelong Republican Turns On His Party, Embraces Obamacare* // Think
Progress // Tara Culp-Ressler - May 19,
2015........................................................................................................................................
105

MISCELLANEOUS........................................................................................
107

*Upgrades finalized for Roaring Brook Road rail crossing* // Iohud // Hoa
Nguyen – May 19, 2015. 107

TODAY’S KEY STORIES

Iowa shrugs off Clinton controversies
<http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/19/politics/hillary-clinton-iowa-2016/> // CNN
// Eric Bradner - May 19, 2015

Cedar Falls, Iowa (CNN) The parallel universes of Hillary Clinton's
presidential campaign collided Tuesday.

In one world, four Iowans who'd all been invited by Clinton's team saddled
up to a table to talk with her about what she might do to ease regulations
on small banks and whether she'll support a Pacific Rim free trade deal.

In the other world, reporters who hadn't gotten Clinton to respond to a
single query in nearly a month threw her questions about her private email
server, her personal wealth gained from exorbitant speaking fees, her
family foundation's acceptance of foreign contributions, the 2003 invasion
of Iraq and the influence old friends who now represent business interests
have on her decision-making process.

By taking five minutes' worth of questions, Clinton appears to have
released some of the pressure that has built in the national press recently
over her desire to focus on the policy matters that she views as central to
her 2016 bid for the Democratic nomination without being sidetracked by the
ever-present questions about her personal ethics and the day's news.

Disconnect

But if the strategy is frustrating reporters, it's not having much impact
here. A disconnect between Washington and the heartland crystallized
Tuesday as many Iowans — including the Democratic activists who will drive
the state's caucuses in early 2016 — seemed to meet Clinton's interactions
and non-interactions with the press with little more than a shrug.

"I don't think that's a widespread concern by most voters," said Tom
Henderson, the Democratic chairman in Polk County, which is Iowa's most
populous.

In interviews after Clinton's events, no one who attended raised any
concerns about her handling of emails, her finances or her family's
foundation.

"Most of us think it's a pretty moot point. Lots of us have tons of
emails," said Brad Magg, the owner of Goldie's Ice Cream Shoppe and Magg
Family Catering and a participant in a Cedar Falls, Iowa, roundtable on
Tuesday. "I care about what she's going to do for policy and what she's
going to do for our communities, for our counties, for our state, and
that's all I think most of us care about."

"I'm here today because I care about small business, point blank," said
Denita Gadson, owner of i-Gus Consulting and another participant Tuesday.

But Clinton's take on policy? That, she said, is another matter — and
she'll need to hear more before endorsing the Democrat.

"I don't know that I'm jaded or cynical enough to say one way or the
other," she said. "Things have to play out."

Like Gadson, who quizzed Clinton on Tuesday about the Trans-Pacific
Partnership, some Democrats who are most likely to participate in the
early-state nominating process say they are less interested in the
personality-driven controversies that constantly surround Clinton and are
more keen to get her take on issues like free trade, which has pitted two
other prominent Democrats — President Barack Obama and Sen. Elizabeth
Warren — against each other.

'Absolutely perfect'

Dean Genth, who hosted a Clinton house party Monday in Mason City, Iowa,
said he loves the way Clinton has launched her campaign.

"I think it is absolutely perfect," he said. "She needs to have the small
events first. With her resume and her viability and the Secret Service
protection she requires, she will definitely be doing the big rallies at
some point. But I think she is right to start with small events in a
grassroots way."

Genth added that the big events will come, "but now is not the time."

"We are thrilled she is giving a signal to Iowans that she understands the
importance of this state and wants to interact with us," he said.

Despite some of the ambivalence here about Clinton's press strategy, there
are signs that she pays at least some price for leaving questions
unanswered. An NBC/Wall Street Journal poll found only a quarter of
registered voters said they viewed her as honest and straightforward, down
13 percentage points from last summer.

Henderson recalled the 2007 Democratic primary with Clinton running against
then-Sens. Barack Obama and John Edwards — where Clinton's vote in favor of
the 2003 war in Iraq, and her refusal to fully retreat from that vote,
damaged her.

"Sometimes she tends to dance, and I think people have been frustrated with
that in the past," Henderson said.

He said that at this stage in the presidential race, candidates like
Clinton are still focused on adding field organizers, making contacts with
activists and making their first few trips into states. But Henderson also
noted that unlike Clinton, former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley -- a likely
Democratic challenger — has already held open events in Iowa, mingling with
anyone who walked in.

"Those are the type of events where Iowans can get engaged and start to
touch the candidate," he said.

There, he said, Democrats can start to get a sense of what really matters
to them: "What is your vision? Why do you want to be president of the
United States? That's one thing that everybody is waiting to hear from her."

Clinton touts small business in Cedar Falls, Independence stops
<http://wcfcourier.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_0dc9da0e-02c3-5361-bd0a-6ceea95c485f.html#.VVtmu7VTC7k.twitter>
// WCF Courier // Christinia Crippes - May 19, 2015

INDEPENDENCE | "Go in. Buy something. Help small business," Hillary Clinton
urged the media pool preceding her into Laree's Independence gift shop.

Clinton, the former first lady, U.S. senator, secretary of state and
odds-on favorite to win the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination, was in
Northeast Iowa Tuesday to continue a conversation with small business
owners.

She held a roundtable with four regional business leaders at Bike Tech in
Cedar Falls on Tuesday morning, which included about a dozen invited guests
including three Democratic state lawmakers and several more media, before
traveling to Independence to meet business owners in their shops.

“I’m running for president because everyday Americans and their families
need a champion, and I want to be that champion,” Clinton said at Bike
Tech. “I want to make the words ‘middle-class’ mean something again.”

Clinton said she wants to be the president of small business and pointed to
four areas she wants to address, if she’s elected next fall.

Those objectives are to cut red tape for small business, simplify their tax
filing, increase targeted tax credits and make it easier for them to get
financing. That latter goal was her main focus during the roundtable at
Bike Tech, which featured the business’ owner Brent Johnson.

Clinton criticized Republicans for their “cynical attempt to game the
system for those at the top” by supporting a full repeal of the Dodd-Frank
financial reform bill.

Clinton said the country “ought to be able to walk and chew gum at the same
time” by keeping the majority of Dodd-Frank in place to regulate big banks
while not over-burdening small banks that help small businesses.

Donna Sorensen, Cedar Rapids Bank and Trust board chairwoman, agreed with
Clinton that the federal government ought to be able to regulate big banks
and community banks differently. She noted other industries regulate based
on size. She said that all banks need to be regulated but that the
standards should be different.

The Republicans offered their own critiques of Clinton.

The Republican National Committee issued a press release criticizing
Clinton’s professed championing of small business where she said in New
Hampshire she was “very surprised’ to learn how small businesses are
struggling.

The Republican Party of Iowa criticized a lack of transparency so far in
Clinton’s campaign.

“What difference, at this point, does it make if Hillary Clinton answers
one or two more questions? There are hundreds of unanswered questions about
her decades of scandal, which explains why more Iowans than not find her
untrustworthy,” Iowa GOP spokesman Charlie Szold said in a statement.

Clinton fielded five media questions following her Cedar Falls event, but
iGUS Consulting owner Denita Gadson of Waterloo, was not shy during the
roundtable about asking Clinton about some of the hot topics currently
making news.

Gadson asked Clinton a question from one of her clients about helping young
entrepreneurs get started, specifically those who have a criminal past but
are aiming now to get on the right track.

“It hasn’t taken their dreams away, but it has made it more difficult for
them to pursue those dreams," Gadson said.

Clinton said that’s a fair question. She agreed that some communities have
to overcome much more to have small business growth, and supported finding
ways for those communities to have access to tools to start to grow.

She also backed voting rights restorations for people with criminal
backgrounds.

Gadson also asked about whether Clinton supported the Trans-Pacific
Partnership trade agreement.

Clinton essentially that it depends on what is in the agreement. She laid
out some specifics of what she would want to see in a trade deal before she
would accept it, including addressing currency manipulation by other
countries, environmental and health regulations, and protecting jobs in the
United States.

The Americans for Democratic Action - Iowa protested outside Clinton’s
roundtable on just that issue. About a dozen activists across the street
from Bike Tech expressed their opposition to the proposed trade agreement
and urged Clinton to give her opinion on it.

On the other end of the political spectrum, Judd Saul, a conservative
activist with Cedar Valley Patriots for Christ, and a few other
conservatives also came out to protest the event, though they focused on
opposition to Clinton in general.

While Clinton’s Cedar Falls event focused on issues, her Independence stop
was more about celebrating and supporting small businesses.

Her first stop was Em's Coffee Co., where Clinton ordered an espresso and
placed an order for a sandwich before heading to Laree's. Em's Coffee Co .
is run by Emile Hillman, 26, with help from her mother Tami Fenner.

Clinton, a new grandmother, followed her own shop-local admonishment to
reporters and picked up some gifts for her granddaughter Charlotte.

Clinton bought a 2-in-1 talking plush ball and a farm animal plush barn
that made farm noises. She also purchased a book titled "Theories of
Everything” by Brian Andreas, an Iowan, which left her cracking up laughing
and ultimately reading a passage to reporters.

"This was a great stop," Clinton said as owner Laree Randall totaled up
Clinton's purchases.

Before heading to Laree's, Clinton met owner of the local Hardware Hank
store, Shirley Tekippe and her son Terry Tekippe.

"I think it was wonderful. I think it was great she took time to stop in
our small community," Terry Tekippe said.

Shirley Tekippe said she'd met the former first lady during her 2008
campaign for president. She remembers Clinton praised her pink sweater.

"She didn't have to do that," Shirley said.

"Hopefully, she remembers Main Street," Tekippe said of Clinton. "Main
Street is important.

Clinton campaign aims for style, substance points amid scrutiny
<http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2015/05/19/hillary-clinton-campaign-democrats-2016-election/27232931/>
// USA Today // Martha T. Moore - May 19, 2015

In the weeks since she formally, finally announced her campaign for the
presidency in April, Hillary Clinton has sought to score points for style
and substance.

Style, to convince Democratic voters that she won't run like an incumbent
who views the primaries as a mere formality — a complaint about her 2008
presidential campaign. Substance, to signal her liberal bona fides to
Democrats who long for the bank-bashing Sen. Elizabeth Warren to get into
the presidential nominating contest.

So Clinton took a road trip halfway across the U.S. from New York to Iowa
in a van nicknamed Scooby Doo and stopped to grab a bite at a Chipotle in
Ohio. She met with small groups of voters for "roundtable discussions" in
which she nodded and listened — much as she did when she began running for
the Senate in 2000, breaking ground as the first first lady to run for
office.

Early reviews say Clinton has achieved what she set out to do when she
launched her campaign on April 12. However, as she looks ahead to the next
phase of her presidential bid and tries to continue to avoid the missteps
that cost her in 2008, she will be challenged to put forward a clear
rationale for her candidacy while dueling with scrutiny from press she has
largely kept at bay.

Clinton "cleared a couple of important hurdles,'' says Democratic
consultant Ben LaBolt, press secretary for President Obama's 2012 campaign.
"The first is, showing that she's relatable and down to earth.''

So far, Clinton's campaign staff seems to be functioning smoothly, without
the internal turmoil that marked her 2008 effort, says Charlie Cook, editor
of the nonpartisan Cook Report. "Her campaign may make new mistakes but
certainly seems like they won't be making the same mistakes as last time.
The arrogance seems to be gone.''

APPEALS TO THE LEFT

On the issues, she's staking out ground that should appeal to liberal
primary voters. She has said she favors citizenship for illegal immigrants,
supports same-sex marriage, and suggested a constitutional amendment to
reform campaign finance. When she said in an April speech in New York that
economic success should be measured "by how many families get ahead and
stay ahead,'' she added a jab at Wall Street, calling family income a "far
better measure (of prosperity) than the size of the bonuses handed out in
downtown office buildings.''

Her call for "an end to mass incarceration'' in a speech on criminal
justice reform April 29 was an implicit acknowledgment of flaws in
President Bill Clinton's 1994 crime initiative, which funded thousands of
police officers during a tough-on-crime era that sent prison populations
soaring.

Her campaign says Clinton's policy statements so far haven't been aimed at
the party's left wing in particular. Immigration, criminal justice reform
and same-sex marriage have "a common theme of justice, fairness, equity,
social justice. The thematic that runs through them is consistent to her
and her life's work,'' spokesman Jesse Ferguson says.

Her willingness to articulate positions on important issues to Democrats
hasn't cost her in polls of New Hampshire voters, says Neil Levesque of the
New Hampshire Institute of Politics at St. Anselm's College. "Sometimes
incumbents or people who have big leads tend to equivocate because they
don't want to lose anybody,'' he says. "She didn't do that.''

However, Clinton still faces pressure from the Democratic left wing over
President Obama's Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade proposal, which
many in her party oppose .

Clinton backed the NAFTA deal negotiated during Bill Clinton's
administration and supported the Pacific pact while secretary of State. Now
she says she wants to wait until a final agreement on TPP is reached before
taking a position. .

Like Jeb Bush's efforts to differentiate himself from President George W.
Bush, Clinton's policy statements, while early in the campaign, are a way
to distinguish herself from her husband, LaBolt says. "She showed in the
crime speech that they're not the same candidate."

However, the scattershot policy pronouncements have yet to reveal what her
campaign is all about, says Dennis Goldford, a political scientist at Drake
University in Iowa. What's needed, he says, is a clear rationale for her
candidacy. "She still, I think, has not solved that problem. Other than the
fact that she desperately wants to be president … what would Hillaryism
mean to the country?'' he says.

Too soon, LaBolt says, given that the first primaries are still seven
months away. "Voters don't really engage until a lot closer until Election
Day and you don't want to go out and talk about your signature initiatives
until you're sure voters are tuned in.''

THE NEXT PHASE

Her campaign insists that the slow rollout in the opening weeks was all
about letting Clinton learn what voters want and need. But it also provides
an opportunity for a handful of primary-state residents to get near a woman
who has been demonized, as well as idolized, for decades.

"If she can continue to have those conversations (with voters), then that
process is valuable both ways,'' Ferguson says.

"A candidate who has not been in the mix in a while needs to find out what
the big issues are and what people are dealing with,'' says Levesque. "I
think that she played it right ... You really need to know how much a
gallon of milk is before you get into New Hampshire and Iowa.''

Clinton's campaign has also designed her fundraising activity to appear
low-key — though she will be the beneficiary of the super PAC Priorities
USA. She has kept a busy schedule of fundraising at events where individual
donations are capped at $2,700. The events are hosted by bundlers called
"Hillstarters,'' supporters who promise to recruit 10 donations of $2,700
each — a relatively low bar in the world of political finance.

Clinton has agreed to participate in six primary debates. Vermont Sen.
Bernie Sanders is the only other announced Democratic candidate, but former
Maryland governor Martin O'Malley has an announcement set for May 30.
Lincoln Chafee, a former Rhode Island governor, and former Virginia senator
Jim Webb are also considering runs.

Clinton needs more opponents, not fewer, to succeed, Goldford says. "She
desperately needs some top-tier competition to keep her sharp.''

Clinton will complete her tour of the primary states with another trip to
New Hampshire later this week, then a May 27 visit to South Carolina; she
was in Iowa on Monday and Tuesday. Her campaign says it will be "a
continuing process where she's going to be on the road, continuing to
listen to voters,'' Ferguson says. "Then we are going to turn to a more
concrete polished rollout phase of the campaign. We're still in the phase
where the first priority is making sure she has those conversations.''

All of her initial campaign activity has taken place against a backdrop of
continued controversy: over donations to the Clinton foundation from
foreign donors, over her use of personal email while secretary of State and
over the 2012 Benghazi attack on American diplomats, including a report
from The New York Times this week about memos on Libya she received from
Sidney Blumenthal, a friend who worked for the Clinton Foundation, while
Clinton was at the State Department.

News organizations, as well as Republicans, have hammered Clinton for not
giving interviews while campaigning. On Tuesday, she fielded questions from
reporters for the first time in weeks.

Clinton should make that issue go away, Cook says, if only by holding
off-the-record sessions as her top campaign staff did with journalists
prior to her announcement. "Have them over to the house and make nice, just
to get them off her back,'' he says.

But it will be larger campaign themes that determine Clinton's success,
Cook says, rather than the running undercurrent of media snubbing or
scandal stories.

"It will be about bigger things. If Clinton can project herself as fresh
ideas and future oriented, generating energy and excitement, she will do
very well,'' he says.

Hillary Clinton Taps DREAMer Lorella Praeli As Latino Outreach Director
<http://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/hillary-clinton-taps-dreamer-activist-lorella-praeli-latina-outreach-director-n361721>
// NBC News Latino // Sandra Lilley – May 20, 2015

Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton has named prominent
immigrant DREAMer activist Lorella Praeli as Latino Outreach Director, a
Clinton campaign official told NBC News. Praeli, who was undocumented for
almost 13 years and became an outspoken advocate during that time, will be
the Clinton campaign's main point person with Latino communities around the
country. She will also be one of the campaign's surrogates with the press
on Latino issues, including immigration.

Praeli's appointment sends a strong signal that the Clinton campaign
recognizes immigration reform as a key issue for many of the nation's
Hispanic voters. It also sends a message to Republican candidates to take a
clearer position on immigration - a contentious issue for the GOP - as they
court Latino votes. Recently Clinton said she supported full and equal
citizenship for undocumented immigrants, saying that anything less is "code
for second-class status."

In a statement obtained by NBC News, Hillary for America National Political
Director Amanda Renteria stated "We are thrilled to have Lorella Praeli, a
DREAMer, join our team because of her courage and perspective in the fight
for Latino families across the country."

"Bringing Lorella into our campaign is the next step in making sure
families aren't living in fear of deportation, all students have the chance
to go to college, and that any comprehensive immigration reform ensures
full and equal citizenship," stated Renteria.

Praeli has been Advocacy and Policy Director for United We Dream, one of
the country's largest immigrant youth organizations, pushing the Obama
administration and both parties to take action on immigration issues and
legislation.

Born in Peru, Praeli was brought to the U.S. by her family at age 10 to
provide her with better opportunities; Praeli lost a leg in an accident
when she was 2. The family moved to Connecticut and her mother, who was a
psychiatrist in Peru, worked as a housekeeper. Praeli attended Quinnipiac
University, where she graduated summa cum laude and where she also came out
as undocumented and became active as a young DREAMer.

Though Praeli obtained a green card in 2012, members of her family still
lack legal status, as is the case with many immigrant families. Praeli's
mother is currently undocumented, while her younger sister Maria obtained
deferred action status through DACA and made headlines after confronting
President and Mrs. Obama on immigration, also stating DREAMers were looking
at the positions of potential candidates, including Hillary Clinton.

Praeli's new role as Latino outreach director - she starts in mid-June - is
one of several high-profile Latino appointments in the Clinton campaign,
including Amanda Renteria as national political director and Jose
Villarreal as campaign treasurer. Clinton also named two Latinos in Nevada,
Emmy Ruiz and Jorge Neri, as state director and organizing director.

Hillary Clinton will host an Atlanta fundraiser next week
<http://politics.blog.ajc.com/2015/05/19/sources-hillary-clinton-will-host-an-atlanta-fundraiser-next-week/>
// AJC // Greg Bluestein - May 19, 2015

Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton is headed to Atlanta
next week to raise some cash and shake some hands, her first visit to
Georgia this campaign season.

Two Democratic insiders say hosts are being lined up for the May 28 visit,
which is likely to be a breakfast event. A Clinton aide later confirmed the
report.

The trip comes a day after the former Secretary of State stops by South
Carolina for her first visit since 2007, though details of that trip are
still in the works.

While Hillary hasn’t yet visited Georgia this campaign season, her husband
Bill talked to an architect convention in Atlanta last week. He didn’t
mention her name during the lengthy talk, though.

The Clinton trip would cap a busy month of visits from White House hopefuls
to Georgia. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Sens. Marco Rubio and Ted
Cruz stumped at the Georgia Republican convention over the weekend, and
Ohio Gov. John Kasich has a date for a May 26 GOP barbecue in east Georgia.

Still, all the attention pales in comparison to the love presidential
candidates are showing neighboring South Carolina.

Update 6:07 p.m.: Republican National Committee spokeswoman Ali Pardo
responded to news of the Clinton visit by attacking her for hobnobbing with
donors instead of commoners:

“Hillary Clinton’s campaign has been full of hypocrisy, flip-flops, and
scandals, so it’s no surprise she would prefer to avoid interacting with
real voters. The truth is that Clinton is more comfortable schmoozing with
millionaire donors than pretending to relate to average Americans.”

Hillary Clinton to travel to Florida, Texas and Missouri
<http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/hillary-clinton-travel-florida-texas-and-missouri>
// MSNBC // Alex Seitz-Wald - May 19, 2015

CEDAR FALLS, Iowa – Hillary Clinton will travel to Florida, Texas and
Missouri in the coming weeks to build support for her presidential campaign
beyond the early primary and caucus states, a campaign aide tells msnbc.

In addition to building robust campaign teams in the four early voting
states – Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada – Clinton’s
campaign has hired organizers in dozens of other states as part of a
50-state organizing program they call the “Ramp Up Organizing Program.”

The goal is to lay the groundwork and organize grassroots support that will
help her in later primaries and caucuses in those states. And it’s an
effort to show that Clinton will fight for every vote, including in red
states like Texas.

Clinton’s campaign has had organizers on the ground for weeks in a number
of states, and it has sent surrogates or senior campaign aides on her
behalf. But now Clinton will personally travel to three of these states for
campaign events and fundraisers.

Clinton will visit Florida next week on Thursday, May 28 and Friday, May
29. Then she’ll head to Texas on Wednesday, June 3 and Thursday, June 4.
And later, she’ll travel to Missouri on Tuesday, June 23.

In the 2008 Democratic primary contest, Clinton won Florida and Texas,
while Barack Obama upset her in Missouri.

It’s an “effort to continue building for primary states beyond the early
four,” said a campaign aide, who requested anonymity to discuss Clinton’s
travel plans. “These local grassroots volunteer infrastructures will help
the campaign be ready to compete and win the 2016 Florida, Texas and
Missouri primaries.”

Clinton will hold a variety of campaign events in each state, including
roundtable discussions, speeches and tours of local institutions and
businesses.

The events will be held around fundraisers in each state.

The former secretary of state is in Iowa Tuesday for an event on small
businesses. On Wednesday, she heads to Chicago for three fundraisers. And
on Friday she returns to New Hampshire.

SOCIAL MEDIA

Joshua Green (5/19/15, 11:53 AM)
<https://twitter.com/JoshuaGreen/status/600736071660371969> Elizabeth
Warren on @BloombergTV asked about Hillary's refusal to take position on
TPP: "I’d like to see her be clearer on that"

Speaker John Boehner (5/19/15, 2:49 PM)
<https://twitter.com/SpeakerBoehner/status/600780285005946880> Revealed:
“Hillary Received Memo Describing #Benghazi As Planned Terror Attack Within
Hours,” reports @DailyCaller http://j.mp/1HsrfLo

Howard Kurtz (5/19/15, 4:09 PM)
<https://twitter.com/HowardKurtz/status/600800375109738496> Hillary's pal &
Clinton foundation guy Sid Blumenthal emails about Libya while trying to do
business with Libya. Will discuss w @megynkelly

Charlie Mahtesian (5/19/15, 4:04 PM)
<https://twitter.com/PoliticoCharlie/status/600799153107644416> Hillary
Clinton will hit the fundraising trail June 5 in Greenwich, CT, at a $29.7
million Roman villa
http://blog.ctnews.com/politics/2015/05/19/hillary-clinton-to-hit-fundraising-trail-in-greenwich/
…

Correct the Record (5/19/15, 4:00 PM)
<https://twitter.com/CorrectRecord/status/600798313479348224> @woodhouseb
will join @erinburnett on @outfrontcnn tonight to talk about
@HillaryClinton's visit to Iowa

Martin Chavez (5/18/15, 8:05 PM)
<https://twitter.com/MartyChavez/status/600497407256727554?s=17> Hillary to
join us in Albuquerque June 3rd for a fundraiser breakfast!  We've got to
raise money early to make... http://fb.me/6DtQ396Xa

Martin O'Malley (5/19/15, 6:20 AM)
<https://twitter.com/GovernorOMalley/status/600652294590439424> I've got
exciting news to share about my upcoming announcement on May 30th. Follow
me on Snapchat at GovernorOMalley to find out @ 12pm ET!

Jonathan Topaz (5/19/15, 5:45 PM)
<https://twitter.com/JonathanTopaz/status/600779412540358658> Hm:
@BernieSanders: "I don't think six debates are enough...we will be
interacting with the DNC to try [for] as many debates as possible"

Michael Barbaro (5/19/15, 6:19 AM)
<https://twitter.com/mikiebarb/status/600651950162649089> Possible
explanation for why Christie wouldn't address immigration for months? Was
preparing to change his position:
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/05/19/chris-christie-citizenship-for-undocumented-immigrants-extreme/
…

HRC NATIONAL COVERAGE

Howard Dean urges NH Democrats, progressives to back Hillary Clinton
<http://www.wmur.com/politics/howard-dean-urges-nh-democrats-progressives-to-back-hillary-clinton/33107952>
// WMUR // May 19, 2015

MANCHESTER, N.H —Former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean spoke to progressive
activists in New Hampshire late Sunday in support of Democratic
presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

A Clinton campaign official told WMUR.com that listeners on the call were a
mix of Clinton supporters and uncommitted Democrats. Former New Hampshire
House Speaker Terie Norelli was also on the call and asked Dean questions
emailed by listeners.

Clinton on Friday will make her second visit to New Hampshire since
announcing her candidacy for president.

Dean, after running for president in 2004, founded the progressive
grassroots group Democracy for America. Now headed by his brother, Jim
Dean, DFA is working with MoveOn.org on the “Run Warren Run” campaign to
try to recruit Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren to run for the
Democratic presidential nomination.

Howard Dean, however, announced his support for Clinton shortly after DFA
and MoveOn unveiled their pro-Warren campaign. As both a progressive leader
and a former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, Dean is key
surrogate for Clinton who appeals to both liberals and more moderate,
“establishment” Democrats.

Sen. Bernie Sanders, who is also a Vermonter, has announced his candidacy
for president and is attempting to appeal to the progressive wing of the
party. Sanders is scheduled to return to the state on May 27 for a town
hall meeting in Portsmouth and possibly other events.

Clinton’s current national campaign manager, Robby Mook, was the Deputy
Field Director for Dean’s presidential campaign 11 years ago.

According to a listener on the call, Dean said he has known Clinton for 25
years and believes she is sincere and pragmatic. The listener said Dean
made it clear that Clinton understands the importance of having a U.S.
Supreme Court that does not make political decisions. And, according to the
listener, Dean said it is time for a woman president.

Dean, the listener said, told the group income inequality is the most
important domestic issue facing the country and maintained that Clinton
understands the next president must deal directly with it.

Norelli, a long-time Clinton supporter, said Clinton has worked on behalf
of children, women and the middle class in general.

New report claims al-Qaeda-Benghazi link known day after attack
<http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/05/18/benghazi-attack-intelligence-documents/27543563/>
// USA Today // Oren Dorell - May 19, 2015

One day after the deadly Sept. 11, 2012, attack on the U.S. compound in
Benghazi, Libya, the Defense Intelligence Agency concluded the assault had
been planned 10 days earlier by an al-Qaeda affiliate, according to
documents released Monday by conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch.

"The attack on the American consulate in Benghazi was planned and executed
by The Brigades of the Captive Omar Abdul Rahman," said a preliminary
intelligence report by the Defense Intelligence Agency, obtained through a
lawsuit following a Freedom of Information Act request.

The group, which also conducted attacks against the Red Cross in Benghazi,
was established by Abdul Baset Azuz, a "violent radical" sent by al-Qaeda
to set up bases in Libya, the defense agency report said.

The attack was planned on Sept. 1, 2012, with the intent "to kill as many
Americans as possible to seek revenge" for the killing of a militant in
Pakistan and to memorialize the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the
report said.

Four Americans were killed in the Benghazi attack, including U.S.
Ambassador Chris Stevens.

The incident became politically controversial because the White House
initially described the attack as the result of a spontaneous protest.
Republican critics said the White House intentionally played down that it
was a terrorist attack, because it occurred so close to President Obama's
re-election.

Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who's now seeking the Democratic
presidential nomination, was to appear this week before the House Select
Committee on Benghazi, but the hearing was canceled after Clinton and the
committee chairman, Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., failed to agree on whether all
the documents Gowdy requested had been given to the panel.

GOP fumbles latest attack on Hillary Clinton's email use
<http://www.cbsnews.com/news/gop-fumbles-latest-attack-on-hillary-clintons-email-use/>
// CBS News // Jake Miller - May 19, 2015

WASHINGTON --Republicans are still firing away at Hillary Clinton's use of
a private email account as secretary of state, but their latest shot seems
to have missed the mark.

On Monday, the New York Times published several emails Clinton sent to an
advisor in 2011 and 2012, while she was still secretary of state.
Republicans noticed that Clinton's email address in the messages (
[email-masked]) was not the same email she told congressional
investigators she used during her time at the State Department (
[email-masked]).

In a press release sent Monday afternoon, the Republican National Committee
cried scandal.

"This is the latest example of how Clinton has attempted to mislead the
public about her use of secret email for public business and raises further
questions about where else she is attempting to hide the truth on this and
other matters," the release exclaimed.

But Clinton's presidential campaign had a quick explanation - After Gawker
published Clinton's old address when she left the state department, she
changed her email address to [email-masked]. Any messages printed
after that time, even if they were several years old, reflected the new
address.

It wasn't a new explanation. They'd made it several times before. Here's
what Clinton's personal office said in a Q&A document after Clinton's use
of a private email account first became an issue in March:

"At the time the printed copies were provided to the Department last year,
because it was the same account, the new email address established after
she left office appeared on the printed copies as the sender, and not the
address she used as Secretary. In fact, this address on the account did not
exist until March 2013. This led to understandable confusion that was
cleared up directly with the Committee after its press conference."

And when the GOP chairman of the House Benghazi committee, South Carolina
Rep. Trey Gowdy, said in March that Clinton had "more than one private
email account," here's what Clinton's lawyer told the committee:

"Secretary Clinton used one email account when corresponding with anyone,
from Department officials to friends to family. A month after she left the
Department, Gawker published her email address and so she changed the
address on her account. At the time the emails were provided to the
Department last year this new address appeared on the copies as the
'sender,' and not the address she used as Secretary. This address on the
account did not exist until March 2103 [sic], after her tenure as
Secretary."

Republicans on the panel weren't willing to accept that explanation from
Clinton's lawyer on faith, however. They pressed Clinton to hand over her
email server to clear up any lingering confusion about whether she used one
address or two.

"Without access to the relevant electronic information and stored data on
the server -- which was reportedly registered to her home -- there is no
way the Committee, or anyone else, can fully explain why the Committee
uncovered two email addresses," Jamal Ware, the Benghazi panel's
communications director, explained in a press release in March.

The general case Republicans are building against Clinton is that she's
being secretive - why did she use a private email account as Secretary of
State, sidestepping the federal system that would automatically archive her
messages? And why did she and her team get to decide which messages to hand
over to archivists after her she left the job?

Clinton has said she used the private account for convenience - the
government email wouldn't work on her mobile device, and she didn't want to
carry two phones.

She's said she handed over every work-related email sent from her private
account. But the problem, Republicans say, is there's no way to verify
that. Clinton says she deleted the personal emails, and she won't hand over
the server that housed the account to see whether they can be recovered.

Voters are split on the matter, according to a CBS News poll taken in March
- 62 percent said it wasn't appropriate for Clinton to use a private
server, and 38 percent said she did it to keep some work-related
information from becoming public. But 49 percent believed Clinton's
explanation that she used a private account because it was convenient.

A House Select Committee is probing the 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi,
Libya that killed four Americans, and investigators have asked the State
Department to submit copies of all of the Benghazi-emails Clinton sent
during her time as secretary of state. On Monday, in response to a Freedom
of Information Act request by Vice News' Jason Leopold, the State
Department said it "plans to produce releasable portions of Secretary
Clinton's emails...by January 15, 2016." Clinton has agreed to testify
before the committee, but Republicans say they need a full account of her
emails before that can happen.

Hillary Clinton on her emails: I want them out, too!
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/hillary-clinton-state-department-emails-release-schedule-118085.html>
// Politico // Josh Gerstein and Gabriel Debenedetti - May 19, 2015

Hillary Clinton and the State Department on Tuesday insisted they are not
slow-walking the public release of her emails during her time as secretary
of state, while a federal judge ordered up a plan for a rolling release of
the hotly anticipated documents.

“Nobody has a bigger interest in getting them released than I do,” Clinton
said to reporters in a rare instance of fielding press questions on the
campaign trail.

The 55,000 pages of emails have become the source of much heartburn,
speculation and bureaucratic man-hours since news emerged earlier this year
that Clinton used a private email server during her time as secretary of
state.

The controversy has complicated the roll-out of Clinton’s presidential bid
and played into criticism that she and her husband are unduly secretive.

Clinton said in March that she wanted the State Department to release the
emails, and since then, the agency has assigned 12 staffers full-time to
reviewing the Clinton emails, according to an official.

The State Department on Monday night proposed a deadline of January 2016 to
complete its review and publicly release the whole set of documents, but a
federal judge on Tuesday rejected such a plan.

U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras on Tuesday said in a written
order State must propose a new schedule by next Tuesday that involves
disclosing the records batch-by-batch on a regular basis and updating the
court every 60 days on the releases.

With the email controversy freshly swirling around her on the campaign
trail, Clinton took a few questions from reporters on Tuesday — the first
time she had done so since April 21, much to the jeers of her Republican
opponents.

“Anything that they might do to expedite that process I heartily support,”
she said to reporters after a roundtable in Cedar Falls, Iowa. “I want the
American people to learn as much as they can about the work I did with our
diplomats and our development experts.”

She contended she has limited say over the timetable.

“They’re not mine,” Clinton said about her emails. She turned over copies
of them to her former department last December. “The State Department has
to go through its process, but as much as they can expedite the process,
that’s what I’m asking them to do.”

State spokesman Jeff Rathke said Tuesday that the agency will abide by the
judge’s order.

“I don’t have anything to add to what was in the court papers,” Rathke told
reporters at a daily briefing. “Clearly, the court has issued an order, and
we’ll comply with it.”

Asked if State was “slow-rolling” release of the records in order to
benefit Clinton politically, Rathke said, “No.”

Rathke reiterated State’s position that its initial proposal to release
most of the records in a single batch was driven by a desire to ensure all
the emails are handled appropriately.

“We have a large volume of records that cover the entire span of Secretary
Clinton’s time at the department. I’m sure you could imagine this would
cover pretty much any topic. It could cover any topic on our foreign policy
agenda,” the spokesman said.

“If certain things were released early and there were other records
pertinent to the same topic that that might not have been finally
processed, there was a desire to do them all at once so they’d be processed
in their entirety.”

The emails have also been a subject of intense interest from a House
committee investigating the Benghazi attacks, and documents unearthed as
part of that probe have slowly leaked out.

Some of the emails revealed that Clinton forwarded unsubstantiated
intelligence on Libya from Sidney Blumenthal, a family ally, to top
officials at the State Department, according to documents obtained by The
New York Times.

Blumenthal, a longtime Clinton family counselor and, according to the
Times, an employee of the Clinton Foundation at the time, sent the
intelligence reports based on information he had gathered while working as
an adviser to Constellations Group, a private consultancy.

Clinton’s habit of forwarding the memos to top advisers like Jake Sullivan
and Chris Stevens, the ambassador who was killed during the 2012 attacks,
raised questions among committee members about the extent of Blumenthal’s
influence at State — considering that aides cast doubt on the credibility
of the memos in several emails.

At a brief hearing on Tuesday on a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit
brought by Vice News, Contreras did not set a specific date by which State
must begin releasing the emails.

However, the judge gave the government one week to provide a schedule for
the periodic release of records, Vice News lawyer Jeffrey Light said after
the session.

Contreras also gave State one week to say exactly when it plans to release
a portion of the records relating to the deadly attack on U.S. facilities
in Benghazi, as well as other Libya-related issues. State officials have
previously pledged to release those emails “soon” but have never offered a
specific date.

The State Department has said the release is taking a while because it must
thoroughly review the Clinton emails for sensitive information typically
removed from records before they are released under FOIA. State official
John Hackett said in the declaration filed Monday night that the agency
wanted to post the bulk of the records online at once in order to make sure
the FOIA rules and policies are consistently applied.

“The Department intends to post the releasable portions of the collection
at the conclusion of its review process, which will facilitate consistency
in the application of FOIA exemptions and the public’s access to and
understanding of the documents,” Hackett wrote in the Monday document.

Clinton has said she turned over all messages that were arguably
work-related but decided to delete a roughly equal number of messages that
her lawyers determined were personal or private in nature.

The State Department could also face deadlines to disclose portions of the
records in other FOIA suits. Last week, a judge ordered State to release
records from Clinton’s top aides on specific topics by September. It’s
unclear whether the requests in that case, brought by conservative group
Citizens United, would encompass some of the Clinton emails.

Clinton's "Second Email Address" Was Explained Months Ago, But Fox Missed
The Evidence
<http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/05/19/clintons-second-email-address-was-explained-mon/203696>
// Media Matters // Hannah Groch-Belgey - May 19, 2015

Fox News selectively quoted a statement from Hillary Clinton's lawyer to
suggest that she lied about having a "second email account" during her time
as secretary of state. But the network ignored in several segments that the
supposed discrepancy was explained months ago.

On May 18, The New York Times published selected emails from Clinton's time
at State, which appeared to show her sending emails from two private
addresses: [email-masked] and [email-masked]. Right-wing
media immediately jumped on the story to claim that it contradicted
Clinton's previous statement that she only used one email address while at
State.

Fox went so far as to suggest Clinton "was lying" about her use of email,
missing key context in several of their segments on the topic. On the May
19 edition of America's Newsroom, guest co-host Gregg Jarrett asked:
"Either she forgot, or she was lying. What do you think?" Fox reporter Doug
McKelway also claimed that the "second email" was a "direct contradiction"
to Clinton's previous statements, noting those remarks were "not made in
testimony, nor was it made under oath, so perhaps there's some wiggle room
there, but I'm not sure how she gets out of that."

Later on Happening Now, McKelway highlighted a letter sent from Clinton's
lawyer that stated "[email-masked] is not an address that existed
during Secretary Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State."

However, this seeming discrepancy was explained in the same letter McKelway
selectively quoted from.

As Clinton's lawyer noted back in that March 2015 letter -- and which Fox
News ignored in these segments -- Clinton changed her email address when
she left State because Gawker had published emails that revealed the
"HDR22" address. That was when she changed the address to "hrod17."

According to her office, when this change occurred, the new address
replaced the old address on the digital records of her previous emails.
Thus, as explained in a release several months ago, when her emails were
printed out and provided to the State Department, the new email address
"appeared on the printed copies as the sender."

While this context was missing from Jarrett and McKelway's morning reports,
Fox Chief White House Correspondent Ed Henry reported the Clinton
campaign's explanation in a separate segment on America's Newsroom, saying
that "when she printed out all the emails to turn over back to the
government, that second account came up, even though that was not the one
she was using months earlier."

The old "HDR22" address still appears in some of the documents the Times
highlighted, but seems to only occur in the text of the body of emails that
were replies or forwards from other individuals. For example, a printed
email from Clinton aide Jake Sullivan which was published by the Times
still shows "HDR22" in the text of his email, because he was replying to
her original message.

The backdating of the email addresses "led to understandable confusion" for
the congressional Select Committee on Benghazi earlier this year, prompting
Clinton's office to issue this explanation in March.

The original Gawker report, which highlighted emails sent to Clinton during
her time at State, also includes screenshots of those emails. The emails
shown are all clearly sent to Clinton's original email account, HRD22, in
keeping with Clinton office's explanation for the email address confusion.

Hillary Clinton says her Iraq war vote was a 'mistake'
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/hillary-clinton-iraq-war-vote-mistake-iowa-118109.html>
// Politico // Adam Lerner – May 19, 2015

INDEPENDENCE , IA - MAY 19:  Democratic presidential hopeful and former
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton visits Laree's The Shoppe of Favorites
store on May 19, 2015 in Independence, Iowa. Earlier in the day Clinton
hosted a small business forum with members of the business and lending
communities in Cedar Falls, Iowa.

During her 2008 campaign, Clinton defended her vote as a way to give
President Bush authority to deal with Iraq. | Getty

After days of Republican presidential candidates wrestling with questions
on the Iraq war, Hillary Clinton weighed in Tuesday, telling reporters that
her vote in favor of the war in 2002 was a “mistake.”

“I made it very clear that I made a mistake, plain and simple. And I have
written about it in my book, I have talked about it in the past,” Clinton
told reporters at an event in Cedar Falls, Iowa, adding that “what we now
see is a very different and very dangerous situation.”

During her 2008 campaign, Clinton defended her vote as a way to give
President George W. Bush authority to deal with Iraq, which she said he
then abused. She frequently followed up this statement by saying that if
she had known what Bush would do with the authority she would not have
voted the way she had, but declined to call the vote a “mistake.”

Then-Sen. Barack Obama hammered her over the vote during the campaign,
citing his opposition to the war while he was serving in Illinois’ state
senate. Many experts believe the Iraq war issue was a major reason she
ultimately lost in the primaries to Obama.

But since losing that election she wrote in her 2014 book “Hard Choices”
that she “got it wrong.”

In her comments Tuesday she made clear that she viewed her past vote as a
mistake, with no qualifications.

She then pivoted to talking about Iraq’s current political situation. In
the last year much of western Iraq has been overtaken by ISIL, a terrorist
group whose successes many analysts attribute to the decade of instability
following Saddam Hussein’s ouster.

“The United States is doing what it can but ultimately this has to be a
struggle that the Iraqi government and the Iraqi people are determined to
win for themselves,” said Clinton. “And we can provide support, but they’re
going to have to do it.”

Questions over the Iraq war have divided the early Republican field ever
since former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush said that he would have invaded Iraq had
he been put in his brother’s situation in 2003, in response to a question
from Fox News’ Megyn Kelly over whether he would have made the decision
knowing what he knows now. Bush shifted his answer multiple times during
the week before finally saying that, with 20/20 hindsight, he would not
have invaded.

Bush has been lambasted for the fumbling, including by Sen. Rand Paul who
said in an interview on Meet the Press Sunday that he didn’t view the
question as a “hypothetical,” but is rather “a recurring question in the
Middle East.” He equated President Bush’s decision to invade Iraq with
Hillary Clinton’s support as Secretary of State for a military campaign in
Libya in 2011 that led to the toppling of Muammar Qaddafi.

“The same question, to be fair, ought to be asked of Hillary Clinton, if
she ever takes questions,” he said. “Was it a good idea to invade Libya?
Did that make us less safe? Did it make it more chaotic? Did it allow
radical Islam and ISIS to grow stronger?”

Gabriel Debenedetti contributed to this report

Hillary Clinton’s State Department Staff Kept Tight Rein on Records
<http://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-clintons-state-department-staff-kept-tight-rein-on-records-1432081701>
// WSJ // Laura Meckler - May 19, 2015

WASHINGTON—When Hillary Clinton was secretary of state, her staff
scrutinized politically sensitive documents requested under public-records
law and sometimes blocked their release, according to people with direct
knowledge of the activities.

In one instance, her chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, told State Department
records specialists she wanted to see all documents requested on the
controversial Keystone XL pipeline, and later demanded that some be held
back.

In another case, Ms. Mills’s staff negotiated with the records specialists
over the release of documents about former President Bill Clinton’s
speaking engagements—also holding some back.

The records requests came under the Freedom of Information Act, or FOIA,
the public’s main tool to get information from the government. Decisions on
what to release belong with each agency’s FOIA staff, say experts on the
law, to guard against the withholding of documents for political or other
inappropriate reasons.

Questions about the transparency of Mrs. Clinton’s State Department tenure
have been bubbling ever since it was revealed that she exclusively used a
private email account to conduct her work as secretary. The existence of
that private system, which is being investigated by a House special
committee probing the 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic outpost in Benghazi,
Libya, meant the department didn’t have access to her emails when public
requests to see them came in.

Mrs. Clinton has since given the State Department 55,000 pages of emails
she deemed to be about official business. On Tuesday, at a brief news
conference in Iowa, she reiterated that she wants the department to release
them.

Also on Tuesday, a federal judge ordered the State Department to release
these emails on a rolling basis, not wait until they are all ready. The
State Department, which had planned to release them next January, said it
would comply.

In the background of the controversies is a culture at the State Department
of delay and inefficiency in meeting public requests for records, both
during and predating Mrs. Clinton’s tenure, according to open-government
advocates, investigative reports and government officials.

An email exchange between State Department staffers in October 2012, while
Mrs. Clinton was secretary of state, points to the role played by her
political staff in records requests.

An official dealing with potential document releases described one of them
as being “of interest on the 7th Floor”—a reference to the secretary’s
office. A colleague replied that the records were set for release but
added: “I believe, though, that this is still pending with Cheryl Mills’
office…. The real action, for now, is with Cheryl’s office.” The focus of
the request is unclear.

A spokesman for Mrs. Clinton, Nick Merrill, said, “The State Department
takes FOIA requests very seriously, and has a rigorous process in place for
handling the thousands of requests that come in. Secretary Clinton’s State
Department took that process seriously and made it a priority, and to
suggest otherwise would be wrong.”

Later, on Tuesday evening, Mr. Merrill added that Ms. Mills—a longtime aide
to the Clintons who is on the board of the Clinton Foundation—“did not
inappropriately interfere with the FOIA process” and “has spent her career
contributing to the greater good.”

State Department spokesman Alec Gerlach said documents aren’t withheld
unless they fit under exemptions spelled out in the public-records law.
These include avoiding harm to national security, trade-secret exposure or
privacy violations.

“It is entirely appropriate for certain Department personnel to be made
aware of documents that could potentially respond to Freedom of Information
Act requests,” and these people may be asked for guidance, Mr. Gerlach
said, adding: “This is not unique to any Secretary’s tenure.”

The Clinton political staff’s scrutiny of Keystone documents arose after a
document request that succeeded. In it, the environmental group Friends of
the Earth obtained emails that were sent to Paul Elliott, a lobbyist for
the company seeking to build the pipeline, by an official of the U.S.
embassy in Ottawa—which is part of the State Department.

Mr. Elliott had worked on Mrs. Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign.
Friends of the Earth, a foe of Keystone, suspected that this connection
gave him influence with the State Department, whose approval the proposed
border-crossing pipeline needs.

In one email, the embassy official sent Mr. Elliot a message saying “Go
Paul!” after he circulated some potentially positive news on the pipeline
plan. She also complimented an appearance by the CEO of the company seeking
to build Keystone XL.

In a blog post, Friends of the Earth called the email a “smoking gun”
showing “definitive evidence of bias.” A State Department spokeswoman said
at the time that the emails weren’t evidence of any bias.

After the episode, Ms. Mills insisted on reviewing all Keystone-related
documents being prepared for release, and flagged as problematic a few that
the department’s records-law specialists felt obligated to release, said
the person with knowledge of the situation.

Ms. Mills, this person added, told a records specialist that if he released
records she wanted held back, Mrs. Clinton’s office wouldn’t comply with
any future document requests on any topic.

The Keystone documents Ms. Mills objected to were all either held back or
redacted, the same person said. After Ms. Mills began scrutinizing
documents, the State Department’s disclosure of records related to Keystone
fell off sharply, documents that include a court filing show.

Two others with knowledge of State Department records procedures said
political appointees were allowed greater say than the FOIA experts thought
was appropriate. It was hard to push back against the political staff, one
said.

The pipeline project was so sensitive that an expert on FOIA was invited to
a State Department policy meeting to advise on how to prospectively shield
documents from disclosure, such as by marking them as involving the
“deliberative process,” said a person who attended.

Documents relating to ex-President Clinton’s speeches also sparked
scrutiny, said a fourth person familiar with State Department records
releases.

Mr. Clinton had agreed, when his wife became secretary of state, to submit
proposals for his paid speeches to the department for review. Some document
requests related to the reviews. On this matter, too, Ms. Mills’s office
sometimes objected to the release of records FOIA specialists thought ought
to be handed over, this fourth person said.

Asked who had final say, the person said, “We negotiated it out,” and some
documents were withheld or redacted.

Experts on FOIA said it might be acceptable for records reviewers to seek
the views of political appointees, but there should be no negotiation.
“Ultimately, the career people have to be the ones who make the final
call,” said Miriam Nisbet, who recently retired as director of the federal
FOIA ombudsman office at the National Archives and Records Administration.

FOIA experts said they suspect political interference happens more than
they know. Asked for examples, some cited a case at the Department of
Homeland Security, or DHS, in 2010.

In that instance, the Associated Press reported on political interference
in records releases at DHS. The House Oversight Committee later
investigated and issued a report saying DHS redacted embarrassing
information it should have released, after political staffers insisted on
reviewing records requests. DHS, which modified its practices following the
AP story, told the House committee it didn’t make substantive changes in
document releases for political reasons.

The State Department faces a great volume of records requests, nearly
20,000 in the fiscal year ended Sept. 30, according to federal data. It
processed more than 18,000 requests that year but still ended with a
backlog of nearly 11,000.

A department manual outlines the FOIA process. It says in-house analysts
should collect documents from various bureaus of the department, to be
examined by two FOIA reviewers to see whether they fall under any
disclosure exemptions. Those that don’t are to be released.

In 2012, a State Department inspector general’s report said the
departmental unit that processes records requests had serious leadership
and management problems. It called the agency’s FOIA process “inefficient
and ineffective,” saying requests were prone to delay and bureaus didn’t
treat document requests as a priority.

A later IG report, in March 2015, found problems in the department’s system
for storing emails. Only messages whose senders had marked them as “record
email” were kept in archives and therefore were easily available to FOIA
researchers looking for documents responsive to records requests.

Of more than a billion emails sent in 2011, only 61,156 had been marked
this way, the IG found.

A person knowledgeable about the department’s records process said that
there is no pressure on bureaus or embassies to respond to document
searches in a timely fashion; that FOIA specialists hold little stature;
and that there are no consequences for people who don’t produce documents
requested.

In March, the AP sued the State Department to force the release of some
documents, including emails during Mrs. Clinton’s tenure. The AP said it
sued after its requests went unfilled.

The State Department had no comment on that action because it is in
litigation, a department official said, adding: “We face significant
challenges with the increasing burden of FOIA and other requests. But we
are working to get better. I think our progress through collaboration with
the IG shows our commitment to improving.”

Hillary talks tough on Wall Street regulation
<http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/19/politics/hillary-clinton-big-banks/index.html>
// CNN // MJ Lee - May 19, 2015

(CNN) Hillary Clinton wants one thing to be crystal clear: she is not
afraid to stand up to Wall Street.

Speaking with small business owners in Cedar Falls, Iowa, the Democratic
presidential frontrunner on Tuesday offered a full-throated defense of a
law that's served as a thorn in the side of big banks: Dodd-Frank.

"It's not the big banks that need relief from Washington -- it's small
banks and small businesses," Clinton said. "We should be doing more to rein
in risky behavior on Wall Street and 'Too Big to Fail.'"

The former secretary of state also scolded what she said were attempts by
congressional Republicans to roll back consumer protection provisions and
regulations aimed at big banks in Dodd-Frank, calling them "a cynical
attempt to game the system for those at the top."

The populist remarks could have easily come from Elizabeth Warren, the
liberal Massachusetts senator who has vaulted to national fame by railing
against Wall Street.

Coming within weeks of the launch of her second White House bid, Clinton's
comments were also the latest example of the former New York senator's
aggressive appeal to progressive skeptics who believe she is too cozy with
Wall Street and have balked at the sweeping deregulation of the finance
industry during her husband's presidency in the 1990s.

It's a concerted effort Clinton has been making since her first day back on
the trail.

Her campaign roll-out sought to present Clinton as a champion for the
middle class and she has since publicly taken aim at hedge fund managers
for paying too little taxes and pledged to get big money out of politics.

Clinton's Republican foes were quick to accuse her of hypocrisy.

"It's hard to take Hillary Clinton seriously when she's constantly taking
huge sums of money from the same people she's attacking on the campaign
trail," Republican National Committee spokesman Michael Short said in an
email. "No wonder Elizabeth Warren is holding out on an endorsement."

Meanwhile, Vermont Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders, currently the only
other declared candidate seeking the Democratic Party's nomination for
president, expressed a degree of skepticism of Clinton's support for
banking regulations.

"I opposed the deregulation of Wall Street and pretty much predicted what
would happen in terms of the Wall Street crash," Sanders told CNN's Wolf
Blitzer. "I certainly disagree with her husband on that. She hasn't been
clear about where she's coming from."

In recent days, Clinton has also come under scrutiny from liberal activists
on the controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal. TPP, a
significant second-term agenda item for President Barack Obama, has drawn
widespread opposition from Democrats, and Clinton has faced pressure to
take a firm stance against it.

Warren said on Bloomberg TV on Tuesday that though Clinton has criticized
some aspects of the current trade proposal, she'd like to see her take a
"clearer" position.

Republicans Very Troubled By Clinton Donors See No Conflict With Their Own
Dark Money
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/19/clinton-foundation-dark-money_n_7307852.html>
// Huffington Post // Paul Blumenthal - May 19, 2015

WASHINGTON -- For four months, the Republican Party and its many
presidential hopefuls have laid into likely Democratic nominee Hillary
Clinton over donations to a family foundation. That these attacks
contradict the GOP's broader stand on campaign finance -- and call into
question their own weighty burden of donor conflicts -- hasn't troubled
them at all.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) called contributions to the nonprofit Clinton
Foundation “thinly veiled bribes.” The nation can’t afford the “drama”
represented by those donations, according to Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.).
Former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina asked Clinton to explain why
contributions to the foundation “don’t represent a conflict of interest.”
And the Republican National Committee has made the donations a central part
of its campaign against Clinton.

In embracing this critique of the Clinton Foundation, Republicans are
investing in a view of money in politics that they have otherwise rejected
in recent years: that spending money to gain influence over or access to
elected or appointed officials represents a conflict of interest or an
appearance of corruption or could even lead to outright corruption.

Since 2010, the conservative Supreme Court majority has rejected this
argument as a reason to regulate campaign finance in their Citizens United,
McCutcheon and Williams-Yulee decisions. Most leading Republican federal
officeholders now take the view that spending of any sort on campaigns
should not be impeded by legal restrictions as fears of corruption are
overblown.

So the critical piling on Clinton Foundation donations creates a problem
for Republicans, especially those running for president. If contributions
to the foundation, a 501(c)(3) entity not involved in political campaigns,
create a valid source of corruption concern, then what are we to make of
the hundreds of millions of dollars in undisclosed donations to 501(c)(4)
nonprofits that have worked to elect Republicans over the past three
elections?

Since the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision opened the door for
unlimited corporate, union and, ultimately, individual spending on
elections, Republicans have maneuvered to use so-called dark money
nonprofits to fund large portions of their electoral efforts. Dark money
spending on federal races exceeded $400 million in the 2012 presidential
election and $200 million in the 2014 midterms with the vast majority of
those dollars going to aid Republican candidates, according to previous
analysis by The Huffington Post.

Where the Clinton Foundation is concerned, the public knows who the donors
are and, thus, the press can report on the mutually beneficial relationship
between Bill Clinton and billionaire donor Frank Giustra or point out that
a majority of those also lobbied the Hillary Clinton-led State Department
or note that both Clintons have been very supportive of the Moroccan
government, a foundation donor, as it occupies the disputed territory of
Western Sahara.

The public is not privy, however, to the sources of funds fueling a large
part of the Republican electoral apparatus and a smaller part of Democratic
efforts. Party leaders and wealthy donors have increasingly worked through
nonprofits that are not required to disclose their funding sources.

Republicans, including those now running for president, defend dark money
groups as a means to protect what they argue is the First Amendment right
of donors to engage in political activity without "retaliation." Perhaps,
that retaliation would come in the form of stories informing the public
about how those donors are seeking to influence public policy.

Half of Hillary Clinton’s Speaking Fees Came From Groups Also Lobbying
Congress
<http://time.com/3889577/hillary-clinton-paid-speeches-lobbyists-influence/>
// TIME // Philip Elliott - May 19, 2015

Almost half of the money from Hillary Clinton’s speaking engagements came
from corporations and advocacy groups that were lobbying Congress at the
same time.

The Democratic presidential candidate earned $10.2 million in 2014, her
first full calendar year after leaving the State Department. Of that, $4.6
million came from groups that also spent on lobbying Congress that year,
according to data compiled by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive
Politics.

In all, the corporations and trade groups that Clinton spoke to in 2014
spent $72.5 million lobbying Congress that same year.

Asked Tuesday if there were conflicts of interest in speaking to these
groups, Clinton was curt with reporters in Cedar Falls, Iowa. “No,” she
said.

“Obviously, Bill and I have been blessed and we’re very grateful for the
opportunities that we had but we’ve never forgotten where we’ve come from,”
she added.

But the speaking fees were more about where they were going next.

For critics, the arrangement shows that many of people who booked an
appearance saw it as another way to gain influence with a leading contender
to become the next President.

“It’s big money. They’re spending it because they have far greater sums
riding on those decisions that they’re trying to shape,” said Sheila
Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics.
“Corporations or associations must justifiably make these investments
because everyone knew for many years that Clinton would always remain a
power broker. Every man or woman on the street thought Hillary Clinton
would run again.”

As with routine political donations, it’s hard to suss out a direct
cause-and-effect from the speaking fees.

Take the Pacific trade deal being negotiated by President Obama. In all,
groups and corporations that are pushing for the Trans-Pacific Partnership
to be approved spent almost $3 million to hear from Clinton. The
signatories to one pro-trade letter, dated March 2014, paid more than $1
million in speaking fees in 2014.

From ‘dead broke’ to multimillionaires
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/clinton-speeches/> // WaPo
// Kennedy Elliott, Alexander Becker, Philip Rucker, Tom Hamburger, Peter
Wallsten, and Rosalind Helderman - May 19, 2015

A Washington Post analysis of the Clinton's federal financial disclosures
found that Bill Clinton was paid $104.9 million for delivering 542 speeches
around the world between January 2001 and January 2013, when Hillary
Clinton stepped down as secretary of state.

Since then, both Clintons have hit the lecture circuit. They have not
released information about their speaking in 2013. But according to a
disclosure by Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign, Bill and Hillary
Clinton together earned nearly $25 million for delivering 104 speeches
between January 2014 and May 2015.

Hillary Clinton’s hypocrisy
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hillary-clintons-hypocrisy/2015/05/19/f8a7b194-fe48-11e4-8b6c-0dcce21e223d_story.html>
// WaPo // Dan Milbank – May 19, 2015

In a private meeting last week with 200 of the Democratic Party’s top
financiers, Hillary Clinton drew vigorous applause when she said any of her
nominees to the Supreme Court would have to share her desire to overturn
the Citizens United decision.

Clinton also, as reported by my Post colleagues Matea Gold and Anne Gearan,
put in a plug with the fundraisers (all of whom had hauled in at least
$27,000 for her) for a constitutional amendment overturning the ruling,
which allows unlimited spending by super PACs.

Dana Milbank writes about political theater in the nation’s capital. He
joined the Post as a political reporter in 2000. View Archive

Nice sentiments, to be sure, but the fact that she was unveiling her
Citizens United litmus test with party fat cats at an exclusive soiree
(four days later, she mentioned it to voters in Iowa) tells you all you
need to know about Clinton’s awkward — and often hypocritical —
relationship with campaign-finance reform.

Even as she denounces super PACs, she’s counting on two of them, Priorities
USA Action and Correct the Record, to support her candidacy — a necessary
evil, her campaign says. She’s also chin-deep in questionable financial
activities, ranging from the soft-money scandals of her husband’s
presidency to the current flap over contributions by foreigners and
favor-seekers to the Clinton Foundation. Then there’s the matter of her
plans to continue President Obama’s policy of opting out of the
public-finance system; Obama’s abandonment of the system did as much as the
Citizens United ruling to destroy the post-Watergate fixes.

Her advisers claim campaign-finance reforms will be at the top of her
agenda, a sensible choice because of the deep resentment in the populace
toward a political system rigged in favor of the wealthy. But she gives
supporters little evidence that she’s genuine. Asked by The Post last month
about the role of the pro-Clinton Priorities USA Action, Clinton shrugged
her shoulders and said, “I don’t know.”

If she really thinks money is corrupting politics, she can take concrete
steps right now. She could pledge to return immediately to the public
finance system and call on pro-Clinton super PACs to cease and desist — if
her Republican opponents will do the same. The Republicans won’t, of
course, but then Clinton would have gained the moral high ground she now
lacks.

She could also vow to enact four pieces of legislation if elected: reviving
the public-finance system with matching funds for small contributions;
curtailing candidate super PACs by drafting strict rules prohibiting
coordination; forcing the disclosure of anonymous “dark money”
contributions; and creating a new enforcement agency to replace the
impotent and perpetually deadlocked Federal Election Commission.

“We have a history of candidates making commitments to campaign finance
reform during the campaign and then walking away from it, in particular
with Bill Clinton and Barack Obama,” says Fred Wertheimer , a longtime
campaign-finance reformer. “We’re going to need a lot more than what Mrs.
Clinton has said in order for this to be treated seriously.”

There’s a chance she’ll find some Republican support for legislation to
restore public financing of elections — if only because the absence of such
a system effectively means presidents are elected to eight-year terms,
because their ability to raise virtually unlimited sums as incumbents all
but guarantees reelection.

Stuart Stevens, who ran Mitt Romney’s 2012 campaign, notes that only one
incumbent president in the past 125 years who was not in the public-finance
system lost his bid for reelection — and that was Herbert Hoover. Stevens
says the 2016 winner, Democrat or Republican, “is going to be almost
impossible to defeat” in 2020. (Super PACs won’t completely offset that
incumbent advantage, he figures, because the funds are at least
theoretically outside the candidate’s control.) The prospect of a de facto
eight-year term for a Democratic president could persuade Republicans to
support a revival of public finance even if it isn’t “normally in their
DNA,” Stevens argues.

If she’s serious in her commitment to campaign-finance reform, Clinton
doesn’t have to wait until the election. Stevens suggests she challenge her
opponents to join her in opting into the moribund public-finance system
(though its matching funds would be absurdly low). To keep the super PACs
from filling the void, she could propose both sides disavow them, as
Republican Scott Brown and Democrat Elizabeth Warren did in their 2012
Massachusetts Senate race, pledging to pay a penalty if outside groups ran
ads in their race.

Such an arrangement is probably unworkable, even in the unlikely event
Republicans took her up on it. But this and other tangible steps could
reduce the demoralizing gap between Clinton’s professed commitment to clean
elections and her dubious record.

Hillary Clinton downplays Sidney Blumenthal's influence
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/hillary-clinton-sidney-blumenthal-118098.html>
// Politico // Adam Lerner – May 19, 2015

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks to small
business owners, Tuesday, May 19, 2015, at the Bike Tech cycling shop in
Cedar Falls, Iowa. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)

AP Photo

Hillary Clinton on Tuesday downplayed Sidney Blumenthal’s influence on her
Wednesday, saying she passed his emails to State Department deputies to
“make sure [she wasn’t] caught in a bubble” with only information coming
“from a certain small group of people.”

“He sent me unsolicited emails which I passed on in some instances and I
say that that’s just part of the give and take,” Clinton told reporters
Tuesday at an event in Cedar Falls, Iowa.

The comments came the day after a New York Times report revealed that
Blumenthal, a longtime family ally, sent multiple unsubstantiated
intelligence reports to Clinton’s private email while she was secretary of
state. Clinton then forwarded these emails to top staff, sometimes with
commentary about their veracity, but often solely with instructions to pass
them along to others in the department.

The emails relied largely on unnamed sources and often contained
information known to be false or misleading.

Blumenthal was working at the time for Constellations Group, a company with
business interests in Libya, leading to further concerns about his
motivations in sending the intelligence. Constellations Group planned to
secure contracts with Libya’s transitional government that would have
required State Department-approved permits, giving Blumenthal a direct
financial stake in the ouster of Qaddafi and subsequent U.S. policy in
Libya.

The emails published by the Times predate the attack on the American
consulate in Benghazi that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens, but according
to a ProPublica report, Blumenthal sent Clinton a report from a “sensitive
source” the day after the bombing saying that the attack was inspired by an
anti-Muslim video. This information was later determined to be false.

“I have many, many old friends and I always think that it’s important when
you get into politics to have friends you had before you were in politics
and to understand what’s on their minds,” Clinton said Tuesday. “And he’s
been a friend of mine for a long time.”

Clinton did not comment on whether or not she felt she misrepresented the
information’s source when she sent it on to staff.

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), chairman of the House Select Committee on
Benghazi, plans to subpoena Blumenthal for a private transcribed interview
to discuss his influence on Clinton during her time at the State
Department, committee sources confirmed to POLITICO Monday.

Blumenthal had been barred from working in Clinton’s State Department
because of his role in pushing negative stories about Obama during the 2008
presidential campaign, but continued his personal and professional
relationship with the Clintons, which eventually consisted of sending
intelligence reports about Libya which Clinton then forwarded on.

Outside of his work for Constellations Group, he was employed by the
Clinton Foundation and consulted for Media Matters and American Bridge, two
organizations supporting Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential bid.

A Clinton spokesperson told ProPublica in March that all of the messages
sent to Clinton from Blumenthal had been turned over with the 30,000-pages
of content given to the State Department by Clinton earlier this year. The
spokesman did not comment on whether or not Clinton responded to
Blumenthal’s messages and whether these responses were contained in the
emails given to the State Department for analysis.

Gabriel Debenedetti contributed to this report.

Hillary Clinton Tamps Down ‘Third Term’ Chatter
<http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/05/19/hillary-clinton-tamps-down-third-term-chatter/>
// NYT // Maggie Haberman - May 19, 2015

Hillary Rodham Clinton has started to address a critical issue about her
candidacy — the loaded “third term” question.

After months of questions about how she would handle the tenures of
President Obama and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, Mrs.
Clinton has begun telling supporters that she is not running to serve
either man’s third term in office.

At a donor meeting in the Red Hook, Brooklyn, last week, Mrs. Clinton
raised the topic as she addressed more than 250 people who had helped raise
at least $27,000 for her 2016 presidential campaign, according to three
people who attended the gathering.

“We’re going to make clear, I’m not running for my husband’s third term or
for President Obama’s third term,” one person recalled her saying. “I’m
running to make history on my own.”

Later, all three attendees said, she talked about the campaign being not
about her, but about voters, and said she wanted to build on the successes
of both Mr. Obama and Mr. Clinton.

A campaign spokesman declined to comment.

Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama share several advisers, and Mrs. Clinton served
as the president’s secretary of state in his first term. Mr. Obama’s team
has long been prepared for Mrs. Clinton to seek to distinguish herself from
him — and she has, although primarily by edging to his left, as she has
gone further than he did in support of executive actions on immigration and
on policing reforms.

Mrs. Clinton has generally embraced Mr. Obama and his policies, although
she is likeliest to seek distance from him on foreign policy. As for Mr.
Clinton, whose record she alluded to repeatedly in her 2008 presidential
campaign, Mrs. Clinton has rarely mentioned him so far in this race.

Just to be clear, the Supreme Court, even amidst its deregulatory frenzy,
has said that public disclosure of contributions to campaigns and
independent groups is both constitutional and vital to fair elections.

The very limited record on dark money shows that those funding these groups
-- just like those funding super PACs, which must identify their donors --
include many high-powered corporate and individual interests with
well-connected lobbyists in search of favors. HuffPost reports have found
that dark money groups tightly connected to congressional and party
leadership, both Democratic and Republican, have received large sums from
pharmaceutical, insurance, banking and online payday lenders seeking
specific policy changes while retaining lobbyists previously employed by
those very leaders.

This year, GOP presidential candidates are copying this model on an
individual level, by launching their very own dark money groups to rake in
secret contributions.

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush has his Right to Rise Policy Solutions, which
is playing an increasingly important role in his not-yet-declared,
super-PAC-centered presidential campaign. Rubio's advisers run the
Conservative Policy Solutions group in collaboration with an affiliated
super PAC. And potential candidates like former Texas Gov. Rick Perry,
former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal are
all running around the country fueled by funding from undisclosed nonprofit
groups.

Then there is the case of Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, currently running
another not-yet-announced presidential campaign.

In 2012, Walker faced a recall election after labor unions in his state
rebelled over legislation gutting public employee union rights. His recall
campaign coordinated with a band of nonprofit political groups, led by the
Wisconsin Club for Growth, to promote Walker and his policies in a positive
light. Walker aides worked closely with the outside groups, and the
governor directly raised undisclosed contributions for the effort.

A bipartisan investigation by district attorneys into Walker’s coordination
with those outside groups revealed some of their funding sources, including
a $700,000 contribution to the Wisconsin Club for Growth from Gogebic
Taconite at the exact time the company was seeking a rewrite of state
mining and environmental laws.

John Menard Jr., considered the wealthiest man in Wisconsin, was another
big donor to the save-Walker effort. The billionaire owner of the chain
store Menards gave $1.5 million to the Wisconsin Club for Growth, according
to a report by Yahoo News. During Walker’s term in office, Menard’s company
received $1.8 million in tax credits from an economic development
corporation led by the governor. He also received help in his battle with
the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources as Walker defanged the
watchdog agency.

Others who gave to the coordinated Walker effort include billionaires
Charles and David Koch, Sheldon Adelson, Paul Singer, Bruce Kovner, Donald
Trump, Ken Langone and Steven Cohen.

As Hillary Clinton has done with contributions to her family’s foundation,
Walker denies any conflict of interest involving donors to his coordinated
recall effort. But the full list of contributors is unknown.

The same failure to see their own conflicts applies to candidates elected
since the Citizens United decision precipitated the dramatic rise in dark
money. Both Paul and Rubio were elected to the Senate in 2010 with $2.3
million and $2.7 million, respectively, in allied spending by groups that
do not disclose their donors, including the Karl Rove-founded Crossroads
GPS and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Thanks to its bankruptcy filings, it is known that for-profit Corinthian
Colleges made contributions to Crossroads GPS. While the dates and amounts
of those donations are still hidden, Rubio’s strong support for Corinthian
is well-established. In 2014, he pleaded with the Department of Education
for leniency for the company as it faced a fraud investigation.

No one doubts that huge sums of dark money will again be spent supporting
presidential candidates in the 2016 election. While the public will be able
to consider whether the corporations, billionaires and foreign governments
that contributed to the Clinton Foundation would hold undue sway over a
Clinton White House, they will not even know the identities of those
pouring in the secret donations.

Hillary’s launch delay
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/hillary-clinton-2016-launch-delay-118118.html#ixzz3ad7XKISa>
// Politico // Annie Karnia - May 19, 2015

Hillary Clinton’s official entry into the presidential race on April 12
came in the form of a slick YouTube video and a series of choreographed
roundtable events in Iowa, where Clinton asked more questions than she
answered and listened more than she spoke. A more traditional big-picture
speech and rally outlining Clinton’s vision for the country’s future and
her reason for running, the campaign said, would follow in May.

But the formal roll-out is now being delayed indefinitely, pushed back at
least until June, for largely political reasons: a desire to spend more
time on fundraising and fleshing out policy positions before inviting more
public scrutiny.

“If they had their druthers, they would basically get off the front pages,
let the Republicans eat themselves alive, and let her do what she needs to
do: raise the money and not have to be part of the debate right now,” said
one Clinton donor who’s familiar with the campaign’s thinking. “She has 100
percent name recognition, and is in a good place vis a vis the primary. Why
put your foot on the accelerator?”

In place of a formal launch, Clinton is spending the remainder of May
traveling to Iowa and New Hampshire this week, and South Carolina next
week, where she is scheduled to engage in private meetings with activists
and more of the same staged roundtable discussions. Next week, Clinton
heads to Florida for a handful of fundraisers.

In memos to donors, campaign operatives have compared the low-stakes
early-state events to the exploratory phase of a campaign, before the
candidate officially enters the race. And Clinton’s camp appears in no rush
to leave that protected space.

A few factors, campaign insiders said, are driving the delay. Fundraising
worries trumped the need to emerge with a big rally, partly because of the
prospect of Jeb Bush’s fundraising juggernaut. Clinton was forced to hit
the money circuit earlier than planned, attending intimate events with
donors in New York, Washington, and California. “She will not be able to do
fundraising at people’s houses for a few hundred thousand dollars when the
campaign is in full speed,” the donor said. “She’ll have to do higher
ticket and bigger events.”

At the same time, important planks of Clinton’s policy platform are still
being fleshed out. A source said that initiatives surrounding student loans
— which she plans to make an important part of her platform, in part due to
pressure from the left — are still months out.

On Tuesday, at a roundtable in Iowa, Clinton’s trademark caution was on
display as she again avoided taking any position on President Obama’s
contentious trade deal. “I’ve said I want to judge the final agreement,”
she said. “I’ve been for trade agreements, I’ve been against trade
agreements.”

There’s been no single moment in May that would have been a clean time for
a big kick-off speech. She’s been fending off allegations about Clinton
Foundation donors seeking to curry favor with the State Department; faced
the prospect of a testifying in front of a Congressional hearing on
Benghazi; and contended with publicity surrounding the release of personal
financial disclosures showing the Clinton’s made at least $30 million since
2014 — the month was clouded with the kind of stories Clinton has called
“distractions.”

Her Iowa trip this week might have afforded an opportunity for a formal
launch event but Clinton appears to be enjoying the small, manageable
roundtable settings, which allow her to talk about issues she wants to
address on her own terms. In Las Vegas, for instance, Clinton used the
roundtable setting to make real news: she called for a path to citizenship
and more protections for parents of DREAMers, moving beyond Obama on
immigration reform.

The slow walk-up to the campaign isn’t necessarily a problem, Iowa
activists said, because she’s not starting from zero. “This has been a very
slow emergence … but I have not felt that we, as Iowans, don’t know who
this person is,” said Kurt Meyer, chair of the Tri County Democrats in
Iowa. “We have a full file folder on Hillary Clinton. This is not like we
walk into class, and there’s a blank whiteboard.”

But some Iowans are ready for the campaign’s next phase. “Clearly there are
some important issues — not the least of which is trade — that we’d like to
have a pretty solid answer on,” said Ken Sagar, president of the Iowa
Federation of Labor, AFL-CIO. “If you want to be the leader of the country
and the free world, now would be a good time to step up and let us know
what your position is on important issues that are in the process of being
debated, discusses and determined.”

Iowans want details on raising wages and relieving student loan debt, among
other issues, Sagar said.

On Tuesday, a campaign aide said Clinton was expanding her travel schedule
beyond the early voting states, with trips to Florida, Texas and Missouri
in the coming weeks. But it was still not clear when the traditional launch
event might take place, signaling the transition into the next phase of her
campaign.

“The early focus of the campaign is on directly interacting with voters,
answering their questions and discussing their ideas,” a campaign spokesman
said. “Our next steps will be announced soon.”

Hillary Clinton vows help for small business
<http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2015/05/19/267174/hillary-clinton-vows-help-for.html>
// McClatchy DC // Anita Kumar - May 19, 2015

CEDAR FALLS, IOWA — Hillary Clinton promised Tuesday to be “a small
business president” who would help by cutting bureaucracy and securing more
loans.

“I want to be a small business president, a president who does make it
easier to start and run a small business in this country, so it seems less
like a gamble and more like an opportunity,” Clinton said at a roundtable
discussion at a bike shop.

Clinton is spending the week in Iowa and New Hampshire focusing on small
business, reminding voters of her humble start in life. She told
participants about her father, Hugh Rodham, the owner of a small drapery
business in their hometown of Park Ridge, Ill., just outside Chicago.

“He had a very small business, printing drapery fabrics and then went out
and sold them. My mother, my brothers and I, and occasionally a few day
laborers, would help out with the actual printing process,” she said.
“That’s what put food on the table and gave us a solid middle-class home.”

Critics mocked Clinton, a millionaire who along with her husband earns
hundreds of thousands of dollars for her speeches and millions of dollars
for her books.

“During her last campaign, Clinton never once mentioned small business
during one of her 19 debates and never put forth a small business plan,”
said Jeff Bechdel, a spokesman for America Rising, an opposition research
group. “Her sudden focus on these issues rings hollow for the millions of
small business owners who are facing challenges from policies she supports.”

After the event, in a rare response to a question from a reporter about how
she could relate to the middle class, Clinton downplayed her wealth.

“Obviously Bill and I have been blessed. And we’re very grateful for the
opportunities we’ve had,” she said. “But we’ve never forgotten where we
came from. . . . That means we are going to fight to make sure everyone has
the same chances.”

Clinton told the four small business owners that her plan to assist them
has four key elements: cutting red tape, expanding access to capital,
simplifying taxes and providing tax relief for small business, and
expanding access to new markets.

She spent most of the nearly hourlong event asking questions of the
entrepreneurs, but she answered a few of her own, including one about the
ground rules for a contentious trade agreement Congress is debating.

Clinton declined again to say whether she supports or opposes the 12-nation
deal called the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which is backed by her former
boss, President Barack Obama, but opposed by many liberal Democrats,
including two presidential rivals, Sen. Bernie Sanders, a Vermont
independent, and former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley. She supported the
proposed agreement when she was secretary of state.

Clinton said any deal must increase jobs and wages, be strong on health and
environmental rules, be in the U.S.’s national security interests and
address currency manipulation.

“I’ve said I want to judge the final agreement,” she said. “I’ve been for
trade agreements. I’ve been against trade agreements.”

Outside the bike shop in downtown Cedar Rapids, three members of Americans
for Democratic Action, which supports liberal candidates, held signs that
asked Clinton to take a stand on the agreement.

“We’re really troubled that she’s been silent on it so far,” said Chris
Schwartz, one of the group’s organizers. “And she’s playing politics with
this issue that is critically important to Iowa jobs, worker safety and
human rights around the world.”

Clinton was on her second trip to Iowa since she announced she was running
for president in mid-April.

Later Tuesday, she stopped at a local coffee shop, a hardware store and a
gift shop in Independence, Iowa, where she spoke to the owners. At Hardware
Hank, she spoke to the son of the owner, Terry Tekippe, whose family has
owned the shop for more than five decades.

“We just did a small business thing, so I’m really focused on what we can
do to make it even better,” Clinton told him. “Keep us in focus,” Tekippe
responded.

On Monday, she spoke to about 60 people at the Mason City home of Dean
Genth and Gary Swenson, major Democratic organizers in Iowa who were among
the first gay couples married in the state. They supported Obama in 2008.

“I am going into this race with my eyes wide open about how hard it is to
be the president. I have a little experience with that,” she said. “We need
a president who has both the experience and understanding to deal with the
complexity of the problems we face. I believe I can go into that office on
the very first day and do what is required.”

Clinton pops in on small business owners
<http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/2015/05/19/hillary-clinton-small-businesses-independence/27595531/>
// Des Moines Register // Tony Leys - May 19, 2015

Independence, Ia. – Hillary Clinton made a quick stop here Tuesday morning
to show appreciation for small business owners.

"I want to be the small-business president," she said to Terry Tekippe, who
was standing in the doorway of the Hardware Hank's store his family owns.

The Democratic presidential candidate had appeared earlier in the morning
in Cedar Falls, where she'd talked about ways to help small businesses
thrive. In her unannounced stop in Independence, she walked up and down the
sidewalk of the town's shopping district. She stopped in Em's Coffee Co.,
where owner Emilea Hillman made her an espresso and posed for photos with
the candidate as photographers snapped and filmed away.

Clinton then walked down to "Laree's, the Shop of Favorites," which sells
children's books and toys on one side, and pottery, glassware and artwork
next door. "Careful, careful guys," she told the herd of journalists packed
around her. "Lots of breakable things."

Clinton bought a humor book, "Theories of Everything," plus a ball and a
farm toy for her granddaughter before bidding owner Laree Randall goodbye.

Walking back up the street, Clinton once again passed Tekippe, who was
standing in the hardware-store doorway with his mother, Shirley Tekippe.

Terry Tekippe said he was glad to see the famous candidate take a little
bit of time to tour small-town businesses. "Hopefully she remembers Main
Street," he said. "Main Street's important."

After about a half hour, Clinton and her entourage piled back into several
vans and headed back out onto the campaign trail.

Iowans wonder: How long can Clinton's big campaign stay small?
<http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/19/politics/hillary-clinton-iowa-trip-2016-elections/>
// CNN // Eric Bradner - May 19, 2015

Cedar Falls, Iowa (CNN)Hillary Clinton isn't buckling under mounting
pressure to abandon the comfort of her presidential campaign's small,
carefully-choreographed events to answer lingering and politically
sensitive questions.

But the clock on the former secretary of state's ramp-up into full campaign
mode — with the accountability that comes with regular interaction with the
press — is ticking louder by the day.

Even Iowa Democrats who are friendliest to Clinton's cause appear to have
set it to expire this summer.

By then, they say, she'll need to have shifted her campaign into a higher
gear by rolling out major policy proposals, fielding questions and allowing
more voters access to her through larger rallies.

"People are going to start paying attention here pretty soon — it's just
kind of in the air out here," said Iowa AFL-CIO President Ken Sagar.

Others aren't as forgiving. It's been three weeks since Clinton publicly
answered questions from anyone who her campaign hadn't invited to an event
— prompting more coverage of what she isn't doing than what she is saying,
and triggering editorials like one that ran in the Las Vegas Review-Journal.

"If she can't handle a tough question from a journalist, how can she handle
the duties of the highest office in the land?" the newspaper, in the key
early-voting state of Nevada, opined Monday.

Questions about Clinton's past are dogging her quest for a fresh start
headed into 2016, and voters appear to be taking notice. An NBC/Wall Street
Journal poll found only a quarter of registered voters said they viewed her
as honest and straightforward, down 13 percentage points from last summer.

The Democratic front-runner in the 2016 race for the White House returned
to Iowa this week for her campaign's second swing through the state that
casts the first ballots in the presidential nominating process. On Tuesday
she'll visit Bike Tech, a small business in Cedar Falls, where she's set to
lead another in her series of small roundtable discussions.

The small roundtable events, Clinton has said, have offered her insight
into issues like the drug scourge, a rash of young suicides and mental
health challenges that she said she now realizes must be part of her
campaign.

But she has left most of them without taking any questions from the
journalists tracking her campaign. She also hasn't sat for an interview
with a major news outlet since officially entering the race.

Such a closed-off approach from the press could help Clinton avoid the
mistakes of her unsuccessful 2008 campaign, which struggled at times to
stay on course in a bitter battle with then-Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. John
Edwards.

It has also, though, increasingly made her a target for Republicans who,
needing attention to fuel their candidacies in a much more competitive
nominating battle, have laid into Clinton during their much more frequent
media appearances.

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush estimated over the weekend that he's answered
800 to 900 questions — multitudes more than the 13, by the most generous
counting, that Clinton has answered since launching her campaign.

"For those that really follow TV, 33,000 minutes is two times the number of
'Simpson's' shows that existed in the [past] 25 years," Bush said.

Clinton still hasn't fielded questions herself about her family
foundation's acceptance of foreign donations or the $30 million she and
Bill Clinton made giving paid speeches since the beginning of 2014. And on
Monday evening, another issue popped up in a New York Times report: Her
relationship with long-time ally Sidney Blumenthal, who was offering
Clinton advice on Libya while she was secretary of state at the same time
he did business with clients that operated in Libya.

Democrats are clamoring, meanwhile, for Clinton to tip the scales in a
battle over international trade that has pitted President Barack Obama
against firebrand liberal Sen. Elizabeth Warren — the champion of a
coalition that resembles some of the forces that lifted Obama past Clinton
in their 2008 battle.

"I think she should take a good look at it, and I think it would be very
helpful," Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California said Sunday on
ABC's "This Week."

For as much criticism as Clinton's small-ball approach has met, it's also
allowed her to avoid the errors of GOP contenders like Bush, who needed at
least four tries at answering a question about Iraq last week, and Kentucky
Sen. Rand Paul, whose testy interviews with female journalists led to a
round of inquiries about whether he has a personal problem with being
challenged by women.

Clinton's remarks at a Mason City house party on Monday, where she mingled
with guests for about an hour, were laced with implicit criticism of her
Republican rivals. She mentioned none by name, but made a pointed reference
to her experience.

"I am going into this race with my eyes wide open about how hard it is to
be president of the United States. I have a little experience about that
and I have to tell you, I find it very reassuring because I do have that
experience to know what is possible and how best to proceed, Clinton said.

"But I also know that we are living in an incredibly complicated time in
American history," she said, winding up for a jab at the entire GOP field
of White House aspirants.

"It is not a time for easy answers, for glib answers, or one liners, or
applause lines," Clinton said. "Those are all great, that is part of
campaigning, but at the end of the day, we need a president who has both
the experience and the understanding to deal with the complexity of the
problems we face."

So far, Clinton has visited Iowa twice, Nevada and New Hampshire, where
she'll return for her second visit later this week. She'll complete the
superfecta of early-voting states by swinging through South Carolina next
week.

Once those visits are concluded, Clinton is expected to change gears,
beginning to hold large rallies and deliver major policy speeches.

In Iowa, Democratic insiders and activists say they'd like to see her
campaign more actively — but unlike 2008, there isn't a strong challenger
within Clinton's party to force the sorts of multiple daily
packed-high-school-gymnasium events that candidates then needed to showcase
the strength of their support.

Instead, the lack of a well-known and well-financed challenger has allowed
Clinton to take a more humble approach — doing as much listening as talking
— that showcases humility in what could easily be viewed as a Democratic
coronation. It also affords her to tap into one of her greatest strengths
as a candidate: a lifetime of wisdom on the wonkiest of subjects that pop
up in question-and-answer sessions with those invited to her roundtables.

Sagar, the labor leader, said Clinton's low-key approach has been a welcome
reprieve for a state fresh off a bruising Senate race, and already seeing
an influx of Republican contenders in that party's packed presidential
field.

"Everyone is burned out, honestly, from having these large events
constantly," said Molly Monk, a soon-to-be Simpson College senior and
student government president.

Still, Monk, who's also seen former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley in person
but said she wants to volunteer to help Clinton, said college students are
trying to decide whether Clinton is the kind of candidate they can actively
embrace and work for, or one who they'll support for lack of alternatives.

And Monk, whose Irish Catholic family is filled with U.S. Army veterans,
already has several issues she's waiting for Clinton to address — including
student debt and particularly foreign policy.

"I'm willing to wait like two months or so," Monk said.

Others said they expect a similar timeframe for a Clinton ramp-up.

"A couple months from now — about when we're going back to school — that's
when people are going to start to say, 'All right, it's time to tell us
what you're really going to do,'" said Anna Schierenbeck, a Grinnell
College sophomore and one of the leaders of the College and Young Democrats
of Iowa.

"I think that for now, she's doing a good job channeling this excitement
and being really folksy," she said.

"I do think that as we go forward, it's going to be important for her to do
the more traditional rallies," Schierenbeck said. "Young people love
yelling and screaming about a candidate, and that's going to be important."

The 6 questions Hillary Clinton answered in Iowa
<http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/caucus/2015/05/19/hillary-clinton-submits-quizzing-press/27585233/>
// Des Moines Register // Jennifer Jacobs - May 19, 2015

CEDAR FALLS, Ia. –Breaking a long, much-scrutinized dry spell, Hillary
Clinton allowed herself to be quizzed by reporters Tuesday in Iowa.

"Okaaaay," she said as she approached the mass of waiting reporters, all
bristling with questions. She had just finished an invitation-only
roundtable talk with four Iowans at Bike Tech, a small business in Cedar
Falls.

FIRST QUESTION: Do you regret the way the Clinton Foundation handled
foreign donations when you were U.S. Secretary of State? Your opponents say
the donations and your private email account are examples of the Clintons
having one set of rules for themselves and another set of rules for
everyone else. (The donations raised questions about conflicts of interest
if they were coming from foreigners trying to influence Clinton, the
nation's top diplomat.)

CLINTON: "I am so proud of the foundation. I'm proud of the work that it
has done and is doing. It attracted donations, from people, organizations,
from around the world, and I think that just goes to show that people are
very supportive of the life-saving and life-changing work that it's done
here, at home and elsewhere. I'll let the American people make their own
judgments."

SECOND QUESTION: Given the situation in Iraq, do you think we're better off
without Saddam Hussein in power?

CLINTON: "Look, I know that there have been a lot of questions about Iraq
posed to candidates over the last weeks. I've been very clear that I made a
mistake plain and simple. And I have written about it in my book. I've
talked about it in the past and you know what we now see is a very
different and very dangerous situation. The United States is doing what it
can, but ultimately this has to be a struggle that the Iraqi government and
the Iraqi people are determined to win for themselves. We can provide
support, but they're going to have to do it."

THIRD QUESTION: On your income disclosure, you are in the top echelon of
income earners in this country. (Clinton and her husband, Bill, made least
$30 million in the last year and four months, mostly from paid speeches,
according to a financial disclosure that the Federal Election Commission
requires be made public.) How do you expect every day Americans to relate
to you?

CLINTON: "Well, obviously, Bill and I have been blessed and we're very
grateful for the opportunities that we've had, but we've never forgotten
where we came from, and we've never forgotten the country that we want to
see for our granddaughter, and that means that we're going to fight to make
sure that everybody has the same chances to live up to his or her own
God-given potential. So I think that most Americans understand that the
deck is stacked for those at the top, and I am running a campaign that is
very clearly stating we want to reshuffle that deck. We want to get back to
having more opportunities for more people so that they can make more out of
their own lives. And I think that's exactly what America's looking for."

FOURTH QUESTION: Can you explain your relationship as secretary of state
with Sidney Blumenthal? There's a report out this morning that you
exchanged several emails. Should Americans expect that if elected president
that you would have that same type of relationship with these old friends
that you've had for so long? (The New York Times reported that Blumenthal
wrote her memos about Libya, even as he advised for private business
associates with financial interests in Libya, which blurred the "lines
between business, politics and philanthropy that have enriched and vexed
the Clintons and their inner circle for years.")

CLINTON (laughing): "I have many, many old friends, and I always think that
it's important when you get into politics to have friends that you had
before you were in politics and to understand what's on their minds. He's
been a friend of mine for a long time. He sent me unsolicited emails, which
I passed on in some instances, and I see that that's just part of the
give-and-take. When you're in the public eye, when you're in an official
position, I think you do have to work to make sure you're not caught in the
bubble and you only hear from a certain small group of people, and I'm
going to keep talking to my old friends, who ever they are."

FIFTH QUESTION: We learned today that the State Department might not
release your emails until January 2016. A federal judge says they should be
released sooner. Will you demand that they are released sooner, and to
follow up on the question about the speeches, was there a conflict of
interest in your giving paid speeches into the run-up of your announcing
that you're running for president?

CLINTON: "The answer to the first is: No. And the answer to the second is:
I have said repeatedly, I want those emails out. Nobody has a bigger
interest in getting them released than I do. I respect the State
Department. They have their process, as they do for everybody, not just for
me, but anything that they might do to expedite that process, I heartily
support. You know, I want the American people to learn as much as we can
about the work that I did with our diplomats and our development experts.
Because I think that it will show how hard we worked, and the work we did
for our country during the time that I was secretary of state, where I
worked extremely hard on behalf of our values, and our interests and our
security. And the emails are part of that. So I have said publicly — I'm
repeating it here in front of all of you today — I want them out as soon as
they can get out."

SIXTH QUESTION: But will you demand their release? (In March, the New York
Times revealed that Clinton used a private email account tied to a
home-based server to conduct business as secretary of state, which shielded
her correspondence from the public eye and raised security questions. The
State Department's proposal to release 55,000 pages of the emails, which
Clinton turned over to the agency in December, comes in the wake of a
Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, Politico reports. The proposed Jan. 15
release date would fall just a couple weeks before the Iowa caucuses, the
first voting in the nation in the presidential selection process.)

CLINTON: "Well, they're not mine. They belong to the State Department. So
the State Department has to go through its process and as much as they can
expedite that process, that's what I'm asking them to do. Please move as
quickly as they possibly can."

Clinton then said: "Thank you all very much" and walked away with a wave,
ignoring other questions shouted at her, such as "Do you regret deleting
32,000 other emails, Mrs. Clinton?"

THE BACKGROUND: Since Clinton announced on April 12 that she is running for
president of the United States again, she has carefully, smilingly
side-stepped grillings by press gaggles and avoided sit-down interviews
with reporters, saying that she wants to keep her focus this time on voters
and their ideas for the country — not on herself.

Her GOP presidential rivals have criticized her, and news outlets have
begun tracking her question avoiding. The New York Times posted queries "we
would have asked Mrs. Clinton had we had the opportunity." The Washington
Post's clock showed that before her Iowa Q&A, 40,150 minutes passed since
Clinton had last answered a question posed by the press.

Near the end of her chat with three Iowa small-business owners and a local
banker, Fox News reporter Ed Henry called out to ask if she'd entertain
questions from reporters. "I might. I have to ponder it. I will put it on
my list for due consideration," she answered, to laughs. A few minutes
later, she said she'd pose for photos with her invited guests, then "if I
can learn something, I might come over and take a few questions from the
press."

Clinton is on day two of a two-day swing through Iowa on her second trip
here of her 2016 presidential campaign. She was in Mason City on Monday.

IOWA GOP RESPONSE: "What difference, at this point, does it make," said
Republican Party of Iowa spokesman Charlie Szold in a statement, "if
Hillary Clinton answers one or two more questions? There are hundreds of
unanswered questions about her decades of scandal, which explains why more
Iowans than not find her untrustworthy."

After media drought, Hillary Clinton takes some questions in Iowa
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/after-media-drought-hillary-clinton-takes-some-questions-in-iowa/2015/05/19/ecb3c6d6-fe4b-11e4-833c-a2de05b6b2a4_story.html>
// WaPo // Robert Costa and David Fahrenthold - May 19, 2015

CEDAR FALLS, Iowa — “Hillary! Hillary!” they yelled at the distant figure,
from across the parking lot and across the street, at the edge of the
Secret Service’s protective zone.

She waved. Then she started walking over, trailed by a phalanx of aides,
cops and agents.

“Thank you for standing out here!” Hillary Rodham Clinton said Tuesday,
shaking hands with the 10 or so Iowans who had waited in the chilly wind,
hoping to see her come out the back door of a bike shop after a campaign
event here. “I need your help! I want you to caucus for me!”

This kind of face-to-face interaction isn’t unusual for campaign season in
Iowa, of course. But Clinton’s protective detail makes her a different kind
of candidate: The cluster of people waiting for her spoke about how the
Republicans coming through the state these days are easier to talk to,
mingle with.

It was a morning defined by Clinton’s reengagement — with voters beyond
those handpicked to meet her and with the traveling press — after nearly a
month of closely controlled appearances.

In taking a few questions from reporters, Clinton rapidly addressed a
series of controversies swirling around her and her campaign. She expressed
regret for voting in favor of the Iraq war, dismissed criticism of her
family’s foundation, and defended the millions of dollars she and her
husband have made giving speeches.

Clinton also was noncommittal on President Obama’s proposed Asian
free-trade agreement and, in response to a reporter’s question, said she
favors having the State Department release e-mails from her time as
secretary of state as soon as possible: “I want those e-mails out.”

The news conference — which featured six questions from five reporters —
was impromptu and marked a turning point for Clinton, who so far in her
young campaign has stuck mostly to tightly scripted events with small
groups of voters in Iowa and New Hampshire, and no substantive questions
from the media.

Late in her dialogue with Iowans at the bike shop, Fox News’s Ed Henry
asked during a break in the conversation whether Clinton would take
questions. The candidate — apparently taken aback by what she saw as an
interruption — waved him off but did not say no.

“Maybe when I finish talking to people here. How’s that?” Clinton replied,
to chuckles from attendees and groans from some reporters. When pressed
again, she said: “I might. I’ll have to ponder it. I will put it on my list
for due consideration.”

Later, on Fox News, Henry explained his query: “We had been through one of
these campaign events after another, getting monotonous, one city after
another. Roundtables. All candidates, Democrats and Republicans, are able
to do their talking points, but we’ve gone 27, 28 days without a question.
That’s why I just jumped in.”

Once she finished and posed for some pictures and selfies near polished
mountain bikes and rows of athletic gear, Clinton approached the waiting
crowd of reporters, who thrust forward audio recorders and hoisted boom
microphones above her.

She defended the Clinton Foundation’s practice of accepting foreign
donations — “I’m proud of the work it has done and the work it’s doing” —
and defended her friendship with former Bill Clinton aide Sidney
Blumenthal, who offered what she characterized as “unsolicited” advice on
Libya while she was secretary of state.

“I have many, many old friends, and I always think that it’s important when
you get into politics to have friends you had before you got into politics,
to understand what’s on their minds,” Clinton said.

She also repelled a question about whether regular Americans will be able
to relate to her because of her wealth; she and her husband have made $25
million since early 2014 giving speeches.

“Bill and I have been blessed, and we’re very grateful for the
opportunities we had,” Clinton said. “But we’ve never forgotten where we
came from, and we’ve never forgotten the kind of country we want to see for
our granddaughter, and that means that we’re going to fight to make sure
that everybody has the same chances to live up to his or her own God-given
potential.”

She also fielded a question on the Iraq war, a topic that has bedeviled
Republican presidential contenders in recent days. Clinton, who as a
senator from New York voted to authorize the war in 2003, reiterated that
she now believes that decision was wrong.

“I’ve made it very clear that I made a mistake, plain and simple,” she said.

Clinton’s initial remarks at Bike Tech struck an optimistic tone about the
future of the national economy and the Obama administration’s efforts. But
she also decried the ability of powerful financiers to use tax loopholes to
their advantage.

“Our economy and our country are in much better shape today,” Clinton said.
“But the deck is still stacked for those at the top. People aren’t getting
a fair shake.”

Stepping outside after the reporters’ questions, Clinton made small talk
with a crowd that had grown since she entered the shop. One woman was from
Pennsylvania; Clinton said she goes to Scranton often. Ronald “Ronzie”
Zuehlke told Clinton that he’d met her husband back in the 1990s.

Then she was gone, ducking into a van that had crept up as she greeted
them, so the walk back would be shorter.

Zuehlke, 65, of Cedar Falls, was literally hopping with excitement. “I got
to shake her hand!” he said. “Wow!”

“I’m just having shakes, I’m so excited,” said Linda Bodell, of Cedar Falls.

“I shook her hand!” repeated Zuehlke, a former farmer who had stocked the
pet aisle at Target for 13 years and was now retired. “I didn’t think she’d
come out. Face to face! Holy smokes!”

Hillary Clinton finally takes questions, defends speech income
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/05/19/hillary-clinton-finally-takes-questions-defends-speech-income/?postshare=6981432055889043>
// WaPo // Robert Costa - May 19, 2015

CEDAR FALLS, Iowa -- Hillary Rodham Clinton broke a long drought to take a
few questions from the traveling press here Tuesday, distancing herself
from President Obama's trade pact and defending the millions of dollars she
and her husband have made from giving speeches.

At the end of an event focused on small-business issues at a bicycle shop,
Clinton also said in response to a reporter's question that she favors
having the State Department release e-mails from  her time as secretary of
state as soon as possible: "I want those e-mails out."

Clinton's second swing through Iowa comes amid new revelations about
foreign donations to her family's foundation and speech income for her and
Bill Clinton, who together brought in $25 million by giving paid addresses
since early 2014.

During the short exchange with reporters after the event at Bike Tech,
Hillary Clinton defended the work of the Clinton Foundation -- "I'm proud
of the work it has done and the work it's doing" -- and dismissed questions
about her wealth.

"Bill and I have been blessed and we're very grateful for the opportunities
we had," Clinton said. "But we've never forgotten where we came from and
we've never forgotten the kind of country we want to see for our
granddaughter, and that means that we're going to fight to make sure that
everybody has the same chances to live up to his or her own God-given
potential."

She also fielded a question on the Iraq war, a topic that has bedeviled
Republican presidential candidates in recent days. Clinton, who voted to
authorize the war in 2003 as a New York senator, reiterated that she now
believes the decision was wrong.

"Look, I know that there have been a lot of questions about Iraq posted to
candidates over the last week. I've made it very clear that I made a
mistake, plain and simple," Clinton said. "And I have written about it in
my book, I've talked about it in the past, and what we now see is a very
different and very dangerous situation. The United States is doing what it
can, but ultimately this has to be a struggle that the Iraqi government and
the Iraqi people are determined to win for themselves."

Before the brief press gaggle, Clinton made remarks distancing herself from
an Asian free-trade deal that Obama is pushing and that she supported while
serving in his cabinet.

But Clinton said Tuesday that "any trade deal that I would support must
increase jobs, must increase wages, must give us more economic competitive
power" and that she was waiting to know more before taking a firm position.

"There are questions being raised about this current agreement," Clinton
continued. "It hasn't been fully negotiated yet, so I don't know what the
final provisions are yet... So, I have said I want to judge the final
agreement. I have been for trade agreements, I have been against trade
agreements. I've tried to make the evaluation dependent on what I thought
they would produce, and that's what I'm waiting to see."

Hillary Clinton Talks to Small-Business Owners in Iowa, Then Gives
Reporters a Turn
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/20/us/politics/hillary-clinton-says-law-is-hurting-small-banks-and-businesses.html?_r=1>
// NYT // Amy Chozick - May 19, 2015

CEDAR FALLS, Iowa — For close to an hour on Tuesday, Hillary Rodham Clinton
talked with owners of small businesses here about the issues on their
minds, like whether they would enjoy better access to credit if small local
banks were given regulatory relief and whether a major trade deal up for
debate in Washington could wind up hurting American workers.

Then Mrs. Clinton, who is seeking the Democratic Party’s nomination for
president, took a handful of questions from reporters, and the topics were
sharply different, and sharper in tone: her personal wealth, her use of a
private email while she was secretary of state, her family foundation’s
acceptance of foreign donations and the 2003 invasion in Iraq. She called
her own vote in the Senate to authorize the invasion “a mistake.”

Mrs. Clinton is adhering to a campaign schedule dotted with regular
round-table sessions as she delves into the concerns of voters in Iowa and
New Hampshire. More often than not, though, she avoids engaging with the
journalists covering her campaign, a practice that has drawn criticism in
recent weeks from Jeb Bush, the former Florida governor, who is a likely
Republican presidential candidate.

Tuesday’s event and the question-and-answer session after it — her first
since April 21 — underscored the tension between Mrs. Clinton’s desire to
establish a comfortable rapport with voters on issues she believes they
care about and journalists’ intent to question her about stories that have
dogged her nascent campaign, threatening to throw her off message. All
candidates face that push and pull for control of their campaign narrative,
but it is more pronounced in Mrs. Clinton’s case because of the way she
dominates the Democratic field so far.

Mrs. Clinton opened the round-table discussion here, at a specialty bike
shop, with a call to help small businesses expand their access to credit —
and hire more workers — by relieving small community banks of some
regulatory hindrances. “Isn’t that doable?” she asked to nods of approval.
“Am I right about that?”

She said community banks had been hard hit by the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial
regulation law.

Donna J. Sorensen, chairwoman of the Cedar Rapids Bank and Trust, agreed.
“We are losing those at a rapid rate, about 10 every year in Iowa,” Ms.
Sorensen said. “We exist to support small businesses. Small businesses are
our bread and butter.”

Another participant, Brad Magg, the owner of an ice cream shop and catering
business, said he had opened his first restaurant at age 20 “with a bank
loan from my local bank across the street because the bank president knew
me, knew my work ethic.”

Mrs. Clinton drew a distinction between relieving the pressure on smaller
banks and deregulating big Wall Street banks, a policy that she faulted
some Republicans for supporting.

“What was meant to rein in ‘too big to fail’ has actually fallen harder on
them,” she said of community banks. “That’s why they need relief, because
they were not part of the problem but in some ways are paying a
disproportionate price.”

One of the participants asked Mrs. Clinton about the Trans-Pacific
Partnership trade deal, which the Obama administration is negotiating and
which liberals have pressed her to oppose. She acknowledged that “this is
obviously a very hot topic right now” but avoided saying whether she would
come down for or against it.

“Any trade deal I would support must increase jobs, must increase wages,
must give us more economic competitive power,” Mrs. Clinton said, repeating
her earlier contention that it was too early to tell whether the pact would
meet her threshold.

“I have been for trade agreements. I have been against trade agreements,”
she said. “I try to make a valuation dependent on what they would produce.”

Mrs. Clinton was equally coy after a reporter for Fox News called out to
her with a request to take questions from reporters.

“I might,” she said, smiling. “I have to ponder it. I will put it on my
list for due consideration.”

When she began to answer a handful of questions, Mrs. Clinton made a
modicum of news. She said she hoped the State Department would release her
personal emails as soon as possible. (“As much as they can expedite the
process, that’s what I’m asking them to do.”) She defended her family’s
philanthropic foundation. (“I’ll let the American people make their own
judgments” about foreign donations.)

Asked about current conflict in Iraq, which has stumped Mr. Bush and some
other Republican contenders lately, and whether the world would be better
off had Saddam Hussein remained in power, Mrs. Clinton demurred.

“I made a mistake, plain and simple,” in voting to authorize the 2003
invasion, she said.

She defended her relationship with Sidney Blumenthal, a White House adviser
to former President Bill Clinton and a longtime confidant, who was paid by
the Clinton Foundation and offered advice to Mrs. Clinton about the
situation in Libya while she was secretary of state.

“I always think that it’s important when you get into politics to have
friends you had before you were in politics and to understand what’s on
their mind,” she said.

At every step in her campaign so far, Mrs. Clinton has voiced a populist
message about helping ordinary Americans, saying the “deck is stacked”
against them and in favor of the very wealthy. Tuesday was no different:
“Something is wrong when C.E.O.s earn more than 300 times what the typical
American worker earns,” she said in the round-table discussion.

But for the first time, Mrs. Clinton was asked afterward how she could
relate to voters struggling to get by, given the $25 million that she and
her husband reported in income from paid speeches since the beginning of
last year.

“Obviously, Bill and I have been blessed, and we are very grateful for the
opportunities,” she said. “I’m running a campaign that is very clearly
stating we want to reshuffle the deck.”

Hillary Clinton Finally Takes Reporters' Questions in Iowa
<http://www.nationaljournal.com/2016-elections/hillary-clinton-finally-takes-reporters-questions-in-iowa-20150519>
// National Journal // Emily Schultheis - May 19, 2015

Hillary Clinton found out Tuesday what happens when a presidential
candidate goes almost a month without taking questions from the press: a
feeding frenzy of reporters.

The former secretary of State faced a barrage of questions after a campaign
event in Cedar Falls, Iowa, and answered questions on topics ranging from
Iraq to the Clinton Foundation to her family's wealth.

The brief Q&A came after reporters have focused on their lack of access to
Clinton in recent weeks—before Tuesday, Clinton had answered just 13
questions during the campaign, by NPR's count. That relative silence from
Clinton has allowed a spate of news stories, ranging from questions about
the Foundation's financial dealings to the release of her emails, to pass
by without comment from the candidate herself.

That tension was apparent earlier Tuesday, when a reporter shouted out
during the event to ask whether she would take questions afterward. "I
might. I'll have to ponder it," Clinton replied, adding that it would only
be "when I finish talking to the people here."

Clinton also got a tough question during the event itself, when one of the
roundtable participants asked her to clarify her position on the
Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal. Trade has divided the Democratic
Party: President Obama supports the deal, but progressives—including Sen.
Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Clinton's sole official primary opponent thus
far—have vehemently opposed it. Clinton had previously commented on what it
would take for her to support the deal, but had not taken a stance either
way.

"I've been very clear on this," Clinton said, reiterating her previous
statements that any trade deal she supports must increase jobs and wages,
increase the United States' competitiveness globally, and be good for U.S.
national security. But she expressed concern over several provisions in the
potential deal, saying she will wait to decide until the proposed agreement
has been finalized.

"I have said I want to judge the final agreement," she said. "I have been
for trade agreements, I have been against trade agreements. I've tried to
make the evaluation depending upon what I thought they would produce, and
that's what I'm waiting to see."

Here's what she said in response to the five press questions she answered:

On the release of her emails by the State Department: Clinton said she
hopes the State Department—which said this week that it will not have
completed its review of her emails until January 2016—can "expedite the
process" however possible. "I want them out as soon as they can get out,"
Clinton said, adding that she has asked the department to "please move as
quickly as they possibly can."

On her relationship with Sidney Blumenthal: Clinton also answered a
question about her relationship with Blumenthal, whom The New York Times
reported sent her numerous memos about the security situation in Libya
before the Benghazi attacks occurred. She defended her relationship with
Blumenthal, saying, "I have many old friends. … I'm going to keep talking
to my old friends no matter who they are."

On the Clinton Foundation and questions about its donors: "I am so proud of
the Foundation. I'm proud of the work that it has done and that it is
doing," she said, adding that she would "let the American people make their
own judgments about that."

On whether the invasion of Iraq was a mistake: Clinton has previously said
her 2002 vote to authorize the Iraq war was a mistake, and she reiterated
that Tuesday as the issue has come back into the headlines in recent days.
"I've made it very clear that I made a mistake, plain and simple, and I
have written about it in my book, talked about it in the past, and you
know, what we now see is a different and very dangerous situation."

On her personal wealth and whether regular Americans can "relate" to her:
Clinton, asked about her wealth after personal financial-disclosure forms
revealed that she and her husband made $25 million in speaking fees since
2014, said both of them remember their roots. "Obviously, Bill and I have
been blessed and we're very grateful for the opportunities that we had, but
we've never forgotten where we came from and never forgotten the kind of
country we want to see for our granddaughter," she said. "And that means
that we're going to fight to make sure that everybody has the same chances
to live up to his or her own God-given potential."

In Iowa, Hillary Clinton Takes A Question About Her Questions
<http://www.buzzfeed.com/rubycramer/in-iowa-clinton-takes-a-question-about-her-questions#.gtXLzOn7M>
// Buzzfeed News // Ruby Cramer - May 19, 2015

CEDAR FALLS, Iowa — At a bicycle shop here in northeast Iowa, Hillary
Clinton was taking questions from the audience — a handful of local
officials who’d come to watch her roundtable discussion with small business
owners — when a voice rang out from the other side of the room.

“Secretary Clinton, will you take questions from the media as well?” said
one of the few dozen reporters crowding the rope line at Bike Tech on
Tuesday morning.

Clinton is now one month into the presidential race. Since her campaign
announcement, a number of negative stories have followed Clinton to Iowa
and New Hampshire and Nevada: There’s the use of her personal email at the
State Department, the foreign contributions to the Clinton Foundation, and
the new book, Clinton Cash, which investigates whether those donations, and
domestic ones, were used as tools of influence.

From these varied matters, one common question has emerged for the media
covering her campaign: How many questions, about these questions, has
Clinton answered since her launch — and when will she take more? (Last
week, one news outlet published a story saying she had taken nine. Another
counted 13.)

On Tuesday in Cedar Falls, the press got seven more.

The reporter who yelled his question to Clinton, appearing to startle some
in the audience, also remarked on the candidate’s recent silence.

“We haven’t heard from you in a month,” he told her, setting off a somewhat
strained exchange, which the crowd of press and attendees observed in
silence.

“Maybe when I finish talking to the people,” Clinton said.

“Thank you.”

“How’s that?” she asked.

“Thank you,” he replied. “Will you come over?”

Clinton paused. “I might.”

“Thank you.”

“I’ll ponder it,” she said, prompting some laughter.

“I appreciate that.”

“I’ll put it on my list.”

After another question from the audience, Clinton took pictures with the
participants at the roundtable event — where she vowed to serve as the
“small business president,” eliminate “red tape,” and ease regulations on
community banks.

Then she came over to the reporters.

The shouting happened all at once.

One voice, booming above the rest, could be heard asking multiple times,
“WHAT MAKES YOU SO SPECIAL?”

When the din quieted, Clinton took her seven questions.

First, the foreign donations:

I am so proud of the foundation. I’m proud of the work that it has done and
keeps doing. It attracted donations from people, organizations, from around
the world, and I think that goes to show that people are very supportive of
the life-saving and life-changing work it’s done here, at home, and
elsewhere.

Her vote as senator for the war in Iraq:

I’ve made it very clear that I’ve made a mistake, plain and simple … what
we now see is a very different and very dangerous situation. The United
States is doing what it can but ultimately this has to be a struggle that
the Iraqi government and the Iraqi people have to win for themselves — and
we can provide support, but they’re gonna have to do it.

Her personal wealth:

Bill and I have been blessed. And we’re very grateful for the opportunities
that we’ve had. But we’ve never forgotten where we came from.

Her relationship with a friend and adviser, Sidney Blumenthal, who, after
being barred from serving in the Obama administration, still advised her on
matters pertaining to Libya while he pursued business interests there, as
reported on Monday in the New York Times:

I have many, many old friends. I always think it’s important, when you get
into politics, to have friends you had before you were in politics … He’s
been a friend of mine for a long time. He sent me unsolicited emails, which
I passed on in some instances, and I see that [as] just part of the
give-and-take.

Her paid speeches — did they amount to a conflict of interest?

No.

The emails from the State Department — will she “demand” they be released
sooner than January 2016, as is expected?

I have said repeatedly I want those emails out. Nobody has a bigger
interest in getting them released than I do. I respect the State
Department. They have their process that they do for everybody, not just
for me. But anything that they might do to expedite that process, I
heartily support.

But would she demand it?

As much as they can expedite that process, that’s what I’m asking them to
do — to please move as quickly…

Clinton was cut off. The yelling started again.

“Secretary Clinton?”

“Did you take official actions from the Clinton Foundation donors?”

“Secretary Clinton?”

“Why did you delete the email server?”

“Secretary Clinton?!”

More voices rang out — but Clinton was done, exiting the Cedar Falls bike
shop alongside her press aide to head to another campaign stop. A chyron on
MSNBC summarized the “breaking news”: “CLINTON TAKES QUESTIONS IN IOWA.”

There was another question that went out to Clinton on policy — and it was
from a voter on the roundtable, who raised the topic of the Trans-Pacific
Partnership, the trade deal President Obama is negotiating that has become
an immense source of tension within the Democratic Party.

“What’s your stand?” asked Denita Gadson, the owner of i-Gus Consulting, a
small digital signage company based in Waterloo, Iowa.

Clinton, in this case, had plenty to say — except exactly whether she will
support the deal.

“There are questions being raised about this agreement. It hasn’t been
negotiated yet … I have said I want to judge the final agreement.” In the
past, Clinton said, “I have been for trade agreements; I have been against
trade agreements.”

She would, she said, back a deal that increases jobs, wages, and protects
national security. And she would oppose one, she said, that “gives
corporations more power to overturn health and environmental and labor
rules.”

“I’ve been very clear on this,” Clinton told Gadson.

After A Month, The 7 Questions Hillary Clinton Answered From The Media
<http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/05/19/407981227/after-a-month-the-7-questions-hillary-clinton-answered-from-the-media>
// NPR // Amita Kelly – May 19, 2015

Until Tuesday, it had been almost a month since Hillary Clinton had
answered a question from the press.

After taking questions from Iowans in Cedar Rapids, where she spoke about
small business, the former secretary of state then answered six questions
from reporters. She also took an awkwardly timed one about whether she'll
answer questions from media in the middle of the event. The questions after
the event ranged from the release of her emails when she was secretary of
state and criticism over foreign donations to the Clinton foundation to the
state of Iraq and more.

That brings the total number of questions Clinton has answered since she
launched her campaign, by NPR's count, to 20. As NPR's Tamara Keith
reported recently, Clinton had answered only 13 questions from the media
since launching her campaign. That count included a few substantive
answers, and many versions of "How are you liking Iowa?"

It's also something Republicans, like Jeb Bush and Rand Paul, had started
to use against her, noting that they were answering questions.

During Tuesday's event, Fox News reporter Ed Henry asked if Clinton would
be taking questions from the media. (We guess that counts.) "We haven't
heard from you in a month," he said. Clinton said to laughs that she would.
"Maybe when I finish talking to the people here," she said. "How's that? I
might. I'll have to ponder it, but I will put it on my list for due
consideration."

Here are the six other questions Clinton answered Tuesday, along with her
responses:

1. "Secretary Clinton, do you regret the way that the Clinton foundation
handled foreign donations when you were secretary of state? And your
opponents say that the foreign donations and private emails are examples of
the Clintons having one set of rules for themselves and one for everyone
else. Do they have a point?"

Clinton: "I am so proud of the foundation. I'm proud of the work that it
has done and it is doing. It attracted donations from people, organizations
from around the world and I think that just goes to show that people are
very supportive of the lifesaving and life-changing work it's done here at
home and elsewhere.

"And I'll let the American people make their own judgments about that."

2. "Secretary Clinton, given the situation in Iraq, do you think that we're
better off without Saddam Hussein in power?"

"Look, I know that there've been a lot of questions about Iraq posed to
candidates over the last weeks. I've made it very clear that I made a
mistake, plain and simple. And I have written about it in my book; I've
talked about it in the past. What we now see is a very different and very
dangerous situation; the United States is doing what it can but ultimately
this has to be a struggle that the Iraqi government and the Iraqi people
are determined to win for themselves, and we can provide support but
they're going to have to do it."

3. "On your income disclosure recently, that just came out on Friday, you
are in the tip-top echelon of earners in this country. How do you expect
everyday Americans to relate to you?"

"Well, obviously, Bill and I have been blessed, and we're very grateful for
the opportunities that we had, but we've never forgotten where we came
from. And we've never forgotten the kind of country that we want to see for
our granddaughter, and that means that we're going to fight to make sure
that everybody has the same chances to live up to his or her own God-given
potential.

"So I think that most Americans understand that the deck is stacked for
those at the top — and I am running a campaign that is very clearly stating
we want to reshuffle that deck, we want to get back to having more
opportunity for more people so that they can make more out of their own
lives. And I think that's exactly what America's looking for."

4. "Can you explain your relationship as secretary of state with Sidney
Blumenthal? There was a report out this morning that you've exchanged
several emails. Should Americans expect that if elected president you would
have the same type of relationships with these old friends you've had for
so long?"

[Laughing] "I have many, many old friends, and I always think it's
important, when you get into politics to have friends you had before you
were in politics. And to understand what's on their mind. And he's been a
friend of mine for a long time. He sent me unsolicited emails which I
passed on in some instances. And I see that's just part of the give and
take. When you're in the public eye, when you're in an official position, I
think you do have to work to make sure you're not caught in a bubble and
you only hear from a certain small group of people and I'm going to keep
talking to my old friends whoever they are."

5.-6. "Secretary Clinton, you learned today that [the] State Department
might not release your emails until January of 2016. A federal judge says
they should be released sooner. Will you demand they are released sooner?
And to follow up on the questions about the speeches, was there a conflict
of interest in your giving paid speeches into the run-up of your
announcement that you're running for president?"

"The answer to the second is no. And the answer to the first is I have said
repeatedly that I want those emails out. Nobody has a bigger interest in
getting them released than I do. I respect the State Department; they have
their process that they do for everybody, not just for me. But anything
that they might do to expedite that process, I heartily support.

"You know, I want the American people to learn as much as we can about the
work that I did with our diplomats and our development experts, because I
think it will show how hard we worked and what we did for our country
during the time that I was secretary of state, where I worked extremely
hard on behalf of our values and our interest and our security, and the
emails are part of that. So, I have said publicly, I'm repeating it here,
in front of all of you today, I want them out as soon as they can get out."

Follow-up: "But will you demand it? Will you demand it?"

"Well, they're not mine. They belong to the State Department. So the State
Department has to go through its process, but as much as they can expedite
that process, that's what I'm asking them to do, please move as quickly as
they possibly can to get them out."

Bonus Question: Trade Deal

It is worth noting that Clinton has not been avoiding questions completely.
She has been answering questions from participants at her events — but many
are pre-selected supporters of her campaign.

On Tuesday, however, one participant did ask her a potentially thorny
question, about the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a major trade deal that she
supported as secretary of state but has hedged on as a candidate. She said
she wanted to "judge the final agreement" and expressed concerns over parts
of the deal.

Even when flying with the public, Hillary Clinton keeps it private
<http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/even-when-flying-the-public-clinton-keeps-it-private>
// MSNBC // Alex Seitz-Wald - May 19, 2015

CHICAGO, Illinois – Hillary Clinton has traded private jets for seats on
commercial airlines as she embarks on her second, humbler presidential run.
But even in this relatively more democratic mode of transit, the former
secretary of state is mostly kept apart from the everyday Americans her
campaign wants to champion.

Clinton does not fly the commercial the way you fly commercial. Thanks to
strict security concerns, Clinton is insulated from the public from the
moment she arrives at one airport to the time she leaves the second one.
And even when trapped in a metal tube in the sky with fellow passengers,
there are few opportunities for public interaction.

While the insulation is largely outside of Clinton’s control and determined
by the Secret Service, it underscores the logistical difficulties Clinton
will have in connecting with ordinary voters on her second campaign.

Hillary Clinton boarding her plane, May 19, 2015. (Photo by Alex
Seitz-Wald/MSNBC)

On Tuesday afternoon in Dubuque, Iowa, a few dozen passengers waited for
their routine American Airlines flight to Chicago, one of only three
flights scheduled from the tiny airport that day. Suddenly, a small
motorcade pulled up, just outside the floor-to-ceiling windows that
separate the airport’s only gate from the tarmac.

Secret Service agents piled out, followed by aides. And then Hillary
Clinton emerged from a red minivan. On the tarmac, she shook hands and
chatted with a woman in a red jacket and her campaign’s state director.
Inside, passengers rushed to the windows and raised their smartphones to
snap pictures.

After wrapping up her five minute conversation, Clinton walked into a small
corridor that leads from the terminal to the plane, putting her just feet
away from passengers inside, with only a glass door in between.

An older man knocked on the glass like he was tapping on a fish tank and
Clinton turned to give a big, enthusiastic wave. She made an “OK” sign with
her thumb and ring finger and smiled. A moment later, she was lead onboard
and took a window seat in the first row. The small commuter plane had only
one class.

She did not pass through TSA screening, though some of her campaign aides
did.

With a bulkhead in front of her, a window to her right, and trusted aide
Huma Abedin between her and the aisle, Clinton donned sunglasses and looked
at her BlackBerry as passengers boarded.

The seats around were filled by Secret Service agents, and then campaign
staff further back. No one approached her during the short flight.

Upon arrival, Clinton and her entourage were quickly whisked off the plane.
Inside, Chicago’s O’Hare airport, she was almost immediately surrounded by
onlookers and fans. She paused for a few selfies and to shake some hands,
but an aide told fans they were in a rush and Clinton got moving.

The former secretary of state pulled her own black wheeled suitcase with a
pink purse balanced on top. Over her should hung a green tote bag from
Lardee’s, a small gift shop she visited earlier in the afternoon where she
purchased a book and two toys.

Clinton had only to travel about 50 feet across the terminal and into a
secure area, where she disappeared from view before the other passengers on
her flight had even collected their gate-checked luggage.

There were no opportunities for a reporter who happened to be on her flight
to speak with her. Earlier in the day, she had taken questions from the
press for the first time in 28 days.

It’s a routine Clinton will likely repeat often as she ramps up her travel.
On her way to Las Vegas this month, Clinton paused for a group shot with a
JetBlue ground crew, presumably after being driven to the plane like she
was in Iowa.

Ditching the private jets that Clinton used frequently since stepping down
as secretary of state was an obvious move for a candidate trying to
reintroduce herself to the American people as a more modest version of her
2008 campaign self.

But the candidate’s commercial flying is about more than symbolism.

In her many years in public life, Clinton has spent hundreds of thousands
of dollars on private jets, sometimes at taxpayer or campaign donors’
expense, causing controversy on more than one occasion.

For instance, her 2006 Senate campaign, when she faced limited Republican
opposition, was famously spendthrift, dolling out $160,000 on private
airfare. Her 2008 presidential campaign, meanwhile, ran out of money thanks
in part to liberal use of private charters.

This time, Clinton’s campaign – and especially her proudly frugal campaign
manager Robby Mook – have vowed to be more careful with funds. That means
many more American Eagle flights from Iowa to Chicago.

Rand Welcomes Hillary to the Felon Voting Rights Cause–But She's Been There
for Years
<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-05-19/rand-welcomes-hillary-to-the-felon-voting-rights-cause-but-she-s-been-there-for-years>
// Bloomberg // David Weigel - May 19, 2015

Before she took her first questions from reporters in four weeks,
Democratic presidential front-runner Hillary Clinton took a little time
Tuesday to undercut Rand Paul.

"Many people in the community, because of where they live, because maybe
they did make a mistake and they don't get their voting rights back, which
I totally disagree with," Clinton told a potential voter at a forum in
Iowa. "I think if you've done your time, so to speak, and you've made your
commitment to go forward you should be able to vote and you should be able
to be judged on the same basis. You ought to get a second chance."

Just as she had done in April, in a speech at Columbia University, Clinton
had talked about criminal justice reform in the same manner as the
Republican senator from Kentucky. Just as it had then, Paul's presidential
campaign sarcastically welcomed Clinton to the party.

"Glad to see her once again joining Senator Paul in undoing some of the
damage the Clinton administration did," Paul's political adviser, Doug
Stafford, told Bloomberg. "There are certainly enough people who served
time because of their policies."

That barb stung when Clinton was talking about over-criminalization. When
it came to felon voter rights, she actually had a lead on Paul. In 2005,
two years before announcing her first presidential bid, Clinton
co-sponsored the Count Every Vote Act. It was a package of reforms that
grew out of Democratic anger at the 2000 and 2004 elections, coming weeks
after Senator Barbara Boxer of California had actually challenged the
official electoral vote count on the Senate floor. And it would have
restored voting rights for felons.

Clinton took heat for that. "Should convicted murderers be allowed to
vote?" the Washington Times asked in a 2005 editorial. "If the federal
Count Every Vote Act of 2005 passes, they will be." Other conservative
taste-makers latched on to data from Jeff Manza and Marcus Britton of
Northwestern University and Christopher Uggen of the University of
Minnesota, about the Democratic leanings of felons. "Thirty percent of
felons would vote if Hillary’s law was passed," wrote a reporter for
Newsmax in 2005. "With 85 percent of felon voters statistically likely to
vote Democrat, that could add up to 1.2 million votes to presidential
candidate Clinton’s tally in 2008."

The Count Every Vote Act went nowhere in 2005, and didn't become a priority
when Democrats took the Senate–and when Clinton was actually running for
president. But Paul has made voting rights restoration a theme of his
campaign, and as a Republican, he's more able to portray it as something
that's right for America even if it looks bad for his party.

"I've been a louder voice for criminal justice than any Democrat has been
out there so far, and I'll continue that," Paul told reporters Monday at a
news conference in Philadelphia. "I think the Democrats have taken the
African-American vote for granted. Every time I go into our big cities and
talk to black leaders, I hear them say, haven't talked to my congressman in
years, because they think my vote is automatic. I'm going to be a
Republican who says no one vote anywhere in America is automatic for either
party."

On Trade Deal, Hillary Sits on the Fence
<http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/run-2016/2015/05/19/hillary-clinton-still-on-the-fence-on-tpp>
// US News // David Catanese - May 19, 2015

Hillary Clinton is still not taking a position on the Trans-Pacific
Partnership currently being pushed by President Barack Obama and
Republicans in Congress.

When asked about the trade proposal during a small business round-table in
Cedar Falls, Iowa, on Tuesday morning, Clinton said she had been "very
clear" on the issue, before dodging it again.

"There are questions being raised by the current agreement. I don't know
what the final provisions are yet," she said. "I want to judge the final
agreement. I have been for trade agreements, I have been against trade
agreements."

Clinton has only outlined broad provisions that any trade deal should
include, citing increased wages and jobs as requirements.

As secretary of state, she touted the TPP as "the gold standard in trade
agreements." But her reluctance to wade into the boiling fight between
business and labor interests as a presidential candidate pinpoints the
political divisiveness around the issue.

"This is obviously a very hot topic right now," Clinton acknowledged.

Prominent Democrats like Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., have led the
opposition to the deal, citing the lack of enforcement of labor provisions
in past agreements.

And even some Republicans – like former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee – are
against it, saying it would allow bad-acting countries to cheat Americans
out of jobs.

During the visit, Clinton also said she supported granting convicted felons
the right to vote ("You ought to be able to get a second chance") and
accused the GOP of using a "Trojan horse idea" of advocating for the
rollback of broad financial regulations to help community banks. She said
lawmakers could work to ease regulations on the smaller outfits without
eliminating the oversight of those banks commonly deemed "too big to fail."

Afterward, Clinton also addressed reporters for the first time in weeks,
defending the work of her family's foundation and claiming it's in her
interest for her emails as secretary of state to be released sooner rather
than later.

"I want them out as soon as they could get out. They're not mine. They
belong to the State Department," she replied.

Clinton finds problems with Obama TPP trade proposal
<http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/19/politics/hillary-clinton-trade-issues-iowa-trip/index.html>
// CNN // Eric Bradner - May 19, 2015

Washington (CNN)Hillary Clinton took aim Tuesday at two core components of
a massive free trade pact that President Barack Obama is negotiating —
signaling some agreement with the deal's liberal critics.

The Democratic front-runner in the 2016 presidential race said she wants to
see rules included in the Trans-Pacific Partnership that would penalize
countries for driving down the value of their currencies in order to give
their exports a price advantage in the U.S. market.

And she said she's concerned about a provision that would give
"corporations more power to overturn health and environmental and labor
rules than consumers have."

"I think that is a problem," Clinton said during a roundtable event in
Iowa, when one woman participating in the event asked her about the deal.

It's as close to staking out a clear position on the trade deal that
Clinton has come — though she left wiggle room Tuesday.

"I want to judge the final agreement. I have been for trade agreements; I
have been against trade agreements," she said.

Her comments come as the Senate prepares to vote on trade promotion
authority, a measure that would allow Obama to finalize the Pacific Rim
deal and submit it to Congress for a vote with limited debate and no
amendments. That authority, negotiators say, is crucial to getting other
countries to sign off on a final deal.

Those two items are central to the critique that trade unions,
environmental and public health groups have made against the 12-country
Pacific Rim pact, which would link 40% of the world's economy, including
Japan, Australia, Canada and Mexico.

Currency manipulation is not part of the talks. U.S. trade negotiators have
instead said currency issues are best left to the Treasury Department, and
that including them in the trade talks could be a deal-breaker for other
countries.

Democrats are pushing to amend the trade promotion authority bill to force
Obama to address currency in the trade deal.

The amendments being pushed, Clinton said, have "some merit."

What is part of the negotiations, though, is a wonky item known as an
"investor-state dispute settlement" mechanism.

It would give corporations the right to challenge, to an independent,
international arbiter, whether countries' rules and regulations meet their
free trade obligations.

Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts has raised that issue as
the key reason she wants to see the Trans-Pacific Partnership rejected.

Clinton, White House spar over trade as fast-track vote looms
<http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/19/us-usa-trade-clinton-idUSKBN0O424Z20150519>
// Reuters // Amanda Becker - May 19, 2015

Democratic U.S. presidential contender Hillary Clinton set up a potential
clash over sensitive trade legislation with the White House on Tuesday,
urging steps to prevent currency manipulation and lawsuits by foreign
companies against governments.

The White House also ratcheted up pressure on lawmakers, threatening to
veto legislation that could help seal a Pacific trade pact if Congress
forced sanctions against trading partners who artificially weaken their
currencies.

The Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) has pitted Obama against some fellow
Democrats, including leading liberal, Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth
Warren.

Clinton, the leading Democratic presidential contender, made her first
substantial statement on the issue on Tuesday. Her intervention could
strengthen Democratic opposition to the deal, which is part of Obama's
diplomatic pivot to Asia and a centerpiece of his second-term legislative
agenda.

"It needs to try to address directly or indirectly the manipulation of
currency by countries that would be trade partners," Clinton said at a
roundtable during a campaign stop in Iowa.

"That's been a big source of us not being as competitive as we want to be."

Clinton also said rules allowing companies to sue foreign governments over
health, environmental and other policies, which would be part of the TPP,
were "a problem," echoing concerns raised by Warren.

Obama is trying to build support in Congress for the TPP and Treasury
Secretary Jack Lew said in a letter to senators that U.S. officials are
reaching out to TPP partners to establish "new approaches to addressing
unfair currency practices."

The Senate is to vote this week on the measure to streamline trade talks
that will move Obama closer to enacting the TPP, which would cover 40
percent of the global economy that is seen as a counterbalance to China's
rising economic and diplomatic clout.

If fast-track authority is granted to the White House, then Congress must
vote yes or no on any trade deal that is negotiated, without the chance to
make any amendments.

Supporters of sanctions against currency cheating say many trading partners
in Asia such as Japan, Singapore, Malaysia and Vietnam run substantial
trade surpluses with the U.S. that may be a result of undervalued
currencies.

The administration argues that approach would lay the United States open to
charges that Federal Reserve policies were aimed at reducing the value of
the dollar.

"An enforceable currency provision in our trade agreements could give our
trading partners the power to challenge legitimate U.S. monetary policies,"
Lew said in the letter. Lew and a White House spokesman warned that Obama
might veto a bill that included enforceable currency provisions.

Clinton, under pressure from the party's left wing to take a definitive
stand on the TPP, said she wanted to see what amendments to trade
legislation were adopted in the Senate before deciding whether to throw her
support behind the Asia Pacific deal.

"I want to judge the final agreement," Clinton said. "I have been for trade
agreements, I have been against trade agreements. I try to make the
evaluation on what I thought they would produce."

Clinton made the comments during her second visit to Iowa, the state that
kicks off the presidential nominating battle in early 2016.

Hillary Clinton Is Pitching Herself To Millennials
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/19/hillary-clinton-millennials_n_7310016.html>
// Huffington Post // Howard Fineman - May 19, 2015

WASHINGTON -- Is Hillary Clinton actually moving left, and if so, why?

The answer is yes, though not on every topic. And the reason is to push
young voters' turnout and grassroots organizing enthusiasm as close as
possible to the levels that President Barack Obama enjoyed in 2008.

“After two terms of President Obama, it won’t be easy, but our challenge is
to again excite the passion of the youngest voters,” Clinton campaign
chairman John Podesta told fellow Georgetown Law Center alums at a luncheon
last week.

The campaign aims to fire up millennials with both a tailored approach to
the issues and innovative use of technology. For the latter, the team
recently brought aboard a former high-ranking Google manager to push new
initiatives in social media and big data-guided outreach.

As for issues, Clinton advisers and Democrats close the candidate say she
will focus on matters of particular appeal to those voters ages 18 to 33.
The idea is that she will go strongly to the left on social issues, move
somewhat less left on economic issues, and remain a centrist on foreign
policy, military affairs and terrorism.

The target areas include climate change and other global environmental
concerns, and social issues broadly defined -- including support for
same-sex marriage; a path to citizenship for most undocumented immigrants;
and criminal justice reforms such as changing harsh sentencing rules,
reducing the current reliance on incarceration and opposing
"militarization" of local police forces.

Clinton also plans to take a measured, big-picture approach to dealing with
the overbearing influence of corporate wealth and the resulting public
cynicism. She will advocate a higher minimum wage and support a
constitutional amendment to overturn the Citizens United decision. But
she's not about to become an all-out, rail-against-the-banks populist in
the manner of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). And as she did this week,
Clinton will talk up the role of small business and innovation.

Especially on climate and social issues, the calculation is that the entire
electorate has rapidly moved left, led by the youngest voters, whose views
on the full range of these topics is starkly more liberal than those of the
oldest voters. It’s become almost too easy to ridicule Republicans speaking
to young audiences as “out of the mainstream.”

“On climate change, some of the Republicans remind me of Alfred E. Neuman,”
said Podesta last week. “What, me worry?”

Economics are a closer question among millennials. Their distrust of
big-government solutions is robust; their doubts about the efficacy of
programs such as Social Security is deep. They believe in entrepreneurship,
if for no other reason than that the old pyramid of lifetime hiring is gone.

So far, Hillary Clinton has avoided taking firm stands on the Keystone XL
pipeline or the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade pact. If and when she is
forced to do so, she’ll flat-out reject the former, one adviser predicts,
and look for less-than-sweepingly ideological reasons to temporarily oppose
the latter.

If the goal is to instill passion in millennials, however, there is little
reason to dwell on foreign policy, or so it seems. A recent poll shows that
the current crop of youngest voters is noticeably less worried about
terrorism than the previous cohort.

The overwhelming American consensus is that the Iraq War was a mistake and
that the bomb-and-drone approach to ending terrorism and making the U.S.
safer hasn’t worked. But that doesn’t necessarily mean voters want the U.S.
to withdraw from the world. It’s more likely to mean that voters,
especially millennials, don’t see the "Global War on Terror" as central to
the 2016 contest. So even though Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state is
her top official on-the-job experience, she isn’t going to make it the
centerpiece of her campaign.

Republicans will still dwell on what she did and didn't do at the State
Department. But it’s doubtful young voters will care.

Hillary Clinton's top campaign aides in Nevada
<https://www.ralstonreports.com/blog/hillary-clintons-top-campaign-aides-nevada>
// Ralston Reports // Jon Ralston - May 19, 2015

Hillary Clinton's top campaign aides, including her campaign manager, are
in Nevada this week to meet with supporters,  community leaders and
reporters, yet another sign that the Silver State is critical to the
presumptive Democratic nominee's strategy.

Robby Mook, who ran Clinton's 2008 effort in Nevada, is here along with
Marlon Marshall, who is overseeing  all of her state campaigns. They were
in Reno on Monday evening meeting with Obama and Clinton backers from '08.
They plan to be in Carson City today and will also travel to Las Vegas.

Their visit comes after the candidate made national news this month and
laid down a marker for her White House race on immigration in a Las Vegas
stop during which she indicated she would go further than the president on
immigration reform.

Mook's return coincides with the assembling of a team that helped Clinton
win Nevada by 5 points over Obama in the 2008 caucus (he eventually won the
delegate fight, 13-12), including new state director Emmy Ruiz, who worked
for the president here in 2012.

Hillary Clinton to hit fundraising trail in Greenwich
<http://blog.ctnews.com/politics/2015/05/19/hillary-clinton-to-hit-fundraising-trail-in-greenwich/>
// CT News // Neil Vigdor - May 19, 2015

Hillary Clinton is harvesting campaign cash in her backyard — Bush family
roots be damned.

The prohibitive favorite for the Democratic presidential nomination will
hit the fundraising trail June 5 in Greenwich, huddling with deep-pocketed
contributors at a $29.7 million Roman villa in the hometown of Bush family
patriarch Prescott Bush Sr., Hearst Connecticut Media has learned.

Bush was the grandfather of prospective Clinton 2016 rival Jeb Bush, who in
January embarked on his own White House exploration at Greenwich fundraiser
where he poo-pooed the Clinton mystique and told fellow Republicans that
running a campaign based on “90s nostalgia” would fail.

Now, Clinton is trying to one-up Bush just a stone’s throw from where the
former Florida governor gave Clinton bulletin board material.

The former secretary of state, U.S. senator and first lady will greet
contributors at the Indian Harbor compound of retired financial trader and
philanthropist Malcolm Wiener and his wife, Carolyn Wiener, according to an
invitation obtained by Hearst.

The couple’s seven bedroom, and 11.5-bathroom mansion is steeped in
history. Built in 1889 on a property developed by Boss Tweed for his
Americus Club shoreline retreat, the home was once owned by Commodore Elias
C. Benedict. The couple’s annual real estate taxes are about $227,000.
There is a even a private island named after Tweed just off the promontory.

The ask for an audience with Clinton is $2,700 per person and $5,400 per
couple. To be a co-host of the event and snag an invite to a VIP reception
with Clinton and membership in her Hillstarters Program, individual
supporters must raise $27,000. Hosts are being asked to raise $50,000,
which would qualify them for Clinton’s Hillraisers Program.

The Hillstarters and Hillraisers bundlers programs are Clinton’s answer to
former President George W. Bush’s Pioneers and Rangers designations.

Democrats relished the spotlight of Clinton’s upcoming visit to the state
where Hillary and Bill Clinton met as Yale Law students.

“I am optimistic that Hillary Clinton will be back in the state again and
not just for money,” said Nancy DiNardo, a former state Democratic
chairwoman. “I think in Greenwich you seeing more Democrats coming in
having fundraisers because they can be just as successful as Republicans
there.”

Republicans renewed questions about Clinton’s transparency as secretary of
state and her fundraising activity for her family’s foundation.

“Instead of answering serious questions about shady foreign donations and
her secret email server, Hillary Clinton continues to opt for closed-door
fundraisers and staged campaign events,” said Jerry Labriola Jr., chairman
of the state GOP. “With new concerns raised each day, it is clear why
Connecticut voters can’t trust her.”

Labriola’s criticism of Clinton came on the same day that the state’s top
Republican endorsed Marco Rubio for president, becoming the first state GOP
chairman to endorse the Florida senator. Rubio, who is scheduled to give
the keynote at a Connecticut GOP fundraiser on the eve of Clinton’s visit,
thanked Labriola on Twitter. Democrats panned the endorsement.

“By being the first state party to line up behind Rubio, the Connecticut
GOP is sending a clear message that they agree with Marco Rubio that
immigration reform isn’t a priority, that the country was better off with
George W. Bush’s Iraq war, and that it’s okay to discriminate against the
LGBTQ community,” said Leigh Appleby, a state Democratic Party spokesman.

Like George W. Bush, brother Jeb Bush has kept somewhat of an arm’s length
from Greenwich, identifying more with Florida than Connecticut. Greenwich
is just 13 miles from the Clintons’ adopted home of Chappaqua, N.Y., and is
a requisite fundraising destination for both Republicans and Democrats.

The GOP registration advantage has eroded over the last decade, with Barack
Obama in 2008 becoming the first Democratic presidential candidate to win
Greenwich since Lyndon Johnson in 1964. The town went for Mitt Romney in
2012.

Drew Marzullo, the town’s top Democratic office holder and a selectman,
said he is hoping Clinton can replicate Obama’s success in Greenwich.

“I hope to get the chance to meet her on June 5 and say to her, President
Obama won Greenwich in 2008 and I have no doubt she can too,” Marzullo said.

Nurtured by Clinton Network, O'Malley Now Becomes 2016 Rival
<http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/nurtured-clinton-network-omalley-now-2016-rival-31155792?page=2>
// ABC News // Lisa Lerer and Ken Thomas, Associated Press - May 19, 2015

More than a decade ago, Bill Clinton spotted a political star in the
making, someone he predicted would go from a big-city mayor to a national
leader — maybe even to the White House. "I won't be surprised if you go all
the way," Clinton wrote in a 2002 letter to Baltimore's mayor, Martin
O'Malley.

In the years that followed, Bill and Hillary Rodham Clinton showed up time
and again as their young ally gained stature as governor of Maryland,
hosting fundraisers, headlining rallies and connecting him to their
sprawling network of political donors.

Now, O'Malley is just days away from walking down the path Clinton laid out
for him more than a decade ago, as he prepares to announce his presidential
campaign in Baltimore on May 30. And that means transforming himself from
one of Hillary Clinton's most loyal supporters into her chief adversary for
the Democratic nomination.

"It's certainly been a long and friendly relationship," said Steve Kearney,
a former O'Malley aide. "Times change. He clearly thought she was the best
candidate in 2008. We'll find out whether that remains true today."

O'Malley quickly endorsed Clinton in her nomination contest with Barack
Obama, raised at least $500,000 for her from Maryland donors when he was
governor, defended her on cable news and traveled to New Hampshire to
campaign for her.

"If I can, I will help her, wherever I can, whenever I can," O'Malley said
then.

Today, O'Malley says that while he maintains "tremendous respect" for the
Clintons, Democratic voters deserve more than a coronation. "What would be
more awkward is if no one were willing to compete for the Democratic
party's nomination for president," he told NPR last month. "That would be
an extreme poverty indeed."

Hillary Clinton, who last spoke to O'Malley in October at a Maryland
campaign rally, and her advisers remain reluctant to comment on O'Malley's
candidacy. But some longtime supporters see his bid as an opportunistic
maneuver to remain relevant, after his hand-picked Democratic successor
lost the governor's race last year in heavily Democratic Maryland.

"Martin O'Malley is certainly not the first person who has turned against
her and who she helped enormously," said Stella O'Leary, a Democratic
activist whose relationship to O'Malley dates back to the early 1990s when
she hired the young man — who fronts a Celtic folk band — to perform at a
birthday party for former Minnesota Sen. Eugene McCarthy. "I don't know how
she doesn't lash out and start screaming."

Some who question his motives also think the challenge could benefit
Clinton by giving her a debate sparring partner — as long as O'Malley
avoids tough hits on her finances, family foundation and character.

In the waning days of the Clinton administration, O'Malley was starting his
first term as mayor. During one of their earliest meetings, at the 2000
NAACP Convention in Baltimore, the Irish-American mayor asked to be
included in a White House delegation going to Northern Ireland later that
year. He scored a last-minute invite, joining many of Clinton's top
political aides and fundraisers on the trip.

Others in that delegation remember O'Malley for his musical talents. At one
stop, as they waited in a pub for the notoriously late president, O'Malley
and New York Rep. Joe Crowley pulled out their guitars and entertained the
group with renditions of traditional Irish songs.

"Next thing I know we almost forgot all about the president," said Brian
O'Dwyer, a New York lawyer and Clinton friend who's active in
Irish-American issues. "It was a terrifically warm trip."

Years later, O'Malley would tap the connections he made on that trip to aid
his political rise. During his first campaign for governor, Elizabeth
Frawley Bagley, a top Clinton donor who met O'Malley on the Ireland trip,
held a fundraiser for him at her Georgetown home. In Manhattan, lawyers at
O'Dwyer's firm started a group called New York Irish for Martin O'Malley.
And O'Leary's political action committee, Irish American Democrats, made
campaign contributions.

O'Malley's relationship with the Clintons deepened as he became more
involved with the Democratic Leadership Council, a centrist group that
helped craft much of Bill Clinton's policy agenda. After the 2001 terrorist
attacks, he worked with Hillary Clinton, then a New York senator, on
homeland security issues.

When O'Malley faced a tough race for governor in 2006, the Clintons held
fundraisers and starred at rallies for him. In the final days of that race,
Bill Clinton answered pleas from O'Malley aides to appear in a campaign ad
— stopping in an airport to tape an endorsement of his "good friend."

While Hillary Clinton served as secretary of state, Bill Clinton returned
to Baltimore four years later to help O'Malley win re-election.

O'Malley maintained his ties to Bill Clinton as he prepared for a
presidential run. Last year, O'Malley tweeted a photo of himself with the
ex-president at a New York book party, and flew to Denver solely to appear
with him at the Clinton Global Initiative.

Some friends of all three don't see malice in O'Malley's ambitions, but
also don't feel conflicted. "It's not that I love Martin any less but I
love Hillary more," said O'Dwyer. "She was a partner in bringing peace to
in Ireland. That type of loyalty is hard to ignore."

Clinton Super PAC Executive Director Exits Amid Shake-Up
<http://www.buzzfeed.com/rubycramer/priorities-wicks> // BuzzFeed // Ruby
Cramer –May 21, 2015

Buffy Wicks, a leading Democratic operative and former senior aide to
Barack Obama, will leave her post as executive director of Priorities USA
Action, the super PAC working to raise millions in support of Hillary
Clinton's campaign.

Wicks, now in the process of arranging her exit from Priorities, is
expected to stay inside the larger Clinton operation, three sources
familiar with the move said.

She is in discussion with Clinton aides about a senior role on the
"coordinated side" — which could include a position inside the campaign or
at the Democratic National Committee, where officials would work closely
with Clinton should she become the nominee.

A Clinton aide confirmed the talks on Tuesday evening.

"We are recruiting Buffy for a senior-level role on the coordinated side of
the campaign," the Clinton official said.

The departure comes about three weeks after the news that Guy Cecil, the
political director on Clinton's last campaign, would join the super PAC in
a senior role.

At the time, many Democrats viewed the move as a means to minimize another
Priorities official, Jim Messina, the former Obama campaign manager.
Messina was installed as the super PAC's co-chair, but has never been fully
embraced by the longstanding circle of aides and advisers around Clinton.

It was never clear, though, what Cecil's entry would mean for Wicks.

Wicks, a widely respected and well-liked figure in the party, served as the
national director of get-out-the-vote efforts on Obama's reelection
campaign.

She is close with senior members of the Clinton team, including the
campaign manager, Robby Mook. The two met working for Howard Dean in 2004 —
an operation that famously trained much of its field staff in organizing
techniques from the labor and protest movements of the '60s and '70s. Wicks
and Mook both emerged from that race as part of an ascendant new class of
field organizers.

Wicks was largely new to fundraising when she joined Priorities last
January.

She took the helm along with Messina and his co-chair, former Michigan
governor Jennifer Granholm, amid a relaunch by the pro-Obama super PAC into
a paid-media effort backing a Clinton bid in 2016. The leadership team was
formulated as a meld of the Obama and Clinton worlds ahead of the next
election.

Priorities was inactive throughout the 2014 midterms. After the election,
the super PAC struggled to solicit pledges and outline a clear fundraising
strategy. With the campaign now underway, Priorities has had more success —
but the group spent much of early 2015 dealing with negative stories over
fundraising and leadership.

Originally, in late 2013, existing Priorities officials hoped that John
Podesta, now the Clinton campaign chairman, would join the PAC as a
co-chair. But Podesta, who served as a senior official in Bill Clinton's
administration, took a job at the White House instead. Cecil, most recently
the head of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, comes to the PAC
as an ally of Podesta and Bill Clinton. (He was also reportedly considered
as a choice for campaign manager.)

Cecil also used to work at Dewey Square Group, the consulting firm whose
officials have informally advised the campaign and outside efforts leading
up to it.

A Dewey Square founding partner, Charlie Baker, recently joined the Clinton
campaign as chief administrative officer. His role, in part, was described
by two sources as a liaison of sorts between the campaign and outside
officials.

With Wicks's departure, it's likely that Cecil will take the lead role at
Priorities — though his position has not been acknowledged or outlined by
the PAC. Cecil's move to Priorities was first reported by the Washington
Post.

Neither Wicks nor a spokesman for Priorities immediately returned a request
for comment.

Iowa Democrats: Flawed Clinton Our Only Hope
<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-05-20/iowa-democrats-flawed-clinton-our-only-hope>
// Bloomberg // David Knowles – May 20,2015

A Bloomberg Politics/Purple Strategies focus group finds Democrats resolved
over their presidential frontrunner

Iowa Democrats see Hillary Clinton as a presidential candidate who, despite
her flaws, represents what they see as their only chance of keeping control
of the White House in 2016.

During a Bloomberg Politics/Purple Strategies focus group conducted Monday
in Des Moines, 10 Iowa Democrats were asked what thoughts they had about
Clinton as a leader and a person.

"She's a bad mama jama. She's a strong, competent woman," said Kiendra, a
33-year-old librarian. "She knows what she's doing. She's not afraid to
step up. She's not afraid to take advice and she's not afraid to say no, I
don't want to do it that way. I'm going to do it this way."

A school teacher named Al cited Clinton's political drive as positive.

"A lot of it, in fact, is made that, oh, she’s so ambitious," Al said.
"Well, you know what? If you’re going to be a politician, if you’re going
to set yourself up to be elected to any office, you have to be ambitious.
You have to have one big ego. And if you’re going for the higher offices,
you’ve got to have an absolutely ego."

While the consensus among those who participated in the focus group was
that Clinton possessed the experience and policy positions required to be
elected president, the group was less confident when it came to naming the
former secretary of state's actual accomplishments.

"I really can’t name anything off the top of my head," said Ryan, a
38-year-old event planner.

Following an awkward silence, a 22-year-old student named Amanda added, "I
honestly can’t say I followed along everything that was going on."

While some took issue with Clinton's ties to Wall Street, secrecy, and
foundation contributions, the group, by and large, seemed resolved that she
represented the party's best chance at fending off a Republican challenger.

"She’s been at a high level in numerous offices for about 25 years now,"
Charlie, 24, who works as a graphic designer, said. "I mean it’s either
going to be that or it’s going to be Scott Walker, you know, taking away,
destroying America’s unions. And there’s just, you know, she’s not perfect.
But she’s been in the eye for a long time, in the public’s eye, and you’re
going to have some stuff on her. But she has great policies and she knows
how to get stuff done."

Bloomberg Politics, in conjunction with Purple Strategies, conducted two
qualitative focus groups in Des Moines, IA, one of Democratic caucus
participants and one of Republican caucus participants. Each group
consisted of ten participants, both men and women, and from a variety of
ages and socio-economic and educational backgrounds. Qualitative research
results cannot be statistically analyzed or projected onto the broader
population at large. As is customary, respondents were compensated for
their participation.

Amid criticism, Clinton sticks to low-key campaign strategy
<http://bigstory.ap.org/article/89443e3833a1413f89e69f615c8ee423/amid-criticism-clinton-sticks-low-key-campaign-strategy>
// AP // Julie Pace – May 20, 2015

CEDAR FALLS, Iowa (AP) — During two days of campaigning this week in Iowa,
Hillary Rodham Clinton didn't make a formal speech. She answered questions
from reporters, but only for five minutes. Pressed by a moderator at her
own event to say where she stood on a trade pact that's dividing her party,
she steered clear.

It was the kind of trip that infuriates her Republican critics, yet gives
them fodder to keep up their argument she's a candidate dodging tough
issues and avoiding taking positions that could haunt her politically.
That's started to worry some Democrats, who are publicly prodding Clinton
to wade deeper into the political fray and pick a side on the Trans-Pacific
Partnership free trade deal.

Clinton and her team are unmoved. They're sticking to their plans for a
low-key start to her second presidential campaign, displaying an early
level of discipline that was lacking when Clinton sought the White House in
2008 and struggled with campaign infighting over strategy.

It's an approach they've crafted to show voters Clinton isn't taking the
Democratic nomination for granted. Yet by not taking a stand on issues of
the day and dismissing some of the traditional trappings of presidential
campaigns, some political operatives say Clinton risks appearing as if
she's doing just that.

"There is a demand if you are a candidate to signify a lack of entitlement
by submitting yourself to questions from the news media on a regular
basis," said David Axelrod, a longtime adviser to President Barack Obama.
"There is risk to that, but it is a risk that comes along with the task of
running for president."

Before a brief exchange with reporters Tuesday, Clinton hadn't taken
questions from the press in nearly a month. Republican presidential
hopefuls seized on her reluctance to engage with reporters and repeatedly
mocked her for ducking questions.

"You can't script your way to the presidency," said Jeb Bush, the former
Florida governor.

So far, Clinton's campaign does have the appearance of a carefully
choreographed operation. Each of her stops in the early-voting states has
looked similar to her two-day swing through Iowa this week, where she
attended a meet-and-greet with local officials and campaign volunteers at a
home in Mason City, discussed economic policy with small business owners at
a bicycle shop in Cedar Falls, and dropped by a coffee shop in Independence
for an espresso and sandwich.

The house party she attended in Mason City was invitation-only and, as with
her past policy roundtables, participants at the small business event were
selected by the campaign.

Even when unexpected moments arise, Clinton sticks to her script. When a
small business owner asked her Tuesday to state her position on the
Trans-Pacific Partnership trade pact, Clinton politely refused.

"I want to judge the final agreement," she said.

Clinton's advisers intended her campaign to start slowly. She will hold a
more formal campaign kick-off next month, likely with a major speech and a
series of one-on-one interviews. But even as the campaign enters that
phase, aides say Clinton will still do the smaller events like those she's
held so far.

Though she never mentioned her critics directly, Clinton pushed back this
week at those who say she should be taking a different approach.

"Somebody asked me the other day, 'Well, you're going to these events where
you're taking time to actually talk and listen to people, is that really
what you're going to do?'" she said Monday. "And I said, 'Well, yes it is.'"

Clinton's advisers also dispute the notion she is avoiding taking positions
on policy, pointing to her backing of Obama's executive actions on
immigration and her call to outfit police departments with body cameras. On
Tuesday, she voiced her opposition to Republican-backed legislation that
would revamp the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial regulation law.

But each was unveiled as part of a careful rollout by Clinton's campaign.
She's been far less willing to weigh in on issues that don't fit with her
campaign schedule, including the fall of Ramadi to Islamic State militants
in Iraq over the weekend.

Clinton's sidestepping on the Asia-Pacific trade pact has been most
notable, given that Congress is currently debating whether to give Obama
the ability to seek faster ratification of a final deal.

While Clinton called the pact the "gold standard" of trade agreements while
serving as secretary of state, she has refused to take a position on the
deal since announcing her candidacy.

As Clinton spoke to small business owners in Cedar Falls on Tuesday, a
small group of protesters stood outside demanding she clarify her stance on
the trade pact. Chris Schwartz, an Iowa organizer with the liberal group
Americans for Democratic Action, said Clinton's silence was "troubling."

"People in Iowa and people across the country want to know the specifics on
all of these issues, including TPP," Schwartz said, referring to the
Trans-Pacific Partnership. "We have a right to have our questions answered."

Fundraiser puts spotlight on Clinton Foundation finances
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/fundraiser-clinton-foundation-finances-118128.html>
// Politico // Gabriel Debenedetti

CEDAR FALLS, Iowa — The Chicago media executive hosting Hillary Clinton at
his home for an afternoon fundraiser Wednesday ranks in the elite category
of those who have given at least $25 million to the Clinton Foundation.

But the Clinton Foundation’s own public records on Fred Eychaner’s
contributions illustrate the problems the organization has had with
disclosing its donations, bringing it under harsh scrutiny and causing
Clinton political trouble as she ramps up her presidential campaign.

Story Continued Below

The foundation’s website lists Eychaner’s Alphawood Foundation as a donor
of somewhere between $10,001 and $25,001, but an examination of the
Alphawood Foundation’s Form 990 tax documents reveals that it in fact
contributed $7.25 million between 2003 and 2007. That’s not the only point
of confusion: the low-profile Eychaner, a major Democratic fundraiser who
started Alphawood, is listed by the Clinton Foundation as one of only seven
donors of over $25 million.

But it’s not certain that Eychaner personally gave more than $25 million.
The Clinton Foundation confirmed that the Alphawood Foundation’s $7.25
million is included in Eychaner’s total, and Alphawood executive director
James McDonough told POLITICO that his “understanding is that they’ve
lumped all our donations under Fred Eychaner’s name.” It remains unclear if
Eychaner would still be above the $25 million threshold if the Alphawood
donations were not included in his donation total.

While the Clinton Foundation discloses its donors voluntarily and faces no
legal consequences for unclear listings like this one, the organization’s
finances have has become a political flash point for Clinton in the early
days of her campaign for the White House — and the lack of clarity in
Eychaner’s gifts could raise further questions about the Clinton
Foundation’s transparency.

The foundation told Reuters in April that it would refile five of its own
tax reports after the discovery of errors in its reporting of donations
from foreign governments — though the foundation did not say on Tuesday
whether it would update its site to reflect that some of the money
attributed to Eychaner actually came through his foundation.

Clinton and her family have repeatedly defended the philanthropic work of
the Clinton Foundation, but it has faced tough scrutiny as she has
kickstarted her political operation in the last two months. Clinton
insisted she was “proud” of the group on Tuesday, saying its wide range of
donors is a testament to its work. But the foundation has been criticized
for accepting money from foreign governments and for not properly
disclosing some of its contributions. Critics have said the group has been
a vehicle for foreign interests to influence Bill and Hillary Clinton,
allegations the foundation and campaign have swiftly and forcefully
rebutted.

Nonetheless, Eychaner’s filing status on the website is unusual. Some
foundation backers whose names are disclosed on the site are explicitly
listed alongside their foundations, such as “Cheryl and Haim Saban & The
Saban Family Foundation,” who have together given the Clinton Foundation
between $10 million and $25 million. Like Eychaner, the billionaire Haim
Saban hosted Clinton for a campaign fundraiser at his home in Los Angeles
earlier this month.

But in Eychaner’s case his connection to the Alphawood Foundation — which
says it works with organizations that focus on “architecture and
preservation, the arts and arts education, promotion and protection of the
rights of LGBT citizens and people living with HIV/AIDS, and other human
and civil rights” — is not noted on the Clinton Foundation site, and the
group’s listed donation total is far lower than what is accurate.

The only other individual reported as having given over $25 million to the
Clinton Foundation — Frank Giustra, who has himself been the subject of
intense scrutiny in news reports and a new book because of his own
relationship with the foundation — is listed alongside his Radcliffe
Foundation, making Eychaner the only individual listed at that high level
without a disclosed institutional tie.

Eychaner is a longtime Democratic donor who supported Clinton in 2008
before becoming a prominent backer of President Barack Obama — he gave
Obama’s foundation $1 million in its first year of operation, tax forms
revealed on Monday, and a December POLITICO analysis showed he was the
country’s fifth-biggest donor in the 2014 election cycle.

His political representative did not respond to a request for comment.

OTHER DEMOCRATS NATIONAL COVERAGE

O'Malley announces 2016 launch details
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/martin-omalley-2016-presidential-launch-details-118090.html>
// Politico // Jonathan Topaz - May 19, 2015

Martin O’Malley’s likely presidential launch will occur on the morning of
May 30 in Baltimore’s Federal Hill Park, the Democrat said Tuesday.

The former Maryland governor and Baltimore mayor, who is all but assured to
announce a bid at the event beginning at 10 a.m., revealed his plans on
Twitter and in a Snapchat video released at noon. The park, near the city’s
Inner Harbor, overlooks downtown Baltimore. The short video, which didn’t
have any audio, showed various scenes of downtown Baltimore, ending with a
sign at Federal Hill Park.

The likely presidential hopeful also linked to a website advertising a
“special announcement.” If he enters the race, O’Malley will become the
third declared Democratic candidate in a field that includes Hillary
Clinton and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders.

O’Malley supporters view the two-term governor as the most electable
liberal alternative to Clinton, the establishment front-runner. The
potential candidate held an off-the-record meeting in New York City last
week with about 30 progressives, telling the group that he’s the most
viable option for progressives who support liberal icon Elizabeth Warren,
the Massachusetts senator who has said repeatedly that she won’t run in
2016.

Last Thursday, O’Malley held a 13-minute call with donors, supporters and
activists from the first three presidential nominating states, pointing to
a May 30 announcement in Baltimore and telling them “he is inclined to run
for president.” On the call were O’Malley’s political director Karine
Jean-Pierre, an alum of Barack Obama’s 2012 reelection campaign, and senior
advisor Bill Hyers, who was New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio’s 2013
campaign manager. O’Malley didn’t mention Clinton by name, only saying, as
he has in the past, that “history is full of times where the inevitable
front-runner is inevitable until they’re no longer inevitable.”

His campaign headquarters will be located near Baltimore’s Penn Station.

O’Malley, 52, has been the most active Democratic hopeful in the early
nominating states, spending a significant amount of time in Iowa, New
Hampshire and South Carolina since the 2014 election cycle. Still, he has
yet to show much traction in the polls — recent national and Iowa and New
Hampshire polls show O’Malley in the low single digits, behind Sanders, who
announced last month, and far behind Clinton.

O’Malley’s team views him as a liberal insurgent in the mold of Gary Hart,
who rose from the bottom of the polls and nearly defeated establishment
front-runner and then-Vice President Walter Mondale in 1984. (O’Malley
worked on that campaign as a 20-year-old staffer, and Hart has said that he
bought O’Malley his first legal beer when he turned 21.)

O’Malley, though, has faced challenges to his record in recent months. In
perhaps the most stunning upset in the 2014 election cycle, his lieutenant
governor, Anthony Brown, lost in his gubernatorial race against Republican
Larry Hogan, which many took as a repudiation of O’Malley’s record in
solidly Democratic Maryland. In light of the recent civil unrest in
Baltimore, his team has intensely defended his data-driven, tough-on-crime
record as mayor — which critics say contributed to the incarceration of a
large number of young, black men and hindered economic opportunity in the
city.

The former mayor has recently gone on offense on the issue, criticizing
Democrats for failing to invest in American cities over the past several
years and calling for a more robust plan to deal with income inequality and
urban poverty.

Though he has largely refrained from attacking Clinton, O’Malley has taken
several implicit jabs at the former secretary of state on several issues,
including her ties to Wall Street. Recently, he has written op-eds, posted
online videos and stayed active on Twitter to push progressive issues,
including his opposition to the Trans-Pacific Partnership and fast-track
trade authority, which Clinton has yet to weigh in on.

O'Malley picks Federal Hill to announce next move
<http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/politics/blog/bal-omalley-picks-federal-hill-to-announce-next-move-20150519-story.html>
// Baltimore Sun // John Fritze - May 19, 2015

Martin O'Malley is expected to announce his presidential campaign in
Federal Hill Park -- using the city where he got his start in politics as
his backdrop, his campaign said Tuesday.

The former two-term governor and mayor of Baltimore provided new details
about his announcement on Twitter and Snapchat. The event, in which
O'Malley is widely expected to announce he will seek the Democratic
nomination for president, is scheduled for 10 a.m. on May 30.

O'Malley, 52, would become the third Democrat to enter the contest, behind
former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders.
O'Malley has been aggressively traveling in early primary states since his
second term ended in January, but he has not made significant headway in
early polling.

O'Malley has used the park for political events before, including a rally
the night before his 2006 gubernatorial election.

Elizabeth Warren Wants Hillary Clinton To 'Weigh In On Trade'
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/05/19/elizabeth-warren_n_7337274.html>
// Huffington Post // Dana Liebelson - May 19, 2015

WASHINGTON -- As the fight over a massive international trade agreement
heats up on Capitol Hill, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) said on Tuesday
that she wants to see Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton
"weigh in on trade."

In an interview with The Huffington Post, Warren declined to say whether
she would endorse Clinton. "Right now I think it's important for her to
have a chance to lay out her views on a whole host of issues, including
trade," she said.

Warren has emerged as a champion for Americans who oppose the Trans-Pacific
Partnership, a trade deal that the Obama administration is seeking to
negotiate with 11 other nations. The Senate is preparing to vote on
legislation that would grant President Barack Obama the authority to
"fast-track" TPP and other trade deals with no amendments and limited
debate.

When asked who she thought was the best 2016 presidential contender on the
issue, Warren said that "we need to hear from all of our presidential
contenders about trade."

She added, "I will say that Hillary Clinton said in her book that she was
opposed to these arbitration panels that could override domestic
regulations," referring to a controversial TPP provision that would allow
corporations to sue governments over regulations that inhibit their
investment profits.

In her book Hard Choices, Clinton discussed the panels, writing that in
trade agreements, "we should avoid some of the provisions sought by
business interests, including our own, like giving them or their investors
the power to sue foreign governments to weaken their environmental and
public health rules."

Earlier on Tuesday, Warren spoke with Bloomberg about Clinton's opposition
to the panels, adding, "I'd like to see her be clearer on that." When asked
by HuffPost to elaborate, Warren said, "Look, she's already said what she
said in her book about the arbitration panels and I'd like her to weigh in
on trade, I think it's important."

According to CNN, Clinton came closer to taking a position on trade at a
round-table event in Iowa on Tuesday, noting some concerns about the deal
but ultimately hedging once again. "I want to judge the final agreement. I
have been for trade agreements; I have been against trade agreements," she
said.

Michael McAuliff contributed reporting.

GOP

Marc Lasry Says Jeb Bush Would Be ‘Reasonable’ President
<http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-05-19/marc-lasry-says-jeb-bush-would-be-reasonable-president>
// Bloomberg // Saijel Kishan - May 19, 2015

Marc Lasry, the investor who’s raising money for Hillary Clinton’s
presidential campaign, said potential Republican candidate Jeb Bush would
be a “reasonable” president.

“He would be reasonable, he’d be a good president,” Lasry said in an
interview Tuesday with Mark Halperin and John Heilemann on Bloomberg
Television’s “With All Due Respect.” “I think I would look at it very
differently with some of the other candidates.”

Lasry, the billionaire co-founder of Avenue Capital Group, is close to
Clinton, the former U.S. secretary of state who’s seeking the Democratic
nomination. He also backed ex-President Bill Clinton, and once employed
their daughter, Chelsea, as an analyst at his New York-based firm.

Lasry, who told Bloomberg in April that he sought to raise $270,000 during
the first week of Clinton’s campaign, said Tuesday that a fundraiser at his
Manhattan townhouse was oversold. He said Clinton’s politics have moved to
the left and that the vast majority of donors “won’t have an issue with
that.”

The Democrats will probably raise just more than $1 billion, with the
party’s super-Pac’s gathering less than those supporting Republicans, Lasry
said.

He said that along with Bush, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker and Florida
Senator Marco Rubio are the strongest contenders for the Republican
nomination.

Avenue manages $13.3 billion, according to its website. Lasry is also
co-owner of the National Basketball Association’s Milwaukee Bucks.

Marco Rubio Coming To Nevada Later This Month
<http://lasvegas.cbslocal.com/2015/05/19/marco-rubio-coming-to-nevada-later-this-month/>
// CBS Local // May 19, 2015

CARSON CITY, Nev. (AP) — Republican presidential candidate Marco Rubio is
planning to visit Nevada at the end of the month to celebrate his birthday
with the star of the TV show “Pawn Stars.”

A fundraising reception for the Florida senator is scheduled for May 28 at
the Las Vegas home of Rick Harrison, who co-owns the famous Gold and Silver
Pawn Shop.

The event is co-hosted by Nevada Lt. Gov. Mark Hutchison, who is chairing
Rubio’s campaign operations in Nevada.

Rubio has roots in Nevada after spending some of his childhood in Las
Vegas. He is also the cousin of Democratic Nevada state Sen. Mo Denis.

He’s the latest presidential candidate or potential candidate to visit
Nevada this month. Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republicans Jeb Bush, Rick
Santorum and Ben Carson visited in May.

Seth Meyers Mocks Marco Rubio’s ‘Bumpy Sunday’ on Iraq
<http://www.mediaite.com/tv/seth-meyers-mocks-marco-rubios-bumpy-sunday-on-iraq/>
// Mediaite // Matt Wilstein - May 19, 2015

After breaking down Jeb Bush’s problematic handling of questions about the
Iraq War last week, Seth Meyers turned his attention Monday night to Marco
Rubio, who had some struggles of his own during an interview with Chris
Wallace on Fox News Sunday.

“Conventional wisdom was, Marco Rubio was the candidate who benefitted the
most from Bush’s stumbles,” Meyers said. “And after seeing Bush’s clumsy
handling, there was no way Rubio was going to make the same mistake.”

Of course, what followed was a back and forth between Wallace and Rubio
full of circular logic and short of concrete answers to rather direct
questions. “Were Wallace and Rubio even in the same room?” Meyers asked.
“Because it seemed like one of them was on a five-second delay. There’s
less over-talking when my grandpa orders at the McDonald’s drive-thru.”

“How low is the question bar right now?” the host continued. “‘Knowing what
we know now’ is the easy Iraq question, no one should be getting that
wrong. The better question is ‘knowing what we knew then, would you have
invaded Iraq?'”

While Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio and even Hillary Clinton all can agree that
based on the intelligence presented at the time, they would (or did)
authorize the invasion. But, as Meyers made clear, there were a few people
who felt differently.

CNN Asks Rand Paul What He Would Do If ISIS Entered Baghdad
<http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/05/19/cnn_asks_rand_paul_what_he_would_do_if_isis_entered_baghdad.html>
// Real Clear Politics // Tim Hains - May 19, 2015

CNN QUESTION: What about Baghdad? What would you do if Baghdad were in
danger of falling?

SEN. RAND PAUL: Yeah. I'm all for the U.S. helping and supporting the
Iraqis, and we have been. And I'm all for the air power and continuing to
help the Iraqis and the Kurds with arms and with air support.

Ramadi is different, it is not a Kurdish region, you are now talking about
a Sunni region. This is ultimately why Iraq has devolved into a failed
state. What we got is a government that is almost entirely Shi'ite, aligned
with Iran, and the Sunnis feel left out. It is also why Americans or
Shi'ites can retake the cities, but we can't ultimately have a lasting
peace unless the Sunnis are involved.

It is a very complicated situation with many different players. But if the
Sunnis are not involved there will not be a lasting peace.

CNN QUESTION: But if you were president, and you saw ISIS encroaching on
Baghdad, what would the U.S. role be?

SEN. RAND PAUL: Right now, air support, but the one thing I would be doing
in addition to that would be arming the Kurds. To a much greater extent
then we have been. And to recognize the Kurds as a nation.

The other thing I would do, is one of the things we did during the surge.
People talk about American troops during the surge, one of the other things
we did was put a lot of money into assistance to the Sunni chieftains to
encourage their support. If you weigh that amount of money worth what we're
spending on other things, I think it would be money well spent to try to
encourage the alliegence of the Sunni chieftains again.

Carly Fiorina coming to Palm Beach County; Rand Paul cancels to fight
Patriot Act
<http://postonpolitics.blog.palmbeachpost.com/2015/05/19/carly-fiorina-coming-to-palm-beach-county-rand-paul-cancels-to-fight-patriot-act/>
// Palm Beach Post // George Bennett - May 19, 2015

Republican presidential hopeful Carly Fiorina will appear at the Palm Beach
County Convention Center in West Palm Beach on Wednesday, then attend a
ribbon-cutting at the Place of Hope foster care agency in Boca Raton.

Another GOP White House aspirant, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, has cancelled
plans to appear at a Palm Beach County Tea Party rally in Jupiter on
Thursday because he’ll be in Washington fighting against reauthorization of
the Patriot Act.

Fiorina, the former CEO of Hewlett-Packard who announced she’s running for
president this month, will appear at a public rally at the convention
center at 5:15 p.m. on Wednesday. Doors open at 4:30 p.m.

Before the public event, Fiorina will meet with about three dozen donors
who have given at least $1,000 to the county GOP.

After the West Palm Beach event, Fiorina is scheduled to appear at a ribbon
cutting for new facilities at Place of Hope’s Boca Raton campus at 21441
Boca Rio Road. That event begins at 6:30 p.m.

Also expected at the Place of Hope: State Attorney Dave Aronberg; Palm
Beach County Commissioner Steven Abrams; state Sen. Joseph Abruzzo,
D-Boynton Beach; state Rep. Gayle Harrell, R-Stuart; Boca Raton Mayor Susan
Haynie and City Commissioner Robert Weinroth.

TOP NEWS

DOMESTIC

White House Says Would Veto Trade Bill If Currency Amendment is Added
<http://time.com/3889740/barack-obama-trade-veto/> // TIME // Maya Rhodan -
May 19, 2015

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said Tuesday the President would
consider vetoing the entire trade authority bill if an amendment
co-sponsored by Sens. Rob Portman and Debbie Stabenow were to pass.

A vote an amendment that would target countries that manipulate the value
of their currency to improve the prices of their exports could come as soon
as this week in the Senate, Politico reports. Under Portman’s amendment,
countries would be held to standards set by the International Monetary Fund.

The amendment, Earnest said during Tuesday’s briefing, would “undermine the
ability of the Federal Reserve” and if it were to come across the
president’s desk he would “even take the extraordinary step of vetoing the
TPA bill.”

“The president would certainly not support that kind of provision,” Earnest
said Tuesday, though he said there are additional amendments the
administration is open to considering.

Lenny Curry defeats incumbent Democratic Mayor Alvin Brown in Jacksonville
<http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/the-buzz-florida-politics/lenny-curry-defeats-incumbent-democratic-mayor-alvin-brown-in-jacksonville/2230307>
// Tampa Bay Times // Alex Leary - May 19, 2015

Lenny Curry defeated incumbent Democratic Mayor Alvin Brown of Jacksonville
tonight, the latest set back for Democrats in Florida.

"Soak it in with me. Just soak it in," Curry told supporters at top of his
victory speech. He pledged to work with Brown on "one Jacksonville."

Curry, the former head of the state GOP, was boosted by a determined
Republican effort to recapture the seat, strong fundraising and the help
from Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio and other top officials.

He also got the endorsment of the Times-Union, which said Curry has “the
financial and management background to lead Jacksonville out of its fiscal
morass.”

Brown won the seat in May 2011, becoming the first Democrat to hold the
position in two decades and the first African-American. Democrats saw the
former Bill Clinton aide as future statewide candidate.

“I congratulate my friend Lenny Curry, the new Mayor of Jacksonville," Gov.
Rick Scott said in a statement. "I look forward to working with Lenny to
continue to grow economic opportunities in one of Florida’s greatest
cities. I also want to thank outgoing Mayor Alvin Brown for his service to
the people of Jacksonville and I wish him well in his next endeavor."

Beau Biden, vice president's son, hospitalized
<http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/05/19/beau-biden-hospitalized/27607919/>
// USA Today // Gregory Korte - May 19, 2015

WASHINGTON — Beau Biden, the son of Vice President Joe Biden and a
Democratic candidate for governor of Delaware in 2016, has been
hospitalized at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center for an
undisclosed illness.

The vice president's office confirmed Tuesday that Beau Biden was
undergoing treatment at the Bethesda, Md. military hospital, but did not go
into further details.

The 46-year-old former Delaware attorney general has a history of health
problems. He suffered what was described as a mild stroke in 2010. And in
2013, he became disoriented while on family vacation and later underwent a
procedure to remove a small brain lesion at the University of Texas MD
Anderson Cancer Center.

Upgrades finalized for Roaring Brook Road rail crossing
<http://www.lohud.com/story/news/transit/2015/05/18/safety-improvements-coming-roaring-brook-road/27552941/>
// Lohud // Hoa Nguyen - May 18, 2015

More than three months after the deadliest train crash in its history,
Metro-North is working with other agencies to finalize upgrades to a nearby
railroad crossing in New Castle.

Roaring Brook Road is about eight miles from the Commerce Street grade
crossing in Valhalla where a commuter train and sport utility vehicle
collided Feb. 3, killing the motorist and five passengers.

"There's no question that Valhalla has motivated everyone to look and try
to do what we can do immediately," said New Castle supervisor Robert
Greenstein, who has been pushing for the upgrades.

Next week, crews are expected to begin the milling and repaving of the road
on both sides of the crossing and add new signs and improved pavement
markings.

"These are improvements that needed to be done really yesterday,"
Greenstein said.

But while the Valhalla crash may have expedited these short-term fixes,
Greenstein said ideally, officials will eventually approve construction of
a new bridge over the railroad tracks that would eliminate the grade
crossing and still allow traffic to pass by but he didn't believe the
financing of such a bridge project would be feasible anytime soon.

"Let's face it — the bridge is not being built tomorrow," he said.

The crossing has had a history of close calls. Earlier this month, the
railroad gate at Roaring Brook Road came down on a school bus, trapping it
only seconds before a passenger train passed by. The bus driver, who was
charged with stopping in the railroad right of way, a misdemeanor, stopped
about 15 feet further than she should have and tried to back up but stopped
when the gate caught on some brackets, New Castle police said. No one,
including two students on the short-style bus, were injured in the incident.

As part of the planned work, Roaring Brook Road will be closed at the
crossing in both directions for three days starting 7 p.m., May 29.

In Mount Pleasant, Supervisor Carl Fulgenzi, who has been petitioning the
Department of Transportation to close the Cleveland Street crossing where
Federal Railroad Administration records show there have been six accidents,
said he is still awaiting a decision from state officials.

Fulgenzi said he has heard the closing of the Commerce Street grade
crossing also may be a possibility but state and Metro-North officials have
not updated him on their plans if there are any.

"They did admit that they are two crossings they are paying attention to,"
he said.

A few days ago, Fulgenzi said he was at the crossing with lawyers from the
town's insurance carrier and the town police chief inspecting the site when
a motorist approached the crossing, drove around the gate and crossed to
the other side just as the lights began flashing, signaling the near
arrival of a train.

"God forbid there wasn't a train (passing by at the time)," Fulgenzi said.

MTA police chief Michael Coan said during a Monday Metro-North committee
meeting that his agency is monitoring grade crossing safety and have issued
97 violations — or about a third of all 293 summons issued through April.

Senate outmaneuvers hard-line abortion foe in passing 20-week ban with
exceptions
<http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20150519/PC1603/150519277/1031/anti-abortion-activists-join-senator-vowing-to-fight-exceptions-for-rape-incest>
// Post and Courier // Cynthia Roldan - May 19, 2015

COLUMBIA — South Carolina lawmakers voted Tuesday to tighten restrictions
on abortions — prohibiting the procedure after 20 weeks of pregnancy —
overcoming a leading abortion foe’s vow to block exceptions for rape,
incest and severe fetal abnormalities.

Sen. Lee Bright, R-Roebuck, had threatened a filibuster to block a vote on
the bill, but senators outmaneuvered him by voting, instead, to end debate
on the bill. Sen. Larry Grooms, R-Charleston, another abortion foe, said
that strategy was adopted after the state’s largest anti-abortion advocacy
group, South Carolina Citizens for Life, threw its support behind the bill
rather than have it defeated because of the dispute over adding exceptions.

The bill passed the Senate 37-7. If approved on a third vote, the ban heads
back to the House, which already has passed the bill without the
exceptions. The differences would have to be ironed out in a conference
committee for the bill to go to Gov. Nikki Haley for her signature.

Bright had earlier held a news conference in the Statehouse at which he was
joined by several national activists who, like him, opposed exceptions to
restrictions on abortions. Two of the women who backed his objections said
they were conceived through rapes, and a third gave birth after she was
raped as a young teenager.

The only exception Bright said he was willing to allow was to save the life
of the mother.

Afterward, a frustrated Bright chastised his colleagues for spending months
on an environmental bill but only hours on the abortion measure.

“We spent probably eight hours on this bill,” said Bright. “We spent two
months on the Pollution Control Act. It is very rare that a contentious
special order bill goes this quickly.”

Grooms called the bill a partial victory for abortion foes even with the
exceptions.

“Everything about this bill is tough,” Grooms said. “Even with the
exceptions passed out of (the Senate), a number of lives will be saved.”

Abortion-rights supporters planned to try to block the bill if the
exceptions hadn’t been included. Sen. Brad Hutto, D-Orangeburg, said he’d
prepared more than 170 amendments, which would’ve taken days to get through
with less than two weeks remaining in the legislative session this year.
Hutto was among the seven senators who voted against the 20-week abortion
ban.

South Carolina’s American Civil Liberties Union Executive Director Victoria
Middleton denounced the Senate’s action, issuing a statement saying the
second-trimester abortion ban is governmental interference in a private
matter.

“Today’s debate showed that the goal of some South Carolina politicians is
to limit a woman’s access to abortion as a legal medical option,” Middleton
said. “The measure does nothing to improve health outcomes for families and
could have a chilling effect on doctors seeking to give their patients the
best medical care possible. “

Before the vote, another opponent, Sen. Marlon Kimpson, D-Columbia,
reminded colleagues they are not doctors and they could be infringing on
constitutional rights.

“Politics should not drive medical decisions,” Kimpson said. “We are not
medical experts. If we pass this bill, I suspect that we will have a legal
challenge on our hands.”

Bright’s hard line was supported by national activists Rebecca Kiessling, a
45-year-old Michigan lawyer, and Juda Myers of Texas, who founded Choices
For Life, which assists rape victims who want to deliver their babies.

Kiessling, president of Save the 1, an abortion-rights opponent, said her
mother twice sought an illegal abortion after being raped and becoming
pregnant, but ultimately decided to give birth to her.

“I did not deserve the death penalty for the life of my father,” Kiessling
said. “You punish rapists and not babies.”

SC Republican: Abortion Ban Doesn't Keep Rape Victims Pregnant Enough
<http://jezebel.com/sc-republican-abortion-ban-doesnt-keep-rape-victims-pr-1705596433>
// Jezebel // Anna Merlan - May 19, 2015

A South Carolina State Senator is filibustering a bill that would make
abortion illegal for 20 weeks, not because he doesn’t hate abortion—he
totally, loudly does—but because the bill makes an exception for victims of
rape and incest. Those rape and incest victims had 20 whole weeks, State
Senator Lee Bright, says, and now they’re just going to have to give birth.

As The State reports, in a story we saw via the Huffington Post, Bright,
who is a Republican, began his filibuster on Thursday, arguing that the ban
simply didn’t go far enough. As HuffPo’s Laura Bassett reports, he thought
20 weeks was plenty long enough, and besides, aren’t women just going to
lie about getting raped anyway? Don’t they do that?

“We’re not talking about a woman that was assaulted that goes into the
emergency room— which, I would argue, that child still has a right,” Bright
said. “We’re talking about somebody that had 20 weeks.”

Bright said he worried that women would falsely claim they were raped in
order to qualify for the exemption. “After 20 weeks if you wanted to get an
abortion you could go and say you were raped and you could have the
abortion,” he said. “You wouldn’t be denied. There’s no police report.”

There’s nothing a woman likes better, in a conservative Republican’s
imagination, than to sit around, dreaming up ever-more complex ways to get
a late-term abortion.

Bright came in for some criticism, even from fellow anti-abortioneers: Holy
Gatlin of Citizens for Life told The State, “He does not seem to understand
the strategy that will save babies’ lives. We do not agree with these
exceptions, but this isn’t the end game. Sometimes, you have to concede a
battle to win a war.” In response, Bright shared a press release on
Facebook from the South Carolina Pastors Alliance, which called him “a
consistent and stalwart advocate for the pre-born,” and added, “this is a
prime example of his commitment.” He also called a press conference with
women who were conceived from rape and who supported his filibuster.

Despite his best efforts, Bright failed: the bill passed this afternoon,
with exceptions for victims of rape and incest and for the loosely defined
“fetal abnormality.”

INTERNATIONAL

Iraq’s Sunni Strategy Collapses in Ramadi Rout
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/20/world/middleeast/with-fall-of-ramadi-plight-of-iraq-sunnis-worsens.html>
// NYT  // Tim Arango - May 19, 2015

AMIRIYAT FALLUJA, Iraq — More than a thousand Iraqi Sunni fighters stood at
attention, dressed in camouflage but holding no weapons, as the tribal
leader began exhorting them to fiercely battle the militants of the Islamic
State, taking up rhetoric tinged with Arab notions of vengeance.

“It is now time for revenge for our martyrs,” said the sheikh, Falih
al-Essawi, who was dressed in a military uniform. He checked off the
destruction wrought in their lands by the Islamic State, or, as he called
them, “the rats of ISIS”: 25,000 homes leveled, he said, bridges burned,
the economy devastated.

He and other speakers made an explicit plea to the Shiite prime minister in
Baghdad, Haider al-Abadi: Arm and support our men, and we will take the
fight ourselves to the Islamic State.

That event was 11 days ago at a military base here in Amiriyat Falluja, one
of the last cities of Anbar Province in government hands. It was billed as
the beginning of a government program to arm and train local Sunni
tribesmen to battle the Sunni extremists of the Islamic State — a critical
gesture to show that Shiite and Sunni Iraqis could unite in the fight, and
to put Sunni residents at ease with defenders from their same communities.

Now, the fall of Anbar’s capital, Ramadi, to the Islamic State has
illustrated the failure of that strategy.

The government’s effort to foster Sunni fighters, always a seemingly
halfhearted program, now feels almost incidental as thousands of Shiite
militiamen are flooding into Anbar to take up the fight against the Islamic
State, also known as ISIS or ISIL.

A ceremony for a group of Sunni tribal fighters stationed at a base in
Habbaniya, a lakeside town in Anbar, to receive new American-supplied
weapons had been scheduled for Monday, but was canceled because of the
Ramadi crisis. Instead, nearly 3,000 Shiite militiamen arrived at the
outpost.

The collapse of Anbar has also set in sharp relief the continuing tragedy
of Iraq’s Sunnis, beginning with the American invasion in 2003, which
almost instantly upended the old social order of Sunni prominence. With the
majority Shiites thrust into power, the Sunnis were sidelined, many
banished from public life for good because of their ties to Saddam
Hussein’s Baath Party.

Some of those Sunnis joined the insurgency, and many fight today for the
Islamic State. Other Sunnis boycotted elections. A great number even deny
the demographic fact that they are a minority in Iraq.

Most, though, wanted to get on with their lives and find a place within the
new order.

Now, with the rise of the Islamic State, that has become nearly impossible.
The Sunni militants of the Islamic State have declared war on those it
considers apostates — Shiites, Christians, Yazidis — but it is Iraq’s Sunni
Arabs who have arguably suffered the most.

As Islamic State militants seized control of Ramadi in recent days, their
rampage was as grim as it was familiar. Through mosque loudspeakers, they
assured the remaining civilians that they would provide them with food and
security, and open roads and bridges that had been closed. Those promises
belied what actually came with their arrival: vast destruction, summary
killings of those believed sympathetic to the government — militants went
door to door with lists of names — and the displacement of thousands of
people.

The militants immediately opened two Shariah, or Islamic law, courts in
Ramadi, according to an official, and freed prisoners who had been held in
the city by Iraq’s counterterrorism forces.

The failure of Mr. Abadi to marshal a Sunni-led force to save the city has
deepened the grievances of some Sunnis toward the central government that
began with the leadership of the former prime minister, Nuri Kamal
al-Maliki.

“Abadi is a liar just like Maliki,” said Subhi al-Khaliani, a retiree in
Diyala Province. “He won’t arm the Sunnis, but will weaken them instead.”

Bilal al-Dulaimi, 45, who works as a nurse in Diyala, said, “Sunnis are the
prisoners of ISIS, which beheads tens of them daily.” He added, “The Sunni
future is unknown and painful.”

Even Sunni officials in Anbar Province have called upon Mr. Abadi to send
in the Shiite militias, some of them linked with Iran, to help fight the
Islamic State. But many citizens of Anbar are fearful, given the Shiite
armed groups’ role in sectarian atrocities of the past decade.

“The Shiite militias going to Anbar are a nongovernmental force, they are
undisciplined and uncontrolled, and even the prime minister doesn’t control
these militias,” said Amir Abdul, a 38-year-old resident of Anbar. “These
militias are directly connected to Iran.”

Nearly three million Iraqis are now displaced, according to the United
Nations, reaching a level not seen since the height of Iraq’s sectarian
civil war in 2006 and 2007. Then, many Iraqis fled to Syria. But with Syria
convulsed by its own civil war, Iraqis on the run from the Islamic State
have few safe places to go. Nearly 85 percent of the displaced are Sunnis,
according to a United Nations official.

The United Nations, in a statement released Monday, warned that the
humanitarian crisis that is unfolding in Sunni areas has almost overwhelmed
it. “The U.N. is rushing assistance to help people fleeing Ramadi, but
funds are running out and stocks are almost done,” the statement said.

Lise Grande, the United Nations humanitarian coordinator in Iraq, said in
the statement: “Nothing is more important right now than helping people
fleeing Ramadi. They are in trouble and we need to do everything possible
to help them. Thousands of people had to sleep in the open because they
don’t have places to stay. We would be able to do much more if we had the
funding.”

The displacement crisis has been made worse by Iraq’s sectarian divisions.
Civilians fleeing Anbar have often been treated almost as foreign citizens
when they arrive at the gates of Baghdad. Many are denied entry, especially
young men, because the government considers them a security threat. After
an influx of Ramadi residents several weeks ago, several car bombs struck
Baghdad — a common occurrence at any time — and government officials blamed
the displaced people.

Some of the displaced Sunnis have been let into the capital, but many have
had their identification cards confiscated and have been housed in Sunni
mosques, prevented from moving freely around the city.

Many Iraqi Sunni leaders were either killed — especially tribal leaders who
once fought alongside the Americans against Al Qaeda in Iraq, the
predecessor group to the Islamic State — or pushed into exile under the
previous government of Mr. Maliki. As a result, many Sunnis today feel they
have no legitimate leaders, partly because so many were unable to vote in
last year’s elections because of poor security.

The Sunni leaders that have remained in Baghdad are openly mocked as “Green
Zone politicians,” with only a tenuous connection to any constituency and
little influence that extends beyond their offices and homes in the
fortified government center of the capital.

Rafe al-Essawi, a Sunni from Anbar who was Iraq’s finance minister under
Mr. Maliki, left the country in 2013 under threat of arrest on terrorism
charges that Western diplomats said were false.

Speaking recently at the Brookings Institution in Washington, Mr. Essawi
spoke about the pressures the Sunnis faced under Mr. Maliki’s government,
including mass detentions and trumped-up terrorism charges, and the
continuing struggles to incorporate Sunnis into the security forces.

This environment, he said, “makes the society of Sunnis ask the question:
Is it justifiable to be part of the political process? Are we part of Iraq?
If the answer is yes, the government should be an Iraqi-inclusive
government for all Iraqis.”

U.N. chief: North Korea cancels visit
<http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/19/asia/north-korea-ban/> // CNN // Steve
Almasy - May 19, 2015

(CNN)U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said his planned visit Wednesday to
a joint industrial complex has been canceled by North Korean authorities.

In a speech in Seoul, the secretary-general said there was no explanation
given by the North Koreans for the last-minute change.

"This decision by Pyongyang is deeply regrettable. However, I, as the
Secretary-General of the United Nations, will not spare any efforts to
encourage the DPRK (Democratic People's Republic of Korea, or North Korea)
to work with the international community for peace and stability on the
Korean peninsula and beyond," Ban said, according to a U.N. statement.

The Kaesong Industrial Complex lies north of the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ)
that divides the two Koreas. More than 100 South Korean factory owners
employ about 50,000 North Korean laborers to manufacture products such as
clothing and shoes.

The complex was established more than a decade ago at a time when a
previous government in South Korea was pursuing a "sunshine policy" of
friendship with its reclusive northern rival.

Its creation allowed South Korean companies to benefit from the low cost of
North Korean labor. Meanwhile, North Korea gained a valuable stream of hard
currency revenue by appropriating an undisclosed amount of salary from its
citizens working in Kaesong.

Gay Marriage on Ballot Shows Shift in Irish Attitudes
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/20/world/europe/gay-marriage-on-ballot-shows-shift-in-irish-attitudes.html>
// NYT // Douglas Dalby - May 19, 2015

DUBLIN — If there was any doubt about the pace at which acceptance of gay
rights is taking root in societies around the world, consider Ireland.

On Friday, voters in this once deeply Roman Catholic country will decide
whether the Constitution should be amended to add a tersely worded
declaration: “Marriage may be contracted in accordance with law by two
persons without distinction as to their sex.”

If the amendment passes, Ireland will become the first country to legalize
same-sex civil marriage by popular vote.

The referendum’s very consideration, and the relative civility of the
discourse, are a measure of the waning power of the church, which has seen
its pews empty after the clerical pedophile scandals and amid rising
secularism.

But it is also a reflection of a surprisingly swift shift in attitudes in
many societies, where religious teachings and conservative values are
giving way to acceptance of laws that support the privacy of individuals
and expand marital and other rights.

Unlike the vitriolic fights here in the past over abortion and divorce, the
referendum is stirring about as much excitement as might surface during a
local council election.

Gaggles of campaigners hand out leaflets in shopping malls and in housing
estates. Lamp posts are wrapped with colorful posters bearing catchy
slogans. Talk radio chatters away, trying desperately to stir up debate.

The outcome is by no means certain. Though polls are showing greater
support for a yes vote than for a no, there is widespread acknowledgment
that this is the kind of issue that polls cannot always accurately gauge.

Until the last few weeks, the church held whatever moral firepower it still
possesses, preferring to leave the public battles to a variety of Catholic
groups.

In what many interpret as a sign of their concern over alienating those
still in the middle ground, church leaders waited until two weeks before
the vote to distribute pastoral letters to Sunday worshipers.

“Should the amendment be passed, it will become increasingly difficult to
speak any longer in public about marriage as being between a man and a
woman,” said Bishop Brendan Leahy of Limerick in the letter to
congregations in his diocese. “We also ask: ‘What will we be expected to
teach children in school about marriage? Will those who sincerely continue
to believe that marriage is between a man and a woman be forced to act
against their conscience?’ ”

But in a country where about 80 percent of people are still identified as
Catholics, though largely not practicing, no ballot initiative can pass
without Catholic votes. And those most likely to go to church on Sundays,
and receive the pastoral letter, are older, live in rural areas and are
most likely to vote.

Supporters of the measure also fear that a largely silent middle group
could turn out and tip the vote to the referendum’s defeat.

Still, the amendment has wide support from all the main political parties,
trade unions, business organizations and various social groups, as well as
from sports stars and celebrities. Of 226 members of Parliament, only six
have indicated that they will personally cast their ballots against the
measure.

Parliament adopted civil partnerships for same-sex couples in 2010, but
supporters of the amendment say such arrangements do not go far enough.

“This is not equality, and for many gay people, civil partnership, while it
was a step in the right direction, does not give the relationship they have
and the commitment they have made to the person they love the same
recognition as the relationship of a heterosexual couple,” wrote former
Justice Minister Alan Shatter in a recent opinion article in The Irish
Independent. “They feel discriminated against, regarded as second-class
citizens, and they are hurt by it.”

Opponents have broadly defined the implications of the amendment, saying it
could affect issues like surrogacy, adoption and education, as well as
morality and family values.

“We are not against equality, but this is about changing the primary,
natural, fundamental unit of society,” said Ben Conroy, a spokesman for the
Iona Institute, a conservative advocacy group. “It is about obliterating
the right of a child to a mother and father.”

While many states and other countries have moved to broaden equal rights
for gays, resistance lingers, even in the West. France faced strong
opposition and angry protests before it allowed same-sex marriage. In many
places, including the United States, many of the rights questions are being
decided in the courts.

In the Irish Republic, opponents of the measure have been careful to
distance themselves from events in Northern Ireland, where religiously
conservative Protestant politicians have blocked proposals to allow
same-sex marriage that would put it in line with the rest of Britain.

However, the courts have stepped in there as well, and on Tuesday a judge
in Belfast County Court ruled that a baker was guilty of discriminating
against a customer, Gareth Lee, because of his sexual orientation when the
bakery refused to provide a cake inscribed with the words “Support gay
marriage.” The owners of the bakery said they refused because of their
“genuine deeply held religious beliefs.” Mr. Lee agreed to accept 500
pounds, or about $775, in damages.

Ireland has been reluctant to tinker with its 1937 Constitution,
particularly on social issues. Nevertheless, it has taken on two previous
battles over teachings that are abhorrent to the church.

The legalization of abortion has been on the ballot three times in the past
30 years. The last time a referendum was considered, in 2002, it was
rejected by a little less than a percentage point of the voters: 50.4
percent to 49.6 percent. Successive governments have done everything in
their power to avoid another vote.

Divorce was legalized in 1995 after another vitriolic ballot, but only by
the thinnest of margins.

Polls published on Sunday in three national newspapers showed that support
for the amendment was still comfortably ahead, but the wide gap has been
narrowing. The Millward Brown poll for The Irish Sunday Independent found a
13-point drop-off in support from the month before, to 69 percent of people
polled. Polls in the Irish edition of The Sunday Times and The Sunday
Business Post also put the support vote well ahead.

Still, opponents have been encouraged by the way the pollsters were so
wrong about this month’s British election. And the closeness of the vote on
divorce, which was not predicted in the polls, has given them hope that
voters are simply not expressing their views on a matter that many may find
overly personal.

Gay rights groups are relying heavily on the support of the former Irish
president Mary McAleese, a canon lawyer who is a respected scholar of the
church and whose son Justin is gay.

“Will a yes vote affect my heterosexual marriage or any heterosexual
marriage?” Ms. McAleese asked in a speech on Tuesday, noting that she has
been married to her husband for almost 40 years. “Not in the least. But it
will greatly affect my life and the lives of all parents of gay children.
It will give us peace of mind about our children’s future and pride in our
country’s commitment to true equality. It will right a glaring wrong.”

Prime Minister Enda Kenny, a churchgoing Catholic, is also supporting the
proposal, first championed by his coalition partner, the left-leaning
Labour Party.

Mr. Kenny, who had vacillated on the issue, said he was convinced after
learning of the difficulties many gay people faced in recent years. His
government includes elected representatives who are gay; Health Minister
Leo Varadkar recently went public about his homosexuality.

OPINIONS/EDITORIALS/BLOGS

Markos Moulitsas: Clinton a true liberal
<http://thehill.com/opinion/markos-moulitsas/242587-markos-moulitsas-clinton-a-true-liberal>
// The Hill // Markos Moultisas - May 19, 2015

At the State of the Union address early this year, President Obama
delivered the most explicitly liberal speech of his presidency, a genuine
call to arms that expands on the past successes of Democratic policies. It
was Democrats, indeed, who enacted “worker protections, Social Security,
Medicare and Medicaid, to protect ourselves from the harshest adversity.”
It was Democrats who “gave our citizens schools and colleges,
infrastructure and the Internet — tools they needed to go as far as their
effort will take them.”

The speech included none of the middle-of-the-road, centrist Third Way
pablum that has infected the party for a generation. It was, in short,
exactly what liberal activists had spent years calling for. And the
architect of that speech? John Podesta. The same John Podesta who now
chairs Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

That simple connection suggests Clinton is shedding her husband’s
ideological baggage and aiming for a truly progressive presidency. Why,
after all, would Podesta help craft such an explicitly liberal State of the
Union address if he was then going to help take it all back with Clinton?
That address might have been the beginning of a rhetorical bridge spanning
the Obama and future Clinton presidencies.

If you oppose Clinton from the left, you might scoff at such logic. But the
actions of her nascent campaign certainly support that theory.

For example, there is her choice of Robby Mook as her campaign manager. In
2013, Mook helmed Terry McAuliffe’s successful gubernatorial run in
Virginia — the first time the same party occupying the White House has won
the state since 1973. Sure, Mook justly gets a lot of credit for winning
with a candidate as flawed and unappealing as McAuliffe. But the real
beauty of that victory was that McAuliffe won by running an explicit base
turnout election.

Traditionally, Virginia Democrats focus heavily on rural white voters with
gimmicks like sponsoring NASCAR cars. Mook instead focused heavily on the
ethnically and racially diverse D.C. suburbs in Northern Virginia and
African-American communities in places like Richmond, and delivered an
elusive off-year electoral victory for Democrats. In fact, Mook was so
successful, there was no African-American voter drop-off between 2012 and
2013.

If Clinton was interested in another tepid I-stand-for-nothing campaign,
she could’ve brought back Mark Penn for another losing effort. But you
don’t hire Mook to depress your best supporters. Quite the opposite, in
fact.

On actual substance, Clinton’s early speechifying is also cause for
optimism. On immigration, she now supports measures far beyond anything
Obama has proposed, generating enthusiastic support from the Hispanic
community. She’s been saying all the right things on police brutality and
criminal reform (as her husband admits the mistakes of his
get-tough-on-crime policies). And on income inequality, where even her
staunchest liberal supporters can be skeptical, Clinton is striking a
populist tone — and her lack of support for the president’s lobbying
efforts on behalf of his Pacific trade deal hasn’t gone unnoticed.

Indeed, for those hoping to generate a genuine primary challenge against
Clinton, she’s provided very little ammo for them to work with. When Sen.
Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) entered the primary with a stirring call for a
stronger middle class, Clinton tweeted in response, “I agree with Bernie.”
The old Clinton wouldn’t have been caught dead anywhere near those words.

So for those hoping that Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) or Sanders would
push Clinton to the left, it appears it’s too late. She’s already there.

Hillary Clinton’s Iraq Dilemma
<http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/hillary-clintons-iraq-dilemma>
// New Yorker // John Cassidy - May 19, 2015

A week after it began, the flap over Jeb Bush and Iraq still hasn’t fully
died down. With his changing answers to the question that Megyn Kelly first
posed to him, last Monday on Fox News, about whether he would have ordered
an invasion in 2003 knowing what he knows now, the former Florida governor
has provided campaign reporters with something juicy to write about, and
Republican fretters with something to fret about.

If Dubya’s younger brother can’t avoid friendly fire in the confines of a
Fox News interview, how will he handle it when the campaign proper begins?*
The benign explanation is that he’s ring-rusty—thirteen years since his
last election, and all that. But, on Capitol Hill and elsewhere, darker
suspicions are lurking. Perhaps Bush isn’t up to speed on international
issues, or, worse, he’s too tied to his younger sibling to give the obvious
answer to Kelly’s question: “No, no, no—a thousand times, no.”

In Democratic circles, the sight of Bush floundering was a welcome one.
Barely had he emerged from the Fox interview when the Democratic National
Committee put out a video, entitled “Don’t Get Fooled Again,” which
intersperses his comments to Kelly with some footage from 2002 of George W.
saying “Fool me once, shame on me. … You can’t get fooled again.” The jabs
keep coming. In Monday’s Times, Paul Krugman, one of the few commentators
in the mainstream press who expressed skepticism in the run-up to the
March, 2003 invasion, took the opportunity to get in another dig at George
W. Bush, Don Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, et al, reminding his readers, “We
were lied into war.”

Since 2007 or thereabouts, opinion polls have consistently showed that a
sizable majority of Americans regard the Iraq invasion as a mistake. If the
Democrats were likely to field a candidate in 2016 who opposed the war all
along, they’d be in a position to exploit the issue for all it’s worth,
just as Barack Obama did in 2008. But, unless something unexpected happens,
the Democratic nominee will be Hillary Clinton, who, in October, 2002,
voted for a congressional resolution that authorized the use of force
against Iraq, and whose current take on the decision to go to war isn’t
terribly easy to distinguish from the one that Jeb Bush has stumbled into.

Bush’s position, as he explained it in his second clarification last week,
is the following: “ ‘Knowing what we know now, what would you have done?’ I
would’ve not engaged; I would not have gone into Iraq. That’s not to say
that the world is safer because Saddam Hussein is gone—it is significantly
safer. That’s not to say that there was a courageous effort to bring about
a surge that created stability in Iraq—all of that is true. … But we’ve
answered the question now.”

Clinton’s public statements, like Bush’s, have gone through several
iterations. In September, 2007, she argued that she hadn’t, in fact, voted
for a preëmptive war, and said, “Obviously, if I had known then what I know
now about what the President would do with the authority that was given
him, I would not have voted the way that I did.” Since many people regarded
the resolution, at the time it passed, in October, 2002, as a blank check
(twenty-one Democratic senators voted against it), this explanation didn’t
do Clinton much good, but she stuck with it throughout her 2008
Presidential campaign, refusing to describe her vote as a mistake. In her
2014 memoir, “Hard Choices,” Clinton changed tack, fessing up and saying
that she had relied heavily on prewar intelligence about Saddam’s programs
to build weapons of mass destruction. “I should have stated my regret
sooner and in the plainest, most direct language possible,” she wrote. She
went on, “I thought I had acted in good faith and made the best decision I
could with the information I had. And I wasn’t alone in getting it wrong.
But I still got it wrong. Plain and simple.”

That language was commendably clear. It means that Clinton and Bush are now
agreed upon the proposition that, knowing what we know now, invading Iraq
was an error. The two of them also agree that, once Saddam had been
overthrown, the U.S.-led occupation bungled things by not providing
adequate security inside Iraq. In her book, Clinton wrote that the United
States “went to war in Iraq with only half a strategy.” In his interview
with Kelly, Bush said, “Once we invaded and took out Saddam Hussein, we
didn’t focus on security first, and the Iraqis in this incredibly insecure
environment turned on the United States military because there was no
security for themselves and their families. By the way, guess who thinks
that those mistakes took place as well? George W. Bush.”

It was pretty rich of Jeb to cite his brother’s post-White House
ruminations in an effort to exculpate the tragic errors of the Bush
Administration. Nonetheless, Jeb’s statements to Kelly, in which he also
included a direct reference to Clinton’s 2002 vote, highlighted the dilemma
facing the Democratic front-runner. If she tries to use the Iraq issue
against the Republicans, by, for example, warning that a G.O.P. President
could end up blundering into another war, she will open herself to
criticisms, counterattacks, and endless rehashings of her 2002 vote.

Is there a way around this problem? I think that perhaps there is. Rather
than apologizing and complaining about faulty intelligence, Clinton could
say that we all make mistakes, but the key thing is what we learn from
them. In the case of the Republicans in general, and Jeb Bush in
particular, she could argue convincingly that the learning process has
hardly begun.

Despite Bush’s claim, during the big foreign-policy speech that he
delivered in Chicago in February, that “I’m my own man,” it has been widely
reported that he’s been consulting with some of his brother’s former
advisers, including Paul Wolfowitz, who famously said that the Iraqis would
“welcome us as liberators.” The speech itself relied on standard G.O.P.
boilerplate—“Weakness invites war. Strength encourages peace”—and was
devoid of novel ideas. Setting aside Rand Paul, who has virtually no chance
of winning the nomination, there is precious little evidence of new
thinking elsewhere in the Republican field, either. Indeed, Marco Rubio’s
speech last week at the Council on Foreign Relations suggests that the
candidates are trying to outdo each other in bellicosity.

Clinton, for her part, still has work to do to explain what she learned
from the Iraq disaster. Clearly, it didn’t turn her against the concept of
overseas military intervention. In 2011, as Secretary of State, she helped
orchestrate air attacks on Libya that aided in bringing down Muammar
Qaddafi, unleashing a civil war that is still raging. In 2013, after she
left office, she supported U.S. military action against the Syrian regime,
a course that President Obama eventually backed away from. In “Hard
Choices,” however, she struck a cautious note. “As much as I have wanted
to, I could never change my vote on Iraq,” she wrote. “But I could try to
help us learn the right lessons from that war … I was determined to do
exactly that when facing future hard choices, with more experience, wisdom,
skepticism, and humility.”

As the 2016 campaign unfolds, Clinton might want to say more about how her
views have changed, and how, as President, she would reconcile her urge to
exercise American power—both to protect U.S. interests and to do some good
in the world—with the harsh realities of experience. Such a discussion
would help shift attention away from her 2002 vote and allow her to draw a
contrast with the Republicans’ empty rhetoric. More importantly, it would
focus the campaign debate on the question that, ever since March, 2003, has
been hovering over practically everything: Whither America after Iraq?

In his measured responses to international crises and his occasional
flip-flops, President Obama has provided one answer, which harkens back to
the cautious realism of the former national-security advisers Zbigniew
Brzezinski and Brent Scowcroft. Would Clinton stick to Obama’s “Don’t do
stupid stuff” philosophy? Based on her history, some analysts suspect that
she remains, at heart, a neo-liberal interventionist, à la Tony Blair, or
even, perhaps, an old-school Democratic hawk from the Scoop Jackson school.
Understandably enough, given the controversy that followed critical remarks
that she made last summer about the U.S.’s cautious policy in Syria,
Clinton hasn’t said much during the past nine months that would help voters
place her on the foreign-policy spectrum. Now that she’s officially a
candidate for President, it’s time she helped them out a little.

I Don't Believe Hillary Clinton
<http://www.nationaljournal.com/2016-elections/i-don-t-believe-hillary-clinton-20150519>
// National Journal // Ron Fournier - May 19, 2015

I don't believe Hillary Rodham Clinton when she says—as she did at a brief
news conference on Tuesday—that she has no control over the release of her
State Department email. "They're not mine. They belong to the State
Department."

I don't believe her because a person's actions are more revealing than
words: She kept her government email on a secret server and, only under
pressure from Congress, returned less than half of them to the State
Department. She deleted the rest. She considered them hers.

I don't believe her when she says, "I want those emails out. Nobody has a
bigger interest in those being released than I do."

I don't believe her because I've covered the Clintons since the 1980s and
know how dedicated they are to what former Clinton spokesman Mike McCurry
called "telling the truth slowly." The fact is that she would rather delay
the document dump until early 2016—and then have the email released on a
single day to overwhelm the media and allow her to declare herself
exonerated. That was her strategic choice, Clinton advisers confirmed for
me, until a federal judge ordered the State Department on Tuesday to
release the email in stages.

I don't believe her answer to this question: Is there a conflict of
interest in accepting huge speaking fees from special interests seeking
government action? "No," she replied.

I don't believe her because I saw how hard Clinton and her husband,
then-Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton, worked to pass the state's first sweeping
ethics initiative. I don't believe her because I've heard Clinton and her
husband rail against GOP politicians who were guilty of less-obvious
conflicts of interest. I don't believe her because there have been far too
many credible news reports about the blurring of lines between family
finances, the family foundation, and her political and government interests.

I believe the public has a right to know whether any of the deleted email
involved correspondence about the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Foundation or its
donors. I believe she's getting bad advice: The hide-and-attack tactics of
the 1990s won't work as well—if at all—in a post-Internet era that honors
transparency, authenticity, and accountability.

I believe she wants us to take her at her word, but we can't—not even those
people like me who've known the Clintons long enough to respect their
service and appreciate their many virtues. It hurts to witness the
self-inflicted wounds and hemorrhaging of her credibility. But this is no
time for sentimentality.

Blind faith doesn't get you elected president.

I do believe she's right about one thing. "I made a mistake," Clinton said
about her Senate vote to authorize war against Iraq. "Plain and simple."

Hillary Clinton wants to allow felons to vote. That could mean a lot in a
state like Florida.
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/05/19/hillary-clinton-wants-to-allow-felons-to-vote-that-could-mean-a-lot-in-a-state-like-florida/>
// WaPo // Philip Bump - May 19, 2015

While in Iowa on Tuesday, Hillary Clinton mentioned a policy reform that
could affect the results of presidential races: Allowing ex-felons to vote.

Clinton is not the first 2016 candidate to raise this issue, nor is it the
first time that she's done so. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) has repeatedly
advocated for restoring voting rights for felons convicted of certain
crimes. At several points while she was in the Senate, including shortly
after she announced her 2008 candidacy, Clinton introduced the Count Every
Vote Act, which would have restored those rights to anyone not currently
incarcerated or not on parole or probation for a felony. We're still early
in the 2016 campaign, so it's hard to know if that's still the boundary
that Clinton sets.

As it stands, people who are convicted of felonies but are on parole can or
cannot vote depending on where they live, since rules on felon voting
differ by state. The Sentencing Project has a handy primer on the
differences. In 12 states, those convicted of a felony cannot vote even
after having repaid their debt to society -- sometimes for certain periods
of time, sometimes only for certain felonies. (In two states, Maine and
Vermont, there are no restrictions on the voting rights of felons, even if
incarcerated.) In total, some 5.8 million people are barred from voting in
the United States because of their criminal past, according to the
Sentencing Project's data.

University of Florida associate political science professor Michael
McDonald tries to tally how many ex-felons are disenfranchised by state at
his site United States Election Project. His methodology matches government
data on people under correctional control with the Sentencing Project's
outline of each state's laws. Moreover, McDonald collects data on voter
turnout in elections by matching ballots cast with the size of the voting
eligible population.

Assuming that Clinton's advocacy in 2016 matches what she's called for in
the past -- namely, restoring voting rights to those permanently
disenfranchised -- McDonald's data doesn't help us. He explains why:
"Time-series statistics on recidivism, deaths and migration of felons are
largely unavailable." In other words, the government tracks people who are
in prison or on parole, but once they're free, it's hard to determine where
they are or if they're even still alive. In other words, we can't know how
the Count Every Vote Act would change an election.

What if a proposal went further, restoring voting rights to those on
probation or parole and those in prison? What if the ineligible voters in
each state were suddenly eligible? We'll note that this hasn't been
proposed by any presidential candidate, and probably wouldn't be popular if
it were. But it's still illustrative.

Comparing the number of ineligible felons calculated by McDonald to the
voting-age population in each state shows how big a part of the state's
population was ineligible to vote due to restrictions. (We're using 2012
data since we're talking presidential politics.) In Georgia, the number of
ineligible felons constitutes 4.2 percent of the voting-age population of
the state, the highest value nationally.

So if we gave all of those people the right to vote, how many more voters
would that be? We took the overall turnout rate (again from McDonald) and
applied it to the ineligible population. This is purely speculative, of
course; there's a lot of variance among different populations in terms of
how heavily they turnout. Younger and poorer people vote less, for example.
Painting with a broad brush, then, the biggest increase in the vote would
have been in Texas (given its large population), followed by Georgia and
Florida.

That Florida example is interesting. If you look at the estimated vote
increase versus the margin of difference in the presidential race, Florida
sticks out. The number of people who could gain the right to vote and then
actually vote is twice the margin of victory for Obama in the state.
Florida is also one of the 12 states that bans voting from convicted felons
after they're out of institutional control -- in their case, for five
years. We don't know how many people that is, but it's safe to assume the
figure is in the thousands.

The core question here is not one of politics; it is a question of the
boundaries we're willing to put on the responsibilities of citizenship.
Clinton and Paul's argument is that we've put overly tight limits on those
convicted of crimes. But rolling back those limits more broadly than
Clinton proposed in 2007 could have real political implications --
particularly in the always-contested state of Florida.

Knowing politicians as we do, we doubt that this didn't enter into the
calculus.

Ohio Gov. John Kasich is right to "ban the box": editorial
<http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/05/gov_kasich_is_right_to_ban_the.html>
// Cleveland // Editorial Board - May 19, 2015

People shouldn't be able to hide from their past, but they shouldn't be
shackled by it either. That's why Ohio Gov. John Kasich did the right thing
by ordering state agencies to stop requiring job seekers to disclose on
their applications whether they have a prior criminal conviction.

The change in policy doesn't mean applicants don't have to come clean. They
will be asked during the interview process about any criminal history, and
could be subject to a background check. Waiting until then to inquire,
however, removes the possibility of a knee-jerk reaction based strictly on
an application form.

It allows an applicant to be judged first on his or her merits and then be
given a chance to explain the circumstances of their conviction. Sometimes,
perhaps many times, those circumstances and an applicant's attitude will
merit hiring.

Under Kasich's policy shift, certain jobs, such as wildlife officers or
employees handling state funds, will still be subject to initial
disclosures.

Sixteen states and a number of cities and counties – including Cleveland
and Cuyahoga County -- have joined the "ban the box" movement and stopped
requiring applicants for government jobs to check a box acknowledging a
criminal conviction. Six states – Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts,
Minnesota, New Jersey and Rhode Island – have placed the same restriction
on private employers, according to the National Employment Law Project.

In Ohio, where nearly 15 percent of the population has been convicted of a
crime, that might be the logical next step.

What I Told College Graduates
<https://medium.com/@VPOTUS/what-i-told-college-graduates-55c941fd1272> //
Medium // Vice President Biden - May 19, 2015

Everyone has different goals and aspirations. But one thing I’ve observed,
one thing I know, is the expression my dad would use, “it’s a lucky man or
woman gets up in the morning, puts both feet on the floor, knows what
they’re about to do, and thinks it still matters.”

No matter what you do or where you go, we are all striving towards the same
thing — to seek that sweet spot that satisfies both success and happiness.

My wish for every college graduate is that not only tomorrow, but twenty,
forty, fifty years from now, he or she has found that thing that allows
them to get up in the morning, put both feet on the floor, go out and
pursue what they love, and think it still matters.

Remember these points.

1. It’s All Personal

It all comes down to being personal.

It’s about being there for a friend or a colleague when they’re injured or
in an accident, remembering the birthdays, congratulating them on their
marriage, celebrating the birth of their child. It’s about being available
to them when they’re going through personal loss. It’s about loving someone
more than yourself.

Let me give an example.

After only four months in the Senate as a 30-year old kid, I was walking
into a meeting with Majority Leader Mike Mansfield of Montana. And I
witnessed another newly elected Senator — the extremely conservative Jesse
Helms excoriating Ted Kennedy and Bob Dole for promoting the precursor to
the Americans with Disabilities Act.

When I walked into Majority Leader Mansfield’s office, he looked at me and
said “What’s bothering you, Joe?” And I told him, “That guy Helms has no
socially redeeming value. He doesn’t care about people in need, the
disabled.”

Majority Leader Mansfield then proceeded to tell me that — Jesse Helms and
his wife — had three years earlier adopted a 14-year-old boy in braces up
to his hips.

He said, “Joe, it’s always appropriate to question another man’s judgment,
never his motives. Because you don’t know his motive.”

I felt like a jerk. But I began to look past caricatures of my colleagues
to try to see the whole person. And when I did, it seemed to break the ice.

Senator Helms and I continued to have profound political differences. But
the mutual defensiveness dissipated. And as a result — we began to be able
to work together.

So one piece of advice is try to look beyond the caricature of the person
with whom you have to work. Resist the temptation to ascribe motive,
because you really don’t know - — and it gets in the way of being able to
reach a consensus on things that matter to you and to many other people.

2. No one is better than you, every other person is equal to you and
deserves to be treated with dignity and respect.

I’ve worked with eight Presidents and hundreds of Senators and I’ve had
scores of talented people work for me. And here’s what I’ve observed:
regardless of their academic or social backgrounds, those who had the most
success and were most respected were the ones who never confused academic
credentials and societal sophistication with gravitas and judgment.

So don’t forget about what doesn’t come from a diploma — the heart to know
what’s meaningful and what is ephemeral; the head to know the difference
between knowledge and judgment.

3. Remember that reality has a way of intruding.

Life can change in a heartbeat.

Six weeks after my election, my whole world was altered forever when a
tractor trailer crashed into a station wagon and took the life of my wife,
13-month old daughter, and seriously injured my two young sons.

But because I had the incredible good fortune of an extended family
grounded in love and loyalty — and a sense of obligation which they
imparted to me — I not only got help, but focusing on my sons, who
survived, was my redemption.

I can remember my mother saying something I thought that was so cruel at
the time, “Joey, out of everything terrible that happens to you, something
good will come if you look hard enough for it.” She was right.

The incredible bond I have with my children is the greatest gift that could
ever be given.

And who knows whether I would have understood that if nothing happened.

I began to commute every single day for 37 years from Wilmington to
Washington — two hours each way — so I could kiss them goodnight, and kiss
them good morning the next day. I needed my children more than they needed
me. Some at the time wrote in the press and suggested that I couldn’t be
taken seriously because I didn’t stay in Washington to attend fancy events
or meet important people.

But I realized I didn’t miss a thing. Ambition is really important. You
need it. And I certainly have never lacked in having ambition. But ambition
without perspective can be a killer.

4. Engage the World Around You

You are part of an exceptional generation.

You’re the most tolerant generation.

You have the intellectual horsepower to make things better for the world
around you.

But intellectual horsepower and tolerance alone do not make a generation
great unless you can break out of the bubbles of your own making —
technological,
geographic, racial, and socioeconomic — to truly connect with the world
around you.

Because it matters.

No matter what your material success or personal circumstance, it matters.
You cannot breathe fresh air or protect your children from a changing
climate no matter what you make. If your brother can’t marry the man he
loves, then you are lessened. If your best friend has to worry about being
racially profiled, then you live in a circumstance not worthy of us.

So engage in the world around you.

Because you will be more successful and happier.

You can absolutely succeed in life without ever sacrificing your ideals or
your commitment to others and family.

That’s the honest truth.

My word as a Biden.

Lifelong Republican Turns On His Party, Embraces Obamacare
<http://thinkprogress.org/health/2015/05/19/3660701/luis-lang-obamacare/>
// Think Progress // Tara Culp-Ressler - May 19, 2015

Luis Lang, who is currently crowdfunding for medical expenses that he can’t
afford because he didn’t sign up for insurance under Obamacare, has become
a viral sensation. However, the 49-year-old South Carolina resident says he
doesn’t want to be the poster child for the Republican Party’s opposition
to health care reform anymore.

At the end of last week, the Charlotte Observer reported that Lang, a
lifelong Republican who’s previously prided himself on covering his own
medical bills, can’t afford to pay thousands of dollars to treat an issue
stemming from his chronic diabetes. Lang is suffering form bleeding in his
eyes and a partially detached retina, which will cause him to go blind if
left untreated. So he set up a GoFundMe page to solicit $30,000 in
donations to cover a costly surgery that will save his vision.

Since then, the story has been picked up in left-leaning outlets across the
country and covered in nationally syndicated newspaper columns. Obamacare
supporters flocked to Lang’s GoFundMe page to urge him to change his mind
about the health law.

In an interview with ThinkProgress, Lang joked that he might be the most
hated Republican in the country right now. But he also said that, thanks in
part to a flood of media attention that led him to learn more about health
care policy, he doesn’t identify with the GOP anymore.

“Now that I’m looking at what each party represents, my wife and I are both
saying — hey, we’re not Republicans!” Lang said. He added that, though he’s
not a political person by nature and has never voted solely along party
lines, he wants to rip up his voter registration card on national
television so Americans will have proof that he’s making the switch.

Although the Charlotte Observer article positioned Lang against the ACA, he
insists he has never been completely opposed to the law. He does, however,
have some issues with the way it’s been implemented.

Like many Americans, Lang struggled to navigate the website last year and
was frustrated by long wait times and technological glitches. He told
ThinkProgress he thinks the law is too confusing as it’s currently written
— and pointed out that it’s too difficult for him to predict his annual
income as a self-employed contractor, which is what prevented him from
signing up for a plan during previous enrollment periods. He was too
nervous about underestimating his income during the enrollment process and
being required to pay back his insurance subsidy during tax season.

But Lang’s main complaint is the fact that the Supreme Court ruled that
Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion should be optional, which has given
Republican lawmakers the opportunity to refuse to implement the policy on
the state level. That’s led to a coverage gap preventing millions of
Americans from accessing affordable insurance whatsoever. Because Lang’s
income has recently dried up, now that his deteriorating vision prevents
him from working, he now falls into that gap.

“I put the blame on everyone — Republican and Democrat. But I do mainly
blame Republicans for their pigheadedness,” Lang said. “They’re blocking
policies that could help everyone. I’m in the situation I’m in because they
chose not to expand Medicaid for political reasons. And I know I’m not the
only one.”

Lang said he’s read almost every comment on his GoFundMe page. He
acknowledged that a lot of people have criticized him for waiting until he
got sick to think about purchasing insurance, which is not how the health
care system is intended to function. But he insists that he and his wife
have been discussing getting coverage now that they’re getting older, and
notes that he tried his best to navigate the law last year.

“I know we didn’t do it the right way,” Lang told ThinkProgress, explaining
that he’s hoping to figure out the situation with his fluctuating income so
he can be the first in line to sign up for a plan during the next open
enrollment period.

He said he’s always tried to take responsibility for his own bills, but he
also believes that the United States should move toward a universal health
care system that makes coverage available to everyone regardless of their
income level. He said he “one hundred percent agrees” with the people who
commented on his crowdfunding page to argue that health care is a human
right.

“In fact, I have some eyesight jokes for you,” he added. “This whole thing
has helped me see more clearly. Like they say, hindsight is 20/20.”

MISCELLANEOUS

From Rob Russo:

Upgrades finalized for Roaring Brook Road rail crossing
<http://www.lohud.com/story/news/transit/2015/05/18/safety-improvements-coming-roaring-brook-road/27552941/>
// Iohud // Hoa Nguyen – May 19, 2015

More than three months after the deadliest train crash in its history,
Metro-North is working with other agencies to finalize upgrades to a nearby
railroad crossing in New Castle.

Roaring Brook Road is about eight miles from the Commerce Street grade
crossing in Valhalla where a commuter train and sport utility vehicle
collided Feb. 3, killing the motorist and five passengers.

"There's no question that Valhalla has motivated everyone to look and try
to do what we can do immediately," said New Castle supervisor Robert
Greenstein, who has been pushing for the upgrades.

Next week, crews are expected to begin the milling and repaving of the road
on both sides of the crossing and add new signs and improved pavement
markings.

"These are improvements that needed to be done really yesterday,"
Greenstein said.

But while the Valhalla crash may have expedited these short-term fixes,
Greenstein said ideally, officials will eventually approve construction of
a new bridge over the railroad tracks that would eliminate the grade
crossing and still allow traffic to pass by but he didn't believe the
financing of such a bridge project would be feasible anytime soon.

"Let's face it — the bridge is not being built tomorrow," he said.

The crossing has had a history of close calls. Earlier this month, the
railroad gate at Roaring Brook Road came down on a school bus, trapping it
only seconds before a passenger train passed by. The bus driver, who was
charged with stopping in the railroad right of way, a misdemeanor, stopped
about 15 feet further than she should have and tried to back up but stopped
when the gate caught on some brackets, New Castle police said. No one,
including two students on the short-style bus, were injured in the incident.

As part of the planned work, Roaring Brook Road will be closed at the
crossing in both directions for three days starting 7 p.m., May 29.

In Mount Pleasant, Supervisor Carl Fulgenzi, who has been petitioning the
Department of Transportation to close the Cleveland Street crossing where
Federal Railroad Administration records show there have been six accidents,
said he is still awaiting a decision from state officials.

Fulgenzi said he has heard the closing of the Commerce Street grade
crossing also may be a possibility but state and Metro-North officials have
not updated him on their plans if there are any.

"They did admit that they are two crossings they are paying attention to,"
he said.

A few days ago, Fulgenzi said he was at the crossing with lawyers from the
town's insurance carrier and the town police chief inspecting the site when
a motorist approached the crossing, drove around the gate and crossed to
the other side just as the lights began flashing, signaling the near
arrival of a train.

"God forbid there wasn't a train (passing by at the time)," Fulgenzi said.

MTA police chief Michael Coan said during a Monday Metro-North committee
meeting that his agency is monitoring grade crossing safety and have issued
97 violations — or about a third of all 293 summons issued through April.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "HRCRapid" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email-masked].
To post to this group, send email to [email-masked].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.