Subject: H4A News Clips 6.12.15
From: Alexandria Phillips <[email-masked]>
To: Alexandria Phillips <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 07:06:11 -0400
List-Id: <HRCRapid.hillaryclinton.com>

*H4A News Clips*

*June 12, 2015*

*LAST NIGHTS EVENING NEWS*

There was no 2016 coverage on any network news program. Instead, news
networks continued their coverage of the escaped prisoners. They also
discussed new developments related to ISIS and the Middle East, including
the US soldier who was killed, as well as U.S. strategy in the region.

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

*SOCIAL
MEDIA.................................................................................................
**4*

*Hilary Rosen (6/11/15, 9:13 am)* - on the @usairways shuttle to NYC. Not a
#HillaryClinton staffer in sight.
#CheapTranspoIsANewThing......................................................................................................
5

*Buzzfeed News (6/11/15, 9:52 am)* - JUST IN: @CNBC reporting that
@rupertmurdoch is preparing to step down as CEO from 21st Century Fox
*http://www.cnbc.com/id/102730161
<http://www.cnbc.com/id/102730161>*..............................................
5

*Eli Stokols (6/11/15, 10:10 am)* - Jeb says absent fathers "limit the
possibility of young people to live lives of purpose and
meaning."...............................................................................................................
5

*Benjy Sarlin (6/11/15, 10:17 am)* - Asked Jeb Bush about 1995 book
bemoaning lack of "shame" towards single motherhood. He said he'd "evolved"
but restated importance of issue...........................................
5

*WSJ (6/11/15, 4:08 pm)* - Breaking: Twitter CEO Dick Costolo is stepping
down July 1 *http://wsj.com <http://wsj.com>*              5

*Bernie Sanders (6/11/15, 5:01 pm)* - It's time to declare once and for
all: #BlackLivesMatter — on the streets and on the job. Read my piece in
@Medium: *http://bernie.to/dream
<http://bernie.to/dream>*..................................................
5

*David Drucker (6/11/15, 5:30 pm)* - .@tedcruz tells @hughhewitt that his
super PACs have BANKED $37 million, Interview broadcast this
evening.................................................................................................
5

*LAUNCH PREVIEW
STORIES............................................................................
**5*

*Story of Hillary Clinton’s Mother Forms Emotional Core of Campaign* // NYT
// Amy Chozick - June 12, 2015 5

*Hillary Clinton Plans to Show Her Roots in Rally Speech* // WSJ // Laura
Meckler – June 11, 2015.. 8

*With stories of mother's struggle, Clinton seeks reintroduction in first
major campaign speech* // AP // Lisa Lerer & Ken
Thomas............................................................................................................................
9

*Clinton's launch speech to focus on her mother's life* // Politico //
Annie Karni – June 11, 2015...... 11

*Inside the relaunch of Hillary Clinton* // Politico Magazine // Glenn
Thrush - June 12, 2015.......... 13

*Hillary Clinton: "It is your time"* // VOX // Jonathan Allen – June 11,
2015................................... 15

*Why is Hillary Clinton running for president? She'll answer that at a New
York rally* // LA Times // Evan Halper – June 11,
2015.............................................................................................................................
16

*Clinton plans personal kick-off speech, but Democrats want aggressive
agenda* // WaPo // Philip Rucker & Anne Gearan – June 11,
2015..............................................................................................................
18

*Hillary's rally and rationale: More Rodham, less Clinton* // CNN // Jeff
Zeleny & Dan Merica – June 11, 2015 21

*Hillary Clinton Will Evoke Roosevelt and Try to Ease Fears on Trust in New
York Speech* // NYT // Amy Chozick – June 11,
2015............................................................................................................................
23

*Hillary Clinton Plans to Re-Introduce Herself to Voters* // CBS News //
Stephanie Condon – June 11, 2015     26

*Hillary Clinton gets personal* // MSNBC // Alex Seitz-Wald – June 11,
2015................................. 27

*Hillary Clinton Will Push Personal Story at Campaign Launch* // TIME //
Sam Frizell – June 11, 2015               30

*At Launch Rally, Hillary Clinton to Tell Americans 'It Is Your Time'* //
Bloomberg News // Jennifer Epstein – June 11,
2015.............................................................................................................................
31

*Hillary Relaunch to Have 'Airport Style Security'* // The Weekly Standard
// Daniel Halper.......... 34

*HRC NATIONAL
COVERAGE............................................................................
**35*

*Hillary Clinton and Wishful-Thinking Politics* // NYT // Brendan Nyhan –
June 11, 2015.............. 35

*Virginia Is Latest Front in Democrats’ Voting Rights Battle* // NYT //
Maggie Haberman – June 11, 2015        36

*These 9 words prove that Bill Clinton still doesn’t get it on the Clinton
Foundation* // WaPo // Chris Cillizza – June 11,
2015............................................................................................................................
37

*She won’t back down. Or go away.* // WaPo // Kent Babb – June 11,
2015.................................... 38

*Clinton’s Donor Dominance Not Absolute* // WSJ // Peter Nicholas & Laura
Meckler – June 11, 2015 45

*Inside Hillary's house-party strategy* // Politico // Annie Karni – June
11, 2015............................ 47

*The Real Felony: Denying Prisoners the Right to Vote* // The Daily Beast
// Barrett Holmes Pitner – June 12,
2015................................................................................................................................................
50

*Hillary Rally Vs. the Gun Show at Iowa State Fair* // The Weekly Standard
// Jeryl Bier – June 11, 2015           52

*Hillary Clinton's Truth-O-Meter record* // Politifact // Lauren // Carroll
– June 11, 2015............... 53

*Change she can believe in: Clinton bets voters want more of the same, only
better* // LA Times // David Lauter – June 11,
2015............................................................................................................................
55

*Hillary Clinton's big bet: Stress toughness, tenacity, Democratic agenda*
// LA Times // David Lauter – June 11,
2015.........................................................................................................................................
59

*Centrist Dems wary of Hillary’s move to the left* // The Hill // Alexander
Bolton – June 11, 2015... 62

*Hillary Clinton's Economic Inequality Whisperer* // National Journal //
Eric Garcia – June 12, 2015 64

*THE LEGACY TRAP* // National Journal // Ronald Brownstein – June 12,
2015............................ 66

*POLITICAL INSIDERS POLL* // National Journal // Sarah Mimms – June 12,
2015....................... 68

*What Hillary Clinton Can Learn from Michelle Kwan's Figure Skating Career*
// The New Republic // Elspeth Reeve – June 11,
2015...............................................................................................................
70

*With boost from Clinton, efforts to expand voting access advance* // MSNBC
// Zachary Toth – June 11, 2015 71

*De Blasio says he will not endorse Hillary Clinton until she clearly
opposes Trans-Pacific Partnership* // NY Daily News // Jennifer Fermino –
June 11,
2015..................................................................................
73

*Dem operative Woodhouse says NYT retracted charges of illegality in
Clinton email story* // Politifact // Jon Greenberg – June 11,
2015.........................................................................................................
75

*Bill Clinton’s Labor Secretary Urges Hillary Clinton to Oppose TPP at
Kickoff* // The Observer // Jullian Jorgensen – June 11,
2015..........................................................................................................................
77

*Bill Clinton brushes aside foundation criticism* // CNN // Dan Merica –
June 11, 2015.................. 78

*'Conversation' with Hillary Clinton? That'll be $2,700* // Daily Mail //
AFP - June 12 2015............ 80

*Duggan's power now rivals Putin, Bill Clinton jokes* // Detroit News
Washington Bureau – June 11, 2015        82

*Speech inflation: Why Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and others get massive
speaking fees* // Fortune // Ben Geier – June 11,
2015.........................................................................................................................
83

*Clinton rally coincides with gun show at fairgounds* // The Des Moines
Register // Josh Hafner – June 11,
2015................................................................................................................................................
84

*Hillary Clinton Supports Women's Rights, Gay Rights in "Living History"
Instagram Video* // E! Entertainment – June 11,
2015............................................................................................................................
86

*Lady Gaga and Tony Bennett to sing for Hillary* // NY Post // Emily Smith
– June 9, 2015............ 86

*Quote Of The Day* // The Skimm – June 11,
2015........................................................................
87

*OTHER DEMOCRATS NATIONAL
COVERAGE................................................. **87*

*O’MALLEY...................................................................................................
**87*

*O'Malley: I haven't seen video of pool party brutality* // CNN //
Alexandra Jaffe & Betsy Klein – June 11,
2015................................................................................................................................................
87

*O’Malley touts progressive values, experience, results* // Quad City Times
// James Lynch – June 11, 2015    88

*SANDERS....................................................................................................
**89*

*Bernie Sanders Demands Hillary Clinton Take Trade Stance ‘Right Now’* //
NYT // Alan Rappeport – June 11,
2015.........................................................................................................................................
89

*Rival Challenges Clinton to Say Where She Stands on Trade* // AP // Ken
Thomas – June 11, 2015 90

*Bernie Sanders insists his momentum is no fluke* // Politico // Jonathan
Topaz – June 10, 2015... 91

*Bernie Sanders: Hillary Clinton's Silence on Trade Deal 'Offensive'* //
Bloomberg // Sahil Kapur – June 11,
2015................................................................................................................................................
93

*Sanders Explains Obama’s Biggest Mistake And What Clinton Is Doing Wrong*
// Buzzfeed // Evan McMorris-Santoro – June 11,
2015.............................................................................................................
95

*Bernie Sanders hires Elizabeth Warren 'draft' director for progressive
campaign* // The Guardian // Ben Jacobs – June 11,
2015............................................................................................................................
97

*Youth Unemployment and Dr. King’s Dream* // Medium // Bernie Sanders –
June 11, 2015.......... 98

*Sanders hires key Iowa staff members* // The Quad City Times // Ed
Tibbetts – June 11, 2015.... 100

*Sanders pushes paid vacation legislation* // Burlington Free Press //
Nicole Gaudiano – June 11, 2015             101

*OTHER......................................................................................................
**102*

*Bayh won’t seek Indiana Senate seat* // The Hill // Jonathan Easley – June
11, 2015.................. 102

*GOP...............................................................................................................
**103*

*BUSH.........................................................................................................
**103*

*Wall Street lining up for Jeb Bush campaign fundraiser in New York // WaPo*
// Matea Gold – June 11, 2015  103

*Jeb Bush’s legally nonexistent campaign has had a lot of problems* // WaPo
// Max Ehrenfreund – June 11,
2015...............................................................................................................................................
104

*In Europe, Jeb Bush sounds like Barack Obama* // Politico // Eli Stokols –
June 11, 2015............ 105

*Sean Hannity scores first Jeb Bush interview* // Politico // Hadas Gold –
June 11, 2015.............. 107

*Jeb Bush: 'Putin has changed' since brother George saw his 'soul'* // CNN
// Tom LoBianco & Dana Bash – June 11,
2015...................................................................................................................................
108

*Jeb Bush says view on unwed births ‘hasn’t changed at all’* // MSNBC //
Benjy Sarlin – June 11, 2015               111

*Jeb Hated Easy Divorce. So Did Hillary.* // The Daily Beast // Betsy
Woodruff – June 11, 2015.... 112

*RUBIO........................................................................................................
**114*

*Marco Rubio, like a lot of Americans, is terrible with money* // WaPo //
Jonnelle Marte – June 11, 2015           114

*Rubio And Five U.S. Congressmen Voted For Florida's 'Scarlet Letter'
Adoption Bill* // HuffPo // Laura Bassett – June 11,
2015...........................................................................................................................
116

*Is the GOP heartland ready to embrace Marco Rubio?* // LA Times // Lisa
Mascaro – June 11, 2015 117

*Liberals defend Marco Rubio against blistering New York Times attacks* //
Fox News – June 11, 2015               120

*PAUL..........................................................................................................
**121*

*How Rand Paul Has Already Changed the 2016 Race* // TIME // Joe Klein –
June 11, 2015.......... 121

*Rand Paul Signs on to Amendment Barring Ground Troops Against ISIS* //
Bloomberg // David Weigel – June 11,
2015........................................................................................................................................
122

*WALKER...................................................................................................
**123*

*Scott Walker Says Supporters Have Suggested Walker-Rubio 2016 Ticket* //
Bloomberg // John McCormick – June 11,
2015...................................................................................................................................
123

*CRUZ..........................................................................................................
**125*

*Ted Cruz under fire for Tennessee campaign chairman* // Politico // Adam
Lerner – June 11, 2015 125

*Ted Cruz fights GOP approach on Obamacare subsidies* // Politico // Manu
Raju – June 11, 2015 126

*Cruz ramps up attack on ObamaCare* // The Hill // Sarah Ferris – June 11,
2015......................... 127

*CHRISTIE..................................................................................................
**128*

*Chris Christie Lays Out Education Plan* // NYT // Nick Corasaniti – June
11, 2015....................... 128

*Top Chris Christie Aide Goes to His Political Action Committee* // NYT //
Maggie Haberman – June 11, 2015 130

*Christie: Debt-free college is 'wrong'* // Politico // Allie Grasgreen –
June 11, 2015...................... 131

*Christie slams rival for 'scaring' voters* // The Des Moines Register //
Jennifer Jacobs – June 11, 2015               131

*GRAHAM...................................................................................................
**132*

*Sen. Mark Kirk calls Lindsey Graham a 'bro with no ho'* // Politico //
Nick Gass – June 11, 2015... 132

*Lindsey Graham Introduces Abortion Bill* // RealClearPolitics // Andrew
Desiderio – June 11, 2015 133

*SANTORUM...............................................................................................
**134*

*Rick Santorum, moderate Republican?* // CNN // Alexandra Jaffe – June 11,
2015...................... 134

*Rick Santorum Says Economic 'Stagnation' Will Help Him Win in 2016* //
Bloomberg News // Mark Niquette – June 11,
2015...........................................................................................................................
136

*Rick Santorum signs ATR tax pledge* // The Washington Times // David
Sherfinski – June 11, 2015 136

*KASICH......................................................................................................
**137*

*Is John Kasich Too Cranky To Be President?* // NBC News // Perry Bacon –
June 11, 2015........... 137

*CARSON.....................................................................................................
**139*

*Ben Carson doesn’t want to talk about ‘the gay issue’* // MSNBC // Adam
Howard – June 11, 2015 139

*Ben Carson’s hot mess of a campaign: A predictably dysfunctional mish-mash
of fire-breathing rhetoric and insane policy ideas* // Salon // Simon Maloy
– June 11, 2015...................................................... 140

*Ben Carson: ‘The people are frustrated — they’re waking up’* // The
Washington Times // David Sherfinski – June 11,
2015...................................................................................................................................
141

*FIORINA....................................................................................................
**142*

*Fiorina's campaign-trail attacks leave out her own ties to Clinton* // LA
Times // Joseph Tanfani – June 11,
2015...............................................................................................................................................
142

*Carly Fiorina blasts media focus on her Hillary Clinton trolling* // The
Washington Examiner // Ashe Schow – June 11,
2015...........................................................................................................................
144

*OTHER......................................................................................................
**145*

*Fox News Adds G.O.P. Candidate Forum Amid Criticism of Debate Plans* //
NYT // Maggie Haberman            145

*The Koch brothers and the Republican Party go to war — with each other* //
Yahoo News // Jon Ward – June 11,
2015........................................................................................................................................
145

*'16 At 30 Thousand* // NBC // Carrie Dann & Andrew Rafferty – June
11,.....................................
152

2015........................................................................................................................................
152

*With Clinton bound for Sioux City, GOP piles on* // Sioux City Journal //
Bret Hayworth – June 11, 2015          153

*Republicans release anti-Hillary Clinton ad ahead of her Charleston visit
next week* // The Post & Carrier // Schuyler Kropf – June 11,
2015.................................................................................................
153

*Romney Hosting GOP Hopefuls at Utah Retreat* // RealClearPolitics //
Courtney Such – June 11, 2015             154

*TOP
NEWS.....................................................................................................
**155*

*DOMESTIC.................................................................................................
**155*

*Trade Fight Goes to the Wire* // WSJ // Siobhan Hughes, Kristina Peterson
& William Mauldin – June 11,
2015...............................................................................................................................................
155

*Democrats block cyber bill, leaving measure in limbo* // Politico // Tal
Kopan – June 11, 2015.... 158

*Dennis Hastert pleads not guilty on all counts* // CNN // Chris Frates,
Bill Kirkos and Tom LoBianco – June 11,
2015........................................................................................................................................
160

*INTERNATIONAL......................................................................................
**161*

*Obama Looks at Adding Bases and Troops in Iraq, to Fight ISIS* // NYT
//Peter Baker, Helene Cooper & Michael r. Gordon – June 11,
2015.............................................................................................................
161

*OPINIONS/EDITORIALS/BLOGS...................................................................
**164*

*Republicans must stop derailing the Benghazi committee* // WaPo // Elijah
Cummings – June 11, 2015          164

*The Battle for the 2016 Middle Ground* // WSJ // Daniel Arbess – June 11,
2015......................... 166

*How Bill Clinton and Teneo duped the State Dept. ethics dummies* // Leader
& Times // Dick Morris – June 11,
2015........................................................................................................................................
167

*SOCIAL MEDIA*

*Hilary Rosen (6/11/15, 9:13 am)*
<https://twitter.com/hilaryr/status/608985338644697088>* - on the
@usairways shuttle to NYC. Not a #HillaryClinton staffer in sight.
#CheapTranspoIsANewThing*

*Buzzfeed News (6/11/15, 9:52 am)*
<https://twitter.com/BuzzFeedNews/status/608995282068623362>* - JUST IN:
@CNBC reporting that @rupertmurdoch is preparing to step down as CEO from
21st Century Fox **http://www.cnbc.com/id/102730161*
<http://www.cnbc.com/id/102730161>

*Eli Stokols (6/11/15, 10:10 am)*
<https://twitter.com/EliStokols/status/608999833639227392>* - Jeb says
absent fathers "limit the possibility of young people to live lives of
purpose and meaning."*

*Benjy Sarlin (6/11/15, 10:17 am)*
<https://twitter.com/BenjySarlin/status/609001507984449537>* - Asked Jeb
Bush about 1995 book bemoaning lack of "shame" towards single motherhood.
He said he'd "evolved" but restated importance of issue*

*WSJ (6/11/15, 4:08 pm)* <https://twitter.com/WSJ/status/609089952115249153>*
- Breaking: Twitter CEO Dick Costolo is stepping down July 1 *
*http://wsj.com* <http://wsj.com>

*Bernie Sanders (6/11/15, 5:01 pm)*
<https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/609103144681897985>* - It's time
to declare once and for all: #BlackLivesMatter* * —* * on the streets and
on the job. Read my piece in @Medium: **http://bernie.to/dream*
<http://bernie.to/dream>

*David Drucker (6/11/15, 5:30 pm)*
<https://twitter.com/DavidMDrucker/status/609110550270894082>* - .@tedcruz
tells @hughhewitt that his super PACs have BANKED $37 million, Interview
broadcast this evening.*

*LAUNCH PREVIEW STORIES*

*Story of Hillary Clinton’s Mother Forms Emotional Core of Campaign*
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/13/us/politics/story-of-hillary-clintons-mother-forms-emotional-core-of-campaign.html>*
// NYT // Amy Chozick - June 12, 2015*

Dorothy Howell was 8 years old when her parents sent her away. It was 1927.
Her mother and father, who fought violently in the Chicago boardinghouse
where the family lived, divorced. Neither was willing to take care of
Dorothy or her little sister.

So they put the girls on a train to California to live with their
grandparents. It did not go well. Her grandmother favored black Victorian
dresses and punished the girls for inexplicable infractions, like playing
in the yard. (Dorothy was not allowed to leave her room for a year, other
than for school, after she went trick-or-treating one Halloween.)

Unable to bear it, Dorothy left her grandparents’ home at 14, and became a
housekeeper for $3 a week, always hoping to return to Chicago and reconnect
with her mother. But when she finally did, a few years later, her mother
spurned her again.

It took a long time for Hillary Rodham Clinton to fully understand the
story of her mother’s devastating childhood. But now, four years after her
death, Dorothy’s story is forming the emotional foundation of her
daughter’s campaign for president, and will be a central theme in her big
kickoff speech on Saturday.

Sharing that story is a shift for Mrs. Clinton, who in her 2008 campaign
was fiercely protective of her mother’s privacy and eager to project an
image of strength as she sought to become the first female commander in
chief. And in this campaign, her mother’s story may help address one of
Mrs. Clinton’s central challenges: convincing voters who feel they already
know everything about her that there is, indeed, more to know, and that she
is motivated by more than ambition.

“I think for Hillary it’s about learning, and her mother’s story is just
one of the big motivators of who she is,” said Ann Lewis, a former senior
adviser to Mrs. Clinton. “She couldn’t go back and do more for her mother,
but she could do more for other children who need protection or who need a
better chance.”

At the rally on Saturday on New York’s Roosevelt Island, the biggest public
event so far of her 2016 campaign, Mrs. Clinton will explain how her
mother’s experience shaped her life and inspired her to be an advocate for
children and families at the Children’s Defense Fund, and as a first lady,
senator and secretary of state.

Given the closeness of their relationship, it is striking that Mrs. Rodham
has been such a limited part of Mrs. Clinton’s biography.

Dorothy Rodham and her husband, Hugh, moved to Little Rock, Ark., in 1987
to help Mrs. Clinton take care of Chelsea when she was working full time as
a lawyer at Rose Law Firm. After Mr. Rodham died in 1993, Mrs. Rodham spent
more time at the White House, accompanying the first lady and Chelsea on
trips to India, China, Paris and Hawaii. She avoided the spotlight but
enjoyed her time in Washington, with movie nights, trips to the zoo and
margaritas at the Cactus Cantina.

At the 1996 convention, Mrs. Rodham vouched for her son-in-law, saying in a
brief video, “Everybody knows there is only one person in the world who can
really tell the truth about a man, and that’s his mother-in-law.”

But she also berated Mr. Clinton in the midst of the Monica Lewinsky
scandal and encouraged Mrs. Clinton to forge her own political career, said
several people who worked in the White House at the time.

After Mrs. Clinton was elected to the Senate from New York in 2000, Mrs.
Rodham moved to Washington to be closer to her daughter. At one point,
mother and daughter shared a two-bedroom apartment while the Clintons’
townhouse in Northwest Washington was being renovated to make a larger,
private space to accommodate Mrs. Rodham. “Hillary would get home after a
long day in the Senate and they’d just sit there and talk about their
days,” said Patti Solis Doyle, who worked for Mrs. Clinton from 1991 until
2008 and was campaign manager for much of her first presidential run.

When she was secretary of state, Mrs. Clinton would return from a trip and
plop down on the couch with her mom to hear about the latest twist in
“Dancing With the Stars,” her mother’s favorite television show.

Mrs. Clinton plans to spend time talking about her mother in a series of
campaign events in early nominating states next week. She wants to
highlight not only her mother’s background, but also the people, like
teachers, who were kind to Dorothy as a child as a way to pivot to Mrs.
Clinton’s philosophy that government and communities need to do their part
to lift the middle class.

In her 2014 book, “Hard Choices,’’ Mrs. Clinton described how one teacher
in elementary school, realizing that Dorothy was too poor to buy milk at
lunchtime, would buy two cartons herself every day and then say, “Dorothy,
I can’t drink this other carton of milk. Would you like it?’ ” The woman
who hired her as a teenage housekeeper took an interest in her, urging her
to finish high school and giving her clothes. Mrs. Clinton has said these
seemingly small gestures showed her mother the presence of goodness in the
world, and later made her a caring mother and grandmother.

Talking so extensively about Mrs. Rodham signals an evolution for Mrs.
Clinton, from a deeply private, reluctant politician to a 67-year-old
candidate who, according to her friends and aides, is running the campaign
she wants to run. Mrs. Clinton has spent weeks writing Saturday’s speech,
with the help of Dan Schwerin, a longtime aide and director of
speechwriting for the campaign.

A sympathetic tale of her mother’s struggles could help Mrs. Clinton
convince a struggling middle class that she understands their problems,
aides said. A CNN poll released on June 2 showed that 47 percent of voters
thought that Mrs. Clinton “cares about people like you,” down from 53
percent last July. Mrs. Clinton’s campaign aides have publicly shrugged off
such polls as evidence that voters distrust Washington and politics in
general, but privately they are strategizing about how to reframe the
conversation.

The idea of incorporating Mrs. Rodham’s story was floated during the 2008
Democratic primaries, when Mrs. Clinton’s advisers tested how Dorothy
Rodham resonated with focus groups in Iowa; the response was overwhelmingly
positive. But back then Mrs. Clinton was uneasy talking about her mother.

“It would be uncomfortable for any of us to talk about the struggles of any
of our family members in such a public way, especially when your family
members are living,” Ms. Doyle said. “And Dorothy was a very private
person.”

Mrs. Clinton was also fiercely private. When her husband first ran for
president in 1992, Mrs. Clinton vehemently shielded Chelsea and her parents
from the spotlight. She lost her temper when aides proposed a video of
Chelsea, to show that Bill Clinton was a good family man, to be broadcast
at the 1992 Democratic National Convention.

Mrs. Rodham died in 2011 at the age of 92. Her daughter has said that one
of her mother’s heartbreaks was that she was never able to attend college.
After she graduated from high school in California, her mother lured her
back to Chicago with a promise that her new husband would pay for tuition.
Dorothy dreamed of attending Northwestern University. But it turned out
that her mother had lied, and actually wanted her back in Chicago only as a
housekeeper. Eventually she found secretarial work.

“I’d hoped so hard that my mother would love me that I had to take the
chance and find out,” Mrs. Rodham once said. “When she didn’t, I had
nowhere else to go.”

*Hillary Clinton Plans to Show Her Roots in Rally Speech*
<http://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-clinton-plans-to-show-her-roots-in-rally-speech-1434066559>*
// WSJ // Laura Meckler – June 11, 2015*

Hillary Clinton plans to show how her policy prescriptions are rooted in
her family’s personal history during the first rally of her presidential
campaign, on Saturday.

Mrs. Clinton’s speech, to supporters gathering on New York City’s Roosevelt
Island, will portray her as a fighter who learned to navigate life’s
challenges from her mother, who was abandoned by her own parents but went
on to create a stable, middle-class upbringing for her children.

Aides said Mrs. Clinton will cite her mother’s example in explaining that
all children need someone in their corner. The story of Mrs. Clinton’s
mother is meant to address what campaign aides say is the central question
in the election-which candidate voters can count on to fight for them.

“She’s not a quitter, and you can count on her to grind it out and get the
job done,” said Jennifer Palmieri, the Clinton campaign communications
director, said of Mrs. Clinton. “We think it’s important people understand
where that conviction comes from.”

Mrs. Clinton will use Saturday’s rally, before an expected crowd of
thousands, in a sense to reintroduce herself to voters. After a long period
in public life, Mrs. Clinton is known for controversies ranging from the
so-called Whitewater scandal, an Arkansas land deal gone bad, during her
husband’s terms in the White House to recent issues surrounding her use of
a personal email account and server for her government work as secretary of
state. Mrs. Clinton will focus on other aspects of her biography-such as
her work as a young lawyer on behalf of children-to show that she
consistently fights for those needing help.

On Thursday, the Republican National Committee released a TV ad ahead of
the Saturday speech saying that Mrs. Clinton has lost public trust.
“Hillary Clinton’s latest campaign reset won’t change a thing,” RNC
Chairman Reince Priebus said in a statement. “Most people don’t think she’s
trustworthy, and she’s still out-of-touch with everyday Americans.”

From New York, she’ll travel to Iowa for a house party to be simulcast
across the state and an organizing event in Des Moines. Visits to the other
early voting states of New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada will
follow.The Saturday rally marks a new phase of Mrs. Clinton’s presidential
campaign. A candidate for two months, Mrs. Clinton so far has appeared at
small events, such as round table policy discussions. For the first time in
the race, Mrs. Clinton’s husband, former President Bill Clinton, and their
daughter, Chelsea, will appear with her on stage.

Each day of next week will have a biographical theme, Ms. Palmieri said.
The campaign is also producing a biographical video highlighting Mrs.
Clinton’s work, starting with her advocacy for children as a young attorney.

Aides said that Mrs. Clinton’s approach in reintroducing herself to voters
will address concerns expressed in some polls that voters don't find her
honest and trustworthy. “We think the question on voters’ minds is who can
you trust to fight for you?” Ms. Palmieri said.

No new policy details are expected in Saturday’s speech, though Mrs.
Clinton will mention many of her priorities if elected. They include
addressing college affordability and wage stagnation and expanding early
childhood education, all topics she’s mentioned on the campaign trail
already.

So far, Mrs. Clinton has expansively discussed her views on social policy
such as immigration, voting rights and gay rights, but she offered few
details of her economic plan, such as how to approach Wall Street
regulation, how much to raise the minimum wage and whether she would
advance a pending Pacific rim trade deal.

Aides said Saturday’s speech was the not the right venue to flesh out
policy details and that more policy details will come in speeches beginning
next month.

Despite Mrs. Clinton’s long experience in the public eye, her advisers say
many people still don’t know important parts of her personal history,
including the story of her mother, Dorothy Rodham.

Mrs. Rodham’s parents divorced, and neither one wanted their two daughters,
Mrs. Clinton wrote in her book “Hard Choices,” where said her mother’s
childhood had been marked by “trauma and abandonment.”

The Rodham girls were sent to live with grandparents, who Mrs. Clinton
described as severe and unloving. After high school, young Dorothy Rodham
moved to Chicago in hopes of reconnecting with her mother but was spurned
again.

Mrs. Clinton wrote that she learned from her mother to face adversity
through perseverance and to “never quit.’’

*With stories of mother's struggle, Clinton seeks reintroduction in first
major campaign speech*
<http://www.newser.com/article/4e9c2155b6424ee4be46e472bd8b17ca/with-stories-of-mothers-struggle-clinton-seeks-reintroduction-in-first-major-campaign-speech.html>*
// AP // Lisa Lerer & Ken Thomas*

Hillary Rodham Clinton, one of the best-known figures in American politics,
will seek to reintroduce herself to voters on Saturday by telling the story
of her mother's childhood struggles, pitching her 2016 presidential
campaign as a fight on behalf of such everyday Americans.

In the first major speech of her bid for the Democratic nomination, Clinton
plans to pay tribute to the hard work of Americans who she'll argue helped
the country emerge from the Great Recession, saying they deserve to be
rewarded for their sacrifices.

"It is your time," Clinton will say, according to aides who described the
speech she'll deliver from New York City's Roosevelt Island.

While Republicans have already spent months seeking to make the 2016
election a referendum on Clinton, her speech aims to present the decision
facing voters as more than just an assessment of her career as a former
first lady, New York senator and secretary of state.

Instead, her campaign wants to cast the race as a choice about the economic
future of the middle class. Among her campaign aides, Clinton refers to the
election as a "job interview" and the question before voters as a "hiring
decision."

"We think the question is: Can I count on you to be that person who is
going to fight for me?" said Jennifer Palmieri, the Clinton campaign's
communications director. The speech, Palmieri said, will showcase Clinton's
differences with a large, and what she will describe as a monolithic,
Republican presidential field.

Her remarks also represent an effort by her campaign to cast off the shadow
of scandal that has dogged her over the past several months. Clinton has
seen her personal approval ratings drop amid questions about her wealth,
use of a private email account and server as secretary of state, and the
financial dealings of her family charity.

The emphasis on her late mother, Dorothy Rodham, is a change in course from
Clinton's failed White House bid in 2008, when her campaign focused on her
experience and toughness, presenting her as an American version of the late
British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.

Rodham died in 2011 after a life that has been described as Dickensian.
Abandoned at a young age by her parents, she was sent as an 8-year-old with
her 3-year-old sister on a four-day journey to live with strict, unloving
grandparents in California. At the age of 14, she left their house to work
for three dollars per week as a mother's helper.

She eventually arrived in Chicago, where she married Hugh Rodham, a
traveling salesman, and raised Clinton and her two brothers. In her nearly
four decades of public life, Clinton has often cited her mother as an
inspiration, recounting how she pushed her daughter to stand-up for
herself. One of her earliest memories, Clinton has said, is her mother
telling her to challenge a neighborhood bully.

"I said, just go out there and show them you're not afraid," Rodham said in
a rare 2004 interview with Oprah Winfrey. "And if she does hit you again,
which she kept doing, hit her back."

While Rodham largely stayed out of the public eye, Clinton has long
credited her mother with giving her a love of learning and a sense of
compassion. "She has empathy for other people's unfortunate circumstances,"
Rodham said of her daughter in a 2007 campaign ad. "I've always admired
that because that isn't always true of people."

Clinton will be joined by her husband, former president Bill Clinton, and
daughter, Chelsea, at Saturday's rally, marking the first time the family
has been seen together in public since Clinton announced her intention to
again run for the White House in early April.

After the speech, she'll embark on a tour of early voting states, with
events focused on her relationship with her mother, work as a young lawyer
on behalf of poor children, and her father's background as a veteran and
small businessman.

In the coming weeks, her campaign will begin rolling out specific policy
initiatives on issues including college affordability, jobs and the
economy. Those policies, campaign aides argue, will help build Democratic
enthusiasm for her bid, despite the lack of a serious primary challenge.

"They're a great organizing tool," said Marlon Marshall, Clinton's head of
early state strategy.

*Clinton's launch speech to focus on her mother's life*
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/clintons-launch-speech-to-focus-on-her-mothers-life-118907.html>*
// Politico // Annie Karni – June 11, 2015*

After nearly two and a half decades in the glare of the public spotlight,
Hillary Clinton will reintroduce herself on Saturday by highlighting her
personal journey marked heavily by the deprivations faced by her own mother.

Starting with the story of her mother’s abusive and traumatic childhood,
Clinton will explain the role her family played in making her an advocate
for other people, campaign officials told POLITICO, previewing the highly
touted speech on New York’s Roosevelt Island that will set the tone for the
rest of her campaign. (Chelsea and Bill Clinton will attend, but Bill
Clinton will have no speaking role.)

That personal focus will be driven home by the release, shortly afterwards,
of a biographical video about Clinton’s career as a fighter for the
middle-class, dating back to her work for the Children’s Defense Fund after
graduating from law school.

While Clinton has often spoken in recent months about her pride in becoming
a grandmother, it is another matriarch, Dorothy Rodham, who will be the
binding theme in her remarks Saturday.

Dorothy Rodham’s dysfunctional and abusive parents shipped her off to live
with her grandparents in California when she was 8. But the grandparents
proved no more capable of caring for a young child. By age 14, Rodham had
fled from her grandparents home to live with a family working as a
housekeeper earning $3 a week.

It was there that Rodham for the first time saw what a functional family
acted like, Clinton will say. And it is her mother’s surrogate family, she
will say, who first motivated her to be a champion for everyday Americans
who need an outside advocate to help them achieve a better life.

“Her story is wanting to be an advocate for other people. Where does it all
come from? That’s where it all comes from,” said communications director
Jennifer Palmieri, referring to Dorothy Rodham’s story. “We think that’s an
important thing for people to understand. Some people know it, we think a
lot of people don’t.”

In her memoir, “Living History,” Clinton wrote of her mother’s tragic
childhood: “I thought often of my own mother’s neglect and mistreatment at
the hands of her parents and grandparents, and how other caring adults
filled the emotional void to help her.” That is the theme she will strike
Saturday.

It’s been decades since Clinton lived a life that could be relatable to any
of the voters she seeks to represent. Hillary and Bill Clinton together
earned more than $30 million since 2014 alone, according to a recent
financial disclosure.

But the focus on her mother’s childhood and her own middle-class upbringing
in suburban Chicago allows Clinton to draw on personal stories relatable to
the “everyday Americans” she seeks to represent.

She is also expected to strike an economic populist message in explaining
her vision for the country. She will state that prosperity should not be
reserved for CEOs and hedge fund managers, but should be available to
everyday Americans, according to campaign officials.

Her message to middle-class families struggling to make it: “It is your
time.”

Clinton is not expected to roll out and detailed policy proposals in the
speech, which campaign officials described as the “foundational document”
of her campaign. Those detailed policy proposals will begin to be rolled
out in July, with her platform on student loans, and continue into the fall.

But Clinton will outline some of the fights she wants to take on,
including: college affordability, early childhood education, national
security and wages, Palmieri said.

And she will say frame the race as a clear choice for Americans, between
Clinton’s ideas and the Republicans’ top-down economic policies, like lower
taxes for the rich and fewer regulations for corporations. On social
policies, she will frame the Republican field as out of touch with where
the country has moved.

“The question of the campaign is, who is the candidate in the race who
understands what my life is like, what the problems are, has solutions and
is going to hang in and fight for me everyday and get things done,”
Palmieri said. “There’s not any candidate that’s better qualified than her
to be that fighter for people.”

Clinton, Palmieri said, is still in the process of editing her own speech,
and has spent a lot of time figuring out how best to frame her first
big-picture pitch to voters.

Campaign officials said despite the fact that Clinton has been on the
national stage for over two decades, it was important to her and to them to
tell her family story again.

“We’re starting from scratch here,” Palmieri said. “We’re going through all
the paces and explaining why you’re motivated to have been an advocate in
the first place. we think it’s an important part of the process.”

Wonk Warrior

*Inside the relaunch of Hillary Clinton*
<http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/06/hillary-clinton-2016-wonk-warrior-118910.html#ixzz3cqIu3GIg>*
// Politico Magazine // Glenn Thrush - June 12, 2015*

Hillary Clinton hasn’t always been a profile in political courage, but
she’s had her moments. One of them came in late December 2006, a month
before Clinton announced her first run for the presidency, as she huddled
with her team to discuss policy proposals to differentiate her from two
rivals flanking her on the left, Barack Obama and John Edwards.

The conversation, which included former Clinton White House aides like Gene
Sperling and Neera Tanden, who still have the candidate’s ear today, bogged
down on the biggest, nastiest policy fight of her life, health care.
Several of Clinton’s top advisers, the ’90s debacle fresh in everyone’s
mind, counseled her to avoid proposing an individual mandate, the
politically unpopular requirement that the uninsured buy insurance or face
penalties.

When it came to the widely unpopular individual mandate, however, she was
adamant about plowing ahead, according to a former aide who related the
story.

“If I run for president, I’m going to run on universal health care,”
Clinton told the group—and authorized attacks on her Democratic opponent
Obama for opposing a mandate (he would eventually embrace it as president,
much to Clinton’s amusement).

“What’s the point of running if I’m not going to run on universal health
care?” she asked her team.

Eight years later, on the eve of Clinton’s formal campaign kickoff in New
York this weekend, the “what’s the point of running?” question looms over
the presumptive Democratic front-runner and her campaign. Over the past few
months, even some of Clinton’s most fervent and loyal supporters have
fretted to me, over and over, that she hasn’t yet articulated a compelling
rationale for her second race for the White House beyond the sense that
it’s finally her turn and her political view that she’s facing a relatively
weak Republican field.

Clinton is no Teddy Kennedy, who suffered the most infamous case of lockjaw
in political history when asked why he wanted to be president during the
1980 campaign; Her problem is that she’s far more interested in the how
than the why of the presidency, and views her greatest assets as a
willingness to engage all participants in a debate and a workmanlike
capacity to hammer out policy solutions.

Clinton’s big speech will be a rare opportunity to change that narrative.
It will be held at New York’s Roosevelt Island—a none-to-subtle signal that
she’s aligning herself with FDR, the boldest of Democratic presidents and
the one who established the deepest personal connection with
voters—something Clinton has struggled to do throughout her three-decade
career. And she’ll do so with a broad progressive agenda, her advisers told
me, studded with policy proposals to be unveiled in greater depth in a
series of speeches this summer, starting with an ambitious plan to cut
student debt and lower tuition and a program to coax corporations into
paying their workers more. Clinton’s staff believes this is where the
campaign will be won or lost—it will signal to voters, and to ideologically
driven Obama donors, that she’s every bit as committed to their cause as
Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders—or the Hillary Clinton of 1993 for that
matter.

This isn’t some pro forma exercise for Clinton, who started her
professional career working on child welfare programs and sits, poolside,
with briefing books when she’s on vacation. Policy is what Hillary Clinton
lives for, and her team is committed to portray her as a wonk warrior,
which has the added virtue of being true. In 2008, the candidate emphasized
her inevitability and her toughness (she was obsessed with the idea that
male voters would view a woman as a weak potential commander-in-chief), but
for 2016, she’s building her strategy around a series of domestic policy
rollouts.

How she’s doing this is equally telling: Advisers told me it was an
elaborate, even West Wing-style policy process, with concentric circles of
advisers and pollsters who are cooking up a comprehensive economic policy,
some of which will be for public consumption, some of which will be
employed if she’s elected. Over the past year, Clinton has quietly met with
a rotating—and sharp-elbowed—cast of Democratic economic experts,
pollsters, staffers and advocates to craft a just-so economic program to
attack wage stagnation and economic inequality. The very explicit goal has
been political: to invent a program for Clinton that captures the popular
imagination—and, to no small extent, redefines a candidate with a
trustworthiness problem.

“We’re talking about three- and four-hour meetings, briefing papers, weeks
of back-and-forth,” says Clinton’s communications director Jennifer
Palmieri, who says the candidate will unveil pieces of her agenda, one by
one, in a series of events starting in July and stretching to the fall.
“This is the foundational work of the election. She’s a wonk. This is stuff
she loves to do.”

What’s emerging—and her staff maintains she’s made no big decisions on the
stickiest subjects, such as whether to propose tax increases and Wall
Street regulation—are classic Clinton thread-the-needle proposals, albeit
with a slightly sharper needle, pointing unmistakably to the left.

Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz had a one-on-one meeting with Clinton last
December to discuss his aggressive progressive agenda, pushing for deep tax
cuts against the wealthy and pay cuts for CEOs. She already knew the
subject inside out, he told me, and probed him for details on how some of
his proposals could be implemented. Like most of the economists and
advocates she’s met with recently, Stiglitz left satisfied he’d gotten a
fair hearing, but with no concrete commitment.

“I would be surprised at this point that she would want to make it clear
where she is going on the specifics, so I wouldn’t expect to hear that from
her anytime soon,” said Stiglitz, who worked on Bill Clinton’s economic
team—then went on to become one of the country’s most influential champions
of economic equality. “My sense was that she was very responsive to the
overall agenda. … It’s important for her to get elected, but we want to
make sure that she understands that we have to deal with the failure of the
system overall, and not just make small changes.”

The goal, according to a dozen people close to the process who spoke to
POLITICO, is to find the “sweet spot”—bold solutions that aren’t too bold.
She has tasked her small in-house policy team led by former State
Department aide Jake Sullivan with a pragmatic mission: Attack the biggest
problems—higher education debt, a tax system that encourages short-term
gain over long-tern investments, out-of-control CEO pay, crumbling
infrastructure, the non-job-security “gig” economy, women’s pay equity—in a
way that satisfies a restive left wing of the party. But do it without
needlessly alienating general election voters, or potential donors.

“She wants to do just enough,” is how one New York-based Clinton donor who
speaks to both Clintons regularly put it.

***

As important—and complex—as the health care debate was seven years ago when
Clinton last ran for president, it’s dwarfed today by the sheer magnitude
of the structural problems in the American economy, a sapping of dynamism
and middle-income purchasing power that has given consumers (and voters) a
permanent sense of the blahs, even as big banks and corporations book
record profits.

*Hillary Clinton: "It is your time"*
<http://www.vox.com/2015/6/11/8768601/Hillary-Clinton-rally-Roosevelt>* //
VOX // Jonathan Allen – June 11, 2015*

Trying to shed an image of elitism, Hillary Clinton will deliver a concise
message for the masses during her first big campaign rally Saturday: "It is
your time."

The 2016 Democratic presidential frontrunner is scheduled to speak at Four
Freedoms Park on New York's Roosevelt Island, a site that offers the
symbolism of linking herself to Franklin Roosevelt, the well-to-do
president whose New Deal social programs provided work and financial
security for Americans during and after the Great Depression.

The Clinton campaign on Thursday released a basic sketch of the themes of
her speech, which is being billed as the formal announcement of a campaign
that began two months ago. Since then, she has focused on raising money and
meeting with voters in small groups in early primary states.

Now Clinton is ready to articulate her motivation for seeking the
presidency, her vision for the country, and the contrast she will draw with
her Republican rivals for the job, according to her campaign. The last
point, which will be driven by a populist argument that Republican policies
benefit those in the top economic strata, connects to Clinton's main theme:
She wants to be the champion for what she calls "everyday Americans."

Her mother's example

She will also lean heavily on the story of her late mother to explain her
rationale for public service and seeking the presidency, a choice that
appears to reflect her desire to talk more about her personal life — and
about her gender — in this campaign than she did in her failed 2008 bid.

"She is a well-known figure, but when you're asking the American people to
support you as president, even if it is for the second time, there is no
skipping of steps. If you want to understand Hillary Clinton, and what has
motivated her career of fighting for kids and families, her mother is a big
part of the story," Clinton campaign communications director Jennifer
Palmieri said in a statement. "The example she learned from her mother's
story is critical to knowing what motivated Hillary Clinton to first get
involved in public service, and why people can count on her to fight for
them and their families now."

Her campaign also revealed that she will use a video to show biographical
highlights of her career.

Clinton advisers have said the speech will provide the basic architecture
for specific policies she intends to detail over the course of the summer,
but her campaign did not offer any insight into what exactly she will say
about her platform on Saturday.

*Why is Hillary Clinton running for president? She'll answer that at a New
York rally*
<http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-clinton-speech-preview-20150611-story.html>*
// LA Times // Evan Halper – June 11, 2015*

llary Rodham Clinton will forcefully lay out her motivation for running for
president during a major rally in New York on Saturday, campaign officials
say, drawing from her personal story to frame the theme of a White House
run that some Democrats worry has lacked in inspiration.

In her formal announcement speech at Four Freedoms Park, on a small city
island named after Franklin D. Roosevelt, Clinton will talk about how the
tough childhood experiences of her mother drove her to enter public
service. She will seek to dispel the notion that she is running because it
is her turn to inherit the Democratic nomination and offer instead a
personal, detailed biographical sketch that campaign advisors say will make
a compelling case for why the White House is her calling.

The speech will be Clinton’s most expansive since she announced her
candidacy in April, and it provides an opportunity to reboot a campaign
that is way ahead in the polls but has yet to spark the kind of enthusiasm
among the grass roots that twice carried Barack Obama to victory. Advisors
have been working on the address for weeks. They are seeking to replicate
for Clinton the kind of response Obama triggered with his 2007 kickoff
address in Springfield, Ill., where he presented himself as an agent of
change and hope.

“This is an important foundational moment for the campaign,” said Jennifer
Palmieri, Clinton’s communications director. “If she wins, this is how she
will govern. ... She has been working on this for a while."

The absence of any formidable opponent has allowed Clinton to run a
cautious campaign, sticking to boilerplate Democratic issues and mostly
avoiding answering questions from the media. Campaign officials say her
approach will change as she moves into this new phase of her run. The
roundtables with handpicked audiences will soon be accompanied on the
calendar by larger, unscripted events such as town halls and news
conferences.

But like everything else in the Clinton campaign, Saturday’s speech will be
carefully crafted. The setting is notable for its associations with
Clinton’s own background. New York was where she launched her political
career, serving the state as a U.S. senator. Roosevelt Island is, of
course, named for the architect of the New Deal, and Clinton’s messaging –
if not her actual policy proposals – borrows heavily from the time.

“She will talk about the principles behind FDR’s policies that continue to
be true to the Democratic Party,” Palmieri said. “He is someone that she
has admired and been inspired by.”

Some parts of the speech that campaign officials previewed Thursday, in
fact, could just as easily have come from Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, the
self-described democratic socialist who is also running for the nomination,
albeit as a major underdog to Clinton. She will say that hedge fund
managers and bankers need to take more responsibility for the welfare of
the country, ostensibly by contributing more of their earnings to
government. She will herald “everyday Americans” for making sacrifices that
mended the national economy and proclaim it is their turn to be rewarded,
announcing, “It is your time.”

Clinton will be accompanied in New York by her husband, former President
Clinton, and their daughter, Chelsea. It will be the first time the family
has appeared together at a campaign event since Clinton announced her run.

The candidate was notably absent from another major family event this week,
the annual gathering of the Clinton Global Initiative in Denver. It's part
of the family's foundation, which has been a source of relentless negative
press for Clinton of late, as reporters investigate the millions of dollars
in donations it received from foreigners with business interests in America
while she was secretary of State.

Hillary Clinton attacks Republicans over voting restrictions

Saturday’s rally will be followed by a whirlwind of events in early caucus
and primary states. Clinton will be in Iowa by nightfall on Saturday, in
New Hampshire on Monday and then off to campaign events in South Carolina
and Nevada by the middle of next week. Clinton will tease some of the big
policy proposals the campaign will unveil over the summer.

Whether the speech will live up to the billing of campaign officials as an
event that will give voters a personal connection to Clinton remains to be
seen – many of the proclamations Clinton intends to make in it seem a mere
amplification of points she has been raising already in more intimate
settings.

But the goal is to supplant what voters may think they know about Clinton’s
personal story with a more textured portrait to which they can relate and
find inspiration in.

“People know she is a fighter who does not quit and hangs in there,”
Palmieri said. “It is important that they understand where this comes from.
… She has been on the national stage for a long time, but we think there is
a lot to fill in. When you are asking people to put their faith in you to
be their president, it is a big ask."

Clinton will talk in detail about her mother, the late Dorothy Rodham, who
was abandoned as a child, sent to California to live with harsh and
unloving grandparents, and found redemption in her early teen years through
the kindness of an employer who provided cheap room and board and
encouraged her to finish high school.

“Clinton will discuss how her mother shaped the person she is today and why
she could not duck away from this fight,” said a preview from the campaign.
Clinton will attribute her “fighter’s instinct” to her mother, according to
the campaign, as well as her belief that “everyone needs a champion.”

The speech will be accompanied by a major social media push, centered on a
video the campaign is producing about the “fights Hillary Clinton has taken
on during her career.”

*Clinton plans personal kick-off speech, but Democrats want aggressive
agenda*
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clinton-plans-personal-kick-off-speech-but-democrats-want-aggressive-agenda/2015/06/11/4bc107e6-1077-11e5-9726-49d6fa26a8c6_story.html>*
// WaPo // Philip Rucker & Anne Gearan – June 11, 2015*

Democratic activists have been hungry for their presidential front-runner
to articulate a detailed and aggressive path forward on issues ranging from
the economy to the environment to gay rights.

Hillary Rodham Clinton will begin her effort to meet those expectations on
Saturday when she formally kicks off her 2016 campaign with a major speech
in New York City.

At an outdoor rally on Roosevelt Island, Clinton will cloak her candidacy
in the symbolism of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the New Deal as she
offers her rationale for running and her vision for a more activist federal
government.

But Clinton is not planning to offer specific policy prescriptions — at
least not yet. Instead, her advisers said Thursday, she will speak about
her upbringing as the daughter of a woman who was abandoned as a child and
why she sees herself as an advocate for those left behind in a
fast-changing economy. She also intends to draw contrasts with Republicans,
portraying them as champions of corporations and the super-rich.

“It’s a big speech, but it’s not the venue to do a lot of specifics on
individual pieces of policy,” said Jennifer Palmieri, the Clinton
campaign’s communications director. “The speech is the cornerstone of the
campaign — that’s how she looks at this. It’s the foundation from which you
run the rest of the campaign, and if she is elected president it’s the
foundation of how you govern.”

“She can’t just be a tribune of the Democrats,” said Robert Reich, a
liberal economist who served as labor secretary in former president Bill
Clinton’s administration. “It would be useful for her to make a very strong
economic statement about why inequality is eating away at our economy, our
democracy and the moral fabric of the country.”

Clinton’s speech comes amid an intense debate on Capitol Hill over an
Obama-backed trade bill that has divided Democrats. Clinton, who as
secretary of state was involved in negotiating the trade deal, so far has
been careful not to take a position — much to the chagrin of labor unions
and liberal leaders, who are pressuring her to oppose it.

New York Mayor Bill de Blasio (D) — who was campaign manager on Clinton’s
2000 Senate run but has not yet endorsed his former boss — said he wants to
see her make “a very clear statement that this trade deal should be opposed
and should be stopped.”

Otherwise, De Blasio suggested, she could jeopardize the support of
working-class voters in places like Ohio and Pennsylvania who were central
to her 2008 campaign. “I think it’s very important that she speak up and
say there will be no more NAFTA’s,” he said, referring to the controversial
North American Free Trade Agreement of the 1990s.

It is unclear whether Clinton intends to mention trade. Her campaign aides
previewed a markedly personal address framed around the wrenching story of
her late mother, Dorothy Rodham, who was abandoned and mistreated as a
child and whom Clinton has credited with giving her lessons of hope and
perseverance.

The heavy emphasis on Clinton’s personal story is part of a rebranding
strategy to humanize a candidate who sometimes comes across as chilly and
aloof. Her husband, Bill, and their daughter, Chelsea, plan to appear with
her on Roosevelt Island — their first appearance of the campaign.

Shortly after the speech, Clinton’s campaign will release a biographical
video that casts the candidate as a fighter and advocate, dating to the
earliest days of her adult life.

“The speech is about her — what I think is the diagnosis of the problems in
the country, this is my vision of where I want to take the country, here
are my solutions,” Palmieri said.

Clinton’s solutions, however, will not come until later this summer and
fall when she gives a series of policy speeches.

Across the Democratic coalition, expectations for Saturday’s event vary.
Behind the scenes, environmentalists have been pressing Clinton aides to
ensure she prioritizes global warming in her remarks and signal she would
be more aggressive than Obama in tackling greenhouse gas emissions.

“We believe this speech is a great opportunity for her to make crystal
clear that she cares deeply about addressing climate change and will make
it a top priority throughout her campaign,” said Tiernan Sittenfeld, senior
vice president for government affairs at League of Conservation Voters.

Gay rights activists hope Clinton champions priorities beyond legalizing
same-sex marriage, such as passing comprehensive federal non-discrimination
legislation.

“It would benefit her and it would certainly benefit members of our
community to see her dedicate herself and be on the record about her
commitment to a more inclusive America for all of its people,” said Fred
Sainz, a vice president at the Human Rights Campaign.

Meanwhile, economic progressives, many of whom tried unsuccessfully to
draft Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) into the race, want to see Clinton
address economic inequality with specific solutions. Will she call for
busting up the big banks? Raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans?
Closing the carried interest tax loophole that benefits hedge fund
managers? Tougher anti-trust regulations?

“I would love to see some specifics — expanding Social Security, debt-free
college, holding Wall Street accountable,” said Charles Chamberlain,
executive director of Democracy for America, an advocacy group that grew
out of former Vermont governor Howard Dean’s 2004 presidential campaign.
“But I don’t want to make it sound like there’s a menu and she just needs
to go down and check the boxes. The key is we want to see a real fighter
out there.”

Some activists likened it to the president’s annual “State of the Union”
address, in which each interest group hopes the speech touches on its
priorities. But many acknowledged, as American Federation of Teachers
president Randi Weingarten put it, that the speech will be about “values
and aspiration” rather than a policy agenda.

“As always happens with anything involving the Clintons, people spend a lot
of time thinking about what are they going to do, what are they going to
say, but as important a speech as it is, this is one speech,” said
Weingarten, who is a Clinton ally, although AFT has not yet made its
endorsement.

Matt Bennett, a veteran of past Democratic presidential campaigns, said
Clinton is smart to put off her policy plans. Otherwise, she would give her
opponents targets.

“She’s being bombarded with people seeking space in her speech for their
wool and mohair subsidies or their piece of the action, but we think it
would be unwise for her to go too deep into the details,” said Bennett, a
senior vice president at Third Way. “She will be pecked to death by ducks
for the next 18 months if she does that.”

In the first two months of her campaign, Clinton has given important
speeches on three policy matters — immigration, criminal justice and voting
rights. But she has said relatively little about the issue many Democrats
see as shaping the 2016 election: the structure of the economy.

“She’s got to take this on,” Reich said. “She said when she launched her
campaign that ‘the deck is still stacked in favor of those at the top.’
She’s got to tell us what she’s going to do to un-stack the deck.”

*Hillary's rally and rationale: More Rodham, less Clinton*
<http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/11/politics/hillary-clinton-2016-campaign-rally/index.html>*
// CNN // Jeff Zeleny & Dan Merica – June 11, 2015*

When Hillary Clinton sweeps onto the stage Saturday for the first major
rally of her campaign, she will set aside her family's presidential legacy
and concentrate on a chapter of her life she rarely speaks about: the
Depression-era story of her mother, Dorothy Rodham.

As she seeks to present herself as a candidate who will fight for the
middle class, aides say Clinton will turn to lessons learned from her
mother, who was abandoned by her parents as a child and was forced to bring
herself up. She will argue that her Rodham roots have made her the person
she is today, a subtle concession the power of the Clinton legacy alone
will not carry her into the White House.

"She is a well-known figure but when you're asking the American people to
support you as president, even if it is for the second time, there is no
skipping of steps," said Jennifer Palmieri, the campaign's communications
director. "If you want to understand Hillary Clinton, and what has
motivated her career of fighting for kids and families, her mother is a big
part of the story."

The rally on Saturday at Roosevelt Island in New York, which will be awash
in symbolism of Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt, offers a moment for Clinton
to reset her candidacy. She intends to offer a more expansive rationale for
why she believes she should be president, an argument that some Democrats
believe she and her campaign have failed to clearly articulate.

That was among the conversations at a dinner Clinton attended early last
week at the home of Sen. Dianne Feinstein in Washington, where several
other Democratic women senators gathered for an intimate discussion about
her candidacy.

They urged Clinton to present herself as more of a fighter, participants
said, who is passionate about improving the plight of everyday Americans.

Two months after she launched her candidacy, Clinton remains in command of
the Democratic nominating fight. Yet she has struggled to rally excitement
among some liberals in her party.

It's an open question whether there will be enough substance to satisfy
critics who have said Clinton has been short on specifics, particularly on
trade and other liberal priorities.

While the calls for Sen. Elizabeth Warren to enter the race have cooled,
the long lines of Democrats waiting to see Sen. Bernie Sanders on the
campaign trail underscore that she cannot take anything for granted.

The opening chapter of her second presidential bid has been far rockier
than she and her advisers expected, more than a dozen Democrats close to
the campaign told CNN this week. She enters the summer facing far more
questions about her long-term prospects than when she first jumped into the
race.

A CNN/ORC poll last week found that 57% of Americans thought Clinton was
not honest and trustworthy, which was up from 49% in March. And less than
half of people feel she cares about people like them, 47%, which is down
from 53% last July.

Campaign aides familiar with the speech on Saturday say Clinton's chief
goal will be to outline her rationale for running, providing voters with a
reason to elect her and responding to those who have said her run is based
on nothing more than inevitability.

The entire day will focus on Clinton, aides said. Although both Bill and
Chelsea Clinton will attend -- the first time either will appear at a
campaign event -- they will not be the focus and will likely not speak.

The speech will be centered around the story of Rodham, aides said, far
more than the legacy of Clinton.

"The example she learned from her mother's story is critical to knowing
what motivated Hillary Clinton to first get involved in public service,"
Palmieri said on Thursday. "And why people can count on her to fight for
them and their families now."

Clinton's speech will not be a detailed policy rollout. Instead, the former
secretary of state will preview a list of critical policy issues, aides
said, but will wait until later in the summer to outline the details of
each policy proposal.

Aides said that Clinton's speech will be a mix of her biography and vision,
with the former first lady arguing that the guiding principle in her
campaign will be how America's families are doing, not those at the top.
Clinton will repeatedly use the phrase "it is your time," aides said, to
hammer home that Americans who help bring the country back from recession
now deserve to enjoy the benefits.

Campaign aides are producing a biographical video documenting different
points in Clinton's career, including her work as a lawyer for the
Children's Defense Fund. The Clinton campaign used Hillary Clinton's
Twitter account to tease the video that is expected to be released after
Saturday's rally.

And Clinton's speech, of course, will not be without partisan politics.
Aides said she will argue Republicans are a repeat of their predecessors
and will ensure voters that she will offer a clear choice in 2016.

While the first two months of her candidacy have been intentionally
downsized -- small roundtable conversations over big rallies -- Clinton has
spent considerable time appearing before small groups of donors.

Clinton has personally headlined 37 fundraisers in 13 states. It is likely,
given the attendance of each event, that more than $16 million has been
raised from Clinton-headlined fundraisers. Her top aides and operatives
have headlined dozens more.

Clinton aides have said they hope to raise $100 million by the end of 2015.

In the weeks after her campaign kickoff, CNN has learned, Clinton will
headline four more fundraisers in California, three in Massachusetts and
one in Indiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Illinois, Pennsylvania, New York and
New Hampshire. Before June 30, the final day of the first fundraising
deadline, Clinton will have personally headlined over 50 fundraisers.

"She has to raise a lot of money," said former ambassador Edward Romero,
who hosted a Clinton fundraiser in New Mexico earlier this month. "Every
candidate has that pressure."

*Hillary Clinton Will Evoke Roosevelt and Try to Ease Fears on Trust in New
York Speech*
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/12/us/hillary-clinton-to-invoke-roosevelt-in-new-york-speech-laying-out-vision.html>*
// NYT // Amy Chozick – June 11, 2015*

Hillary Rodham Clinton, at a major outdoor rally planned for Saturday, will
directly address concerns that have emerged in the early weeks of her
candidacy, telling voters they can trust her to fight for the middle class
and stressing that she cares about their problems, several people briefed
on her plans say.

The speech, at an event shaping up to be the most ambitious public
gathering undertaken by the campaign since Mrs. Clinton began her quest for
the White House in April, will be shaped by symbolism as she seeks to make
the case for why she should be president.

It will be held in New York City on an island named for Franklin D.
Roosevelt, in the shadow of diverse middle-class neighborhoods, as Mrs.
Clinton tries to evoke the legacy of the New Deal and lay out her vision
for a federal government substantially engaged in lifting American families
that feel economically insecure and increasingly left behind.

Mrs. Clinton has yet to put forth a clear rationale for her candidacy since
announcing in a brief online video that she would run for the Democratic
nomination.

“She has to articulate an authentic, compelling rationale for her
candidacy, a cause and vision that is larger than her own ambitions,” said
David Axelrod, a former senior adviser to President Obama.

But the large outdoor event, complete with a marching band and a space for
an overflow crowd to watch the speech on giant monitors, must also
counteract some signs of decline in Mrs. Clinton’s personal appeal, with
polls showing that a growing number of Americans do not trust her or think
she understands their lives.

A CNN poll released June 2 showed that 57 percent of Americans thought that
Mrs. Clinton was not honest and trustworthy, up from 49 percent in March,
and that 47 percent of voters thought that Mrs. Clinton “cares about people
like you,” down from 53 percent last July. Publicly, Mrs. Clinton’s
campaign aides have shrugged off such polls as evidence that voters
distrust Washington and politics in general. Privately, they are
strategizing about how to reframe the conversation.

Rather than defend attacks on Mrs. Clinton’s trustworthiness regarding her
use of a private email address at the State Department while she was
secretary of state or foreign donations to her family’s philanthropy, the
campaign will seek to turn the trust issue on its head. “But who do you
trust more to fight for you when they get in the Oval Office?” the
Democratic strategist, Steve Elmendorf, said, repeating a line often used
by Mrs. Clinton’s senior advisers.

The campaign will try to turn another one of Mrs. Clinton’s challenges, her
tendency to incite strong and divisive reactions from people, to her
advantage, emphasizing her perceived toughness. Her campaign chairman, John
D. Podesta, often refers to Mrs. Clinton as a “tenacious fighter,” a theme
that will echo throughout the speech and her campaign.

Mrs. Clinton’s husband, former President Bill Clinton, and daughter,
Chelsea, will appear with her at the rally, the first time the family will
make a joint campaign appearance since Mrs. Clinton became a candidate.

Saturday’s event will signal the end of the first phase of Mrs. Clinton’s
campaign, which mainly featured the former first lady holding round-table
discussions with small groups of voters. Mrs. Clinton has said that she has
learned a lot from those meetings, but they could come across as scripted
and lacking in energy, especially as one rival, Senator Bernie Sanders of
Vermont, has already drawn large crowds. In the coming weeks, Mrs. Clinton
will present more specific policies, speak to larger audiences and appear
at town hall gatherings.

The staging of Saturday’s event has been meticulous. Huma Abedin, a
longtime aide to Mrs. Clinton and vice chairwoman of the campaign, and Greg
Hale, an Arkansas-based consultant who has handled events for the Clintons
for years, have taken a lead on planning. Jim Margolis, the news media
consultant behind both of Mr. Obama’s inaugurations, and Mandy Grunwald,
the longtime Clinton adviser who helped choreograph the appearance of Mr.
Clinton and his family at the 1992 Democratic National Convention in New
York, have also been involved.

For weeks, aides weighed various locations. Rather than choosing Iowa or
New Hampshire, they settled on New York, where Mrs. Clinton served as a
senator and where a friendly crowd of supporters was simple enough to
summon.

Looking at a map of New York, aides in the campaign’s Downtown Brooklyn
headquarters settled on Roosevelt Island, the 2-mile-by-800-foot strip of
land on the East River between Manhattan and Queens. The event is open to
the public, and the campaign has received several thousand requests to
attend, though the forecast of scattered thunderstorms could affect turnout.

The campaign angered some island residents after a community day for
children had to be rescheduled. Others have grumbled that the national news
media has, in terms of accessibility, compared Roosevelt Island to the
nearby jail complex of Rikers Island. (Roosevelt Island is reachable via
public transportation as well as a tram that has in the past stalled,
leaving passengers suspended over the murky brown waters of the East River.)

Mrs. Clinton will deliver the speech at Four Freedoms Park, a memorial with
a grassy tree-lined mall, named after the four tenets that Roosevelt
presented in his 1941 State of the Union address: freedom of speech and
worship, and freedom from want and fear.

She has defined her campaign as taking on “four fights,” including
strengthening the economy, helping families and communities, getting
unaccountable money out of politics and protecting the country from foreign
threats.

She is expected to evoke Roosevelt’s policies to reiterate her belief that
government is needed to help lift wages, create jobs, make college and
health care more affordable, and rebuild antiquated infrastructure.

“It’s important for the campaign to demonstrate the sense of energy and
excitement,” the Democratic pollster Geoff Garin said. But what is more
important, he added, “is laying out an agenda that makes people feel that
Hillary Clinton will be a fighter for them.”

Mrs. Clinton’s message will reflect the Democratic Party’s leftward shift
and stand in sharp contrast to the new covenant of personal responsibility
that Mr. Clinton preached when he announced his candidacy in 1991 at the
Old Statehouse in Little Rock, Ark.

“Government’s responsibility is to create more opportunity,” Mr. Clinton
said in that speech. “The people’s responsibility is to make the most of
it.”

Dan Schwerin, a policy adviser to Mrs. Clinton, is among the aides who have
helped her shape her speech. Mrs. Clinton has already tested many of the
main themes, including a populist critique of Wall Street excesses. She has
called for equal pay for women, an overhaul of the criminal justice system
and voting rights policies that would make the process easier for young
people and minorities.

Framing all of this with the pomp and celebration of an official
announcement speech can serve not just as an introduction for a candidate
(or in Mrs. Clinton’s case, a reintroduction), but also as a crucial chance
to counteract negative opinions more than a year before a general election.

In 2000, Vice President Al Gore’s campaign tried to reposition his wooden
and cerebral demeanor as an advantage against the more affable George W.
Bush.

“At the end of the day, with critical decisions impacting your family, do
you want someone you know is smart or not?” was how Chris Lehane, an
adviser to Mr. Gore, summed up the strategy. Or, in shorthand: “You date
Bush and marry Gore.”

With Chelsea nearby, Mrs. Clinton will remind voters about her years as a
working mother, her experience working for the Children’s Defense Fund in
the 1970s and her record of as an advocate for women and children as a
first lady, senator and secretary of state. The campaign also has a
biographical video in the works.

“You can become a caricature of how the press has determined who you are,”
said Thomas R. Nides, a friend and adviser who worked for Mrs. Clinton at
the State Department. “But the good news about Hillary Clinton is that she
has a long history of who she is and what she stands for.”

*Hillary Clinton Plans to Re-Introduce Herself to Voters*
<http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clinton-plans-to-re-introduce-herself-to-voters/>*
// CBS News // Stephanie Condon – June 11, 2015*

After decades in the spotlight, Hillary Clinton this Saturday will use her
first major address as a 2016 presidential candidate to re-introduce
herself to voters, explaining how her personal story has driven her career
aims of helping children and middle class families.

Since launching her 2016 bid for the Democratic nomination in April,
Clinton has held small events in key voting states. This Saturday's speech
and rally at Four Freedoms Park in New York City marks the next phase of
her campaign, according to a campaign official. Four key elements will
comprise Clinton's speech: her motivations, who she's fighting for, her
vision for the nation and a comparison between her vision and the GOP
vision.

The undergirding concept behind the whole speech is her personal story, the
Clinton campaign said. Clinton, of course, heads into the 2016 race as one
of the most well-known presidential candidates ever, after serving as
secretary of state, a U.S. senator, the first lady of the United States and
the first lady of Arkansas. Still, the campaign says, her personal story
explains Clinton's drive to be a champion for everyday Americans.

"She is a well-known figure, but when you're asking the American people to
support you as president, even if it is for the second time, there is no
skipping of steps," Jennifer Palmieri, the Hillary for America
communications director, told CBS News in a statement.

That story starts with Hillary Clinton's mother, Dorothy Rodham. In her
memoir Hard Choices, Clinton wrote, "No one had a bigger influence on my
life or did more to shape the person I became" than her mother. Dorothy
Rodham's childhood was "marked by trauma and abandonment," Clinton wrote,
noting that her mother was on her own and working as a housekeeper and
nanny by age 14. In spite of the challenges she faced, Dorothy Rodham told
her daughter she thrived in life because of the help of others.

In her speech, according to a campaign official, Clinton will share that
story and talk about how she adopted a fighter's instinct from her mother.
She'll also explain how her mother's reliance on the help of others shaped
her belief that everyone needs a champion. That belief drove her career in
public service.

To further share her story, Clinton's campaign is producing a biographical
video, expected to be rolled out in the days after Saturday's event. It
will highlight Clinton's work as an advocate for children and families,
dating back to her work as a young lawyer for the Children's Defense Fund.

Meanwhile, as Clinton readies her message for Saturday, Republicans are
ratcheting up their own efforts to frame Clinton's campaign. The Republican
National Committee is releasing a new ad, called "Wrong for America," as
part of its larger #StopHillary campaign.

The ad is airing on cable in Washington, D.C. and New York City starting
Friday. The new effort also includes a targeted digital push in the key
states of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina, in conjunction
with Clinton's upcoming campaign stops.

*Hillary Clinton gets personal*
<http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/hillary-clinton-gets-personal>* // MSNBC //
Alex Seitz-Wald – June 11, 2015*

Hillary Clinton will lay out a personal rationale for her second attempt at
the presidency Saturday in a major campaign rally to be held at a party
honoring Frank Delano Roosevelt in New York City.

The former secretary of state soft-launched her White House bid April 12 in
a video posted online. But Saturday’s rally will mark the beginning a
full-fledged presidential campaign after eight weeks of a low-key ramp-up.

In the presence of a giant bust of FDR on an island named after the former
president between Manhattan and Queens, Clinton will offer her most
expansive remarks yet on why she’s running for president.

Thousands are expected, with tickets to the event no long available on
Clinton’s campaign website. Bill and Hillary Clinton will be on hand, but
are not expected to speak. Those who make onto Roosevelt Island or watch on
TV from home will see a very different Clinton than the one who lost the
2008 Democratic primary. Whereas Clinton was seen as impersonal and
bloodless then, she now says the chief motivation of her public life is her
mother. Whereas Clinton was seen as moderate and cautious then, she will
now embrace a president who remade the country in a more progressive image.

It shows that as the Democratic Party has moved left on social issues and
both parties have become more populist, Clinton is finally catching up,
said Bob Shrum, a former Clinton White House aide. “Maybe it’s left
compared to the era of triangulation, but the era of triangulation over and
is not where the party is or where the country is, as she discovered in
2008,” he said.

Times have changed and with even Republicans discussing income inequality,
Clinton is demonstrating she gets it. “I think she’s sending a very clear
signal,” said Shrum.

That comes from a personal place, she will say. On Saturday, Clinton will
say that her mother’s brutal childhood is what motivated her to get into
public service and work as an advocate of women and children, the campaign
official said. Her mother’s story will be the foundation of her rationale
for running for president.

As a child, Dorothy Rodham was abandoned by her parents and sent to live
with strict relatives. Not able to bare it anymore, she ran away at 14 and
worked as a housekeeper for a kind-hearted woman who took her in and showed
her what parenting should look like.

That trauma and resilience, Clinton has said, taught her and how to be
tough and made her want to help people in difficult circumstances. “No one
had a bigger influence on my life or did more to shape the person I
became,” Clinton wrote in her 2014 autobiography “Hard Choices.”

Clinton’s mother will likely emerge as a recurring motif of the campaign.
Immediately following her kick-off in New York City, Clinton will travel to
Iowa and then New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada, and is likely to
discuss her mother there, too.

“If you want to understand Hillary Clinton, and what has motivated her
career of fighting for kids and families, her mother is a big part of the
story,” said Jennifer Palmieri, the Clinton campaign’s communications
director.

In an attempt to reintroduce her to voters – or introduce her for the first
time to millennials, a critical voting bloc that missed most of the 1990s –
the campaign has produced a biographical video covering Clinton’s lengthy
career, the official added. It starts with her work at the Children’s
Defense Fund, just after she left Yale Law School, and continues through
her time at the State Department. It will be unveiled in the coming days.

The rest of her speech will strike a decidedly populist economic tone, the
official said. And she’ll preview policy ideas that will be rolled out in
more detail later this summer.

And Clinton will take on Republicans. Instead of addressing the Democrats
running against her for the party’s nomination, she’ll look clear past them
to the hypothetical GOP nominee she would face next year if she wins the
primary. She’ll frame the election as a choice between her economic ideas
and those of the Republicans.

Likely to go unmentioned are Former Gov. Martin O’Malley, Sen. Bernie
Sanders, and former Gov. Lincoln Chafee, who have all mentioned Clinton in
their presidential announcements.

Like many good presidential kick-offs, Clinton’s launch will be about
symbolism as well as substance. Barack Obama chose the place where Abraham
Lincoln gave his “House Divided” speech. Former Gov. Martin O’Malley and
Sen. Bernie Sanders announced at outdoor rallies in the cities where they
once were mayor. Rick Perry last week launched his run in front of a cargo
plane he flew in the Air Force.

Clinton chose a park honoring FDR in the state where she served as senator
for eight years, a choice campaign officials say is meant to invoke
Roosevelt’s legacy.

“She could have chosen anywhere to make her announcement,” said Felicia
Wong, the President of the Roosevelt Institute, a progressive think tank
dedicated to carrying on the legacy of Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt. “By
choosing this venue, she and her team have put themselves squarely in the
legacy and the spirit of Franklin Roosevelt, who re-wrote the rules of the
20th century.”

Roosevelt is credited with creating the modern welfare state, saving the
economy from collapse, taking on entrenched wealthy interests, and
defeating an expansionist, totalitarian foreign power. At the same time, he
built the modern Democratic Party and the values that would emerge at its
core to this day.

Clinton has long seen Eleanor Roosevelt, a fellow first lady, as a role
model and last year spoke admiringly about Teddy Roosevelt, saying she
devoured Ken Burns’ expansive documentary series on the family.

The kick-off comes at time when Clinton is trying to win over restive
progressives. Tying herself to Roosevelt is a smart move, says New
York-based Democratic strategist Hank Sheinkopf. “It is very much aimed to
the left,” said Sheinkopf. “She needs to get rid of everybody who’s
pestering her on her left, and one of the best ways to get rid of them is
to invoke Franklin Roosevelt.”

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, a leader of the national progressive
movement, will notably not attend the rally, his office has said. Clinton
and de Blasio are longtime friends and he managed her Senate campaign in
2000. So far, however, de Blasio has declined to endorse Clinton’s
presidential bid.

Sheinkopf thinks de Blasio is playing hard to get in order to amp up the
value of his endorsement down the road. Comparing de Blasio to “artillery”
when it comes to defending her left flank, Sheinkopf said it’s too soon:
“De Blasio is less needed now and more more needed later. Why do you want
to use a howitzer now, when frankly when you can use much lighter weapons?”

Her embrace of Roosevelt and progressive ideas is about more than the
primary, however. She’ll need the so-called Obama coalition to turn out for
her in a general election if she makes it there, and these are the issues
they care about. “With the increasing polarization of the country, the fact
is the key to winning these election is turning out your base,” said Shrum,
who has held senior roles in Democratic campaigns.

Still, Clinton has not yet weighed in on a few top issue for liberals. The
House will vote Friday on a Trade Promotion Authority bill, which labor
unions and others are fighting tooth and nail. That will have to wait until
sometime after her kick-off.

*Hillary Clinton Will Push Personal Story at Campaign Launch*
<http://time.com/3918339/hillary-clinton-launch-new-york-city/?xid=tcoshare>*
// TIME // Sam Frizell – June 11, 2015*

For Hillary Clinton, this campaign is personal.

When the democratic presidential candidate holds her much hyped rally on
Saturday in New York City, her team said Thursday, she will emphasize her
own history, discussing her family, her mother and her upbringing as a
central part of her rationale for running for President.

The speech will build on many of the tropes that Clinton has developed
throughout the first two months of the campaign, as she uses her past to
talk about income inequality and building stronger families. Much of her
remarks will also center on her domestic and economic vision for the
country.

Clinton will in particular talk about her mother, Dorothy Rodham, who was
abandoned by her parents and worked as a secretary before marrying
Clinton’s father, Hugh Rodham.

“If you want to understand Hillary Clinton, and what has motivated her
career of fighting for kids and families, her mother is a big part of the
story,” Jennifer Palmieri, the campaign’s director of communications, said
in an email to reporters. “The example she learned from her mother’s story
is critical to knowing what motivated Hillary Clinton to first get involved
in public service, and why people can count on her to fight for them and
their families now.”

In 2007 and 2008, Clinton ran as a determined and businesslike candidate
whose unofficial campaign slogan was “ready on Day One,” turning off some
voters who found her difficult to relate to and distant. This time, Clinton
has taken an entirely different, speaking frequently about her
granddaughter, Charlotte, her father’s drapery business and her mother.

Her website prominently displays photos of her as a baby and during her
younger days with Bill Clinton. On Thursday, her newly minted Instagram
feed featured a photo of her as a toddler riding a tricycle with the
caption “Pedal to the metal. #tbt”

Clinton’s team is marking Saturday as official the start of her full-blown
campaign, though she announced her candidacy in mid-April and has been
holding small events in the four early primary states of Iowa, New
Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada over the past nine weeks. During those
months she largely insulated herself from the media while holding carefully
controlled roundtable conversations with voters.

She will deliver her speech on Roosevelt Island in New York’s East River, a
narrow four-mile-long residential haven with views of midtown Manhattan and
Queens. Saturday’s event will be the first large rally of Clinton’s 2016
campaign.

Since joining the race and reentering partisan politics, Clinton’s
favorability among voters has dropped. According to a CNN poll published
last week, 57% of Americans view her as dishonest and trustworthy, up from
49% in March. Clinton’s campaign will be resting their hopes on her
personal story reinvigorating voters over the course of the campaign.

“There’s still a lot of things people don’t know about her,” said Celinda
Lake, a Democratic strategist unaffiliated with Clinton’s campaign. “The
fact she came from Republican family, that she’s a person of faith. Her
long history working for women and children… I think these numbers will
pick up particularly among independent women as they get to know and see
her better.”

On Saturday, the campaign said, Clinton will discuss the lessons she
learned from her mother and will return to some of the populist tones she
has struck so far: that prosperity has to reach more than just the super
rich, and be about everyday Americans and families—the ones that she has
been meeting with on the campaign trail.

Clinton will roll out major policy proposals throughout the summer, but she
has talked frequently about income inequality and criminal justice reform,
and laid out specific ideas about expanding voter participation and
immigration.

*At Launch Rally, Hillary Clinton to Tell Americans 'It Is Your Time'*
<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-11/at-launch-rally-hillary-clinton-to-tell-americans-it-is-your-time->*
// Bloomberg News // Jennifer Epstein – June 11, 2015*

Hillary Clinton has spent the past two months reintroducing herself to
voters with carefully controlled campaign stops and minimal interaction
with the media.

On Saturday, she’ll initiate the next phase of her presidential candidacy
with her first campaign rally, where she’ll discuss oft-omitted pieces of
her personal story and tell the country why she’s best suited to be the
next occupant of the Oval Office. She’ll discuss what motivates her, who
she is fighting for, her vision for the country and what the choices are
for voters in the 2016 election, Clinton officials said Thursday.

The rally, slated for late morning at Four Freedoms Park on New York’s
Roosevelt Island—a tribute to Franklin Delano Roosevelt and, to a lesser
extent, Eleanor Roosevelt—won’t be heavy on policy details, but it will
kick off a summer that will be full of economic proposals, including
Clinton’s views on the minimum wage, Wall Street regulation and student
debt.

“She’s begun to lay an important foundation on which to build the next
phase of her campaign.”

Clinton’s economic positions will be progressive without leaning as far
left those of Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, a self-identified socialist
who in many polls is running a distant second to her for the Democratic
presidential nomination. And they’ll draw on the principle of fairness that
drove FDR’s presidency.

“It is your time,” she will tell the people who her campaign has chosen to
call everyday Americans, arguing that America’s success is measured not by
how those at the top are doing but how the rest of the country is doing.
Prosperity is for every American, she will say, not just for CEOs and hedge
fund managers.

Clinton will also argue that the election will leave voters with a clear
choice between what her aides see as Republicans’ top-down economic
policies and out-of-date social view, and her own views, which they say
hinge on fairness and justice for all.

Clinton shied away from her personal story throughout her 2008 campaign but
has chosen, this time, to use her own experiences from long before she
stepped foot in the White House or the State Department. It’s a way to
connect with voters whose biographical knowledge of Clinton is limited to
her years as first lady and secretary of state, and doesn’t trace back to
her middle class beginnings in the Chicago suburbs or the roots of her
indomitable spirit.

Clinton’s life story from her parents’ influence onward, her supporters
argue, is critical to convincing voters that she is the right person to
lead the country.

“She is a well-known figure but when you're asking the American people to
support you as president, even if it is for the second time, there is no
skipping of steps,” Clinton communications director Jennifer Palmieri said.

The first two months of Clinton’s campaign started laying the groundwork
for her reintroduction to the American people and the methodical campaign
that she and her team have planned for the next 17 months.

“Voters are seeing her not as secretary of state, not as first lady, not as
Bill Clinton’s wife, not as a surrogate for President Obama but as Hillary
Clinton, the 2016 candidate who is looking for their vote and their
confidence to be their next commander-in-chief,” said Democratic strategist
Maria Cardona, who advised Clinton’s first presidential campaign.

During the first phase of her campaign, Clinton was "putting one foot in
front of the next very methodically," said Bill Galston, a domestic policy
adviser in Bill Clinton's White House. "She is not trying to force herself
to be someone she’s not. She’s not Barack Obama. She's not her husband."

Clinton's close ties to the last two Democratic presidents can make it
difficult to differentiate her from them, but she's widely seen as more
disciplined than her husband and more interested in engaging in politics
than the current president. Clinton has suggested on the campaign trail
that she could do better than Obama at working with Republicans and
Democrats in Congress and, Galston said, "she has some skills that [Obama]
lacks and those skills in these polarized times are pretty damn important."

Much of Clinton’s focus on Saturday and as she travels next week to Iowa,
New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada, will be on one important figure
in the candidate’s life: her mother, Dorothy Rodham, who suffered multiple
rounds of “trauma and abandonment” as a child, as Clinton wrote in her 2014
memoir Hard Choices, but experienced enough acts of kindness to persist
through the hardships she faced.

“Mom measured her own life by how much she was able to help us and serve
others,” Clinton wrote, and Rodham taught her daughter: “Never rest on your
laurels. Never quit. Never stop working to make the world a better place.
That’s our unfinished business.”

From her mother’s example, Clinton learned that every child needs someone
fighting for him or her—a belief that has pulled her through her career,
beginning with her work as a young lawyer for the Children’s Defense Fund.

“If you want to understand Hillary Clinton, and what has motivated her
career of fighting for kids and families, her mother is a big part of the
story,” Palmieri said. “The example she learned from her mother's story is
critical to knowing what motivated Hillary Clinton to first get involved in
public service, and why people can count on her to fight for them and their
families now."

The shift to a focus on Clinton's personal story—which will also include
the campaign's release of a biographical video about Clinton in the coming
days—comes after an initial active avoidance of focusing too much on the
larger-than-life candidate.

"One thing that struck me from the start as exactly right was to have this
election not be about her but about everyday Americans," said Geoff Garin,
Clinton's 2008 pollster. "She’s begun to lay an important foundation on
which to build the next phase of her campaign."

Americans, he added, "want their elected officials to be in touch with them
and to have a personal understanding of what they’re going through. She's
demonstrated a commitment to doing that and I think she’ll be a better
candidate as a result of it."

*Hillary Relaunch to Have 'Airport Style Security'*
<http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/hillary-relaunch-have-airport-style-security_969446.html>*
// The Weekly Standard // Daniel Halper*

Security will be tight at Hillary Clinton's re-launch in New York City. It
will mimic "airport style security," according to an email from the
campaign to people who have registered for the event.

"We can't wait to see you on Saturday at the Hillary for America official
launch event -- we're so excited that you're going to be a part of this
day! Here's some information you'll need ahead of time," reads the email
describing Saturday's event.

When and Where

- Saturday, June 13th doors open at 9:30 a.m. - 1:00 p.m.

- FDR Four Freedoms Park, Roosevelt Island, NY

What to bring

- Your printed ticket -- the confirmation email you received when you
registered for the event, you can also use your phone to show your ticket.
Children under the age of 13 do not need a ticket to enter the event.

- Small personal cameras and cell phones will be permitted.

- Guests are encouraged to bring water in standard-sized, clear plastic
bottles, as there will be a limited supply at the event.

What not to bring

- There will be airport style security. Items that will NOT BE permitted
include food, liquids other than water, large bags, large purses,
backpacks, strollers, umbrellas, noise makers, bullhorns, posters, signs,
pets other than licensed service animals, sharp objects, or weapons.

What to expect

- Limited cell service on Roosevelt Island.

- The event is standing only -- seating will be provided for ADA guests.

- Food is not permitted in the park, so make sure to have breakfast before
you arrive.

- Be prepared for a hot summer day; sunglasses, sunscreen, and comfortable
shoes are highly encouraged.

How to get to Four Freedoms Park

The best way to get to the park is by public transportation -- parking on
the island will be extremely limited.

- Subway: Take the F Train to the Roosevelt Island stop. Follow signs to
Four Freedoms Park.

- Tram: From Manhattan: Get on the tram at 59th Street & Second Avenue
Station. Travel time to Roosevelt Island is 4-5 minutes, with trams
departing every 10 minutes. Exit at Tramway Station on Roosevelt Island.
Follow signs to Four Freedoms Park.

- Bus: From Queensboro Plaza overpass, take stairway down north side to
corner of Crescent and Bridge Plaza North. Take the Q102 Queens Surface bus
to Roosevelt Island. Follow signs to Four Freedoms Park.

We want to accommodate as many ADA guests as possible, so if you know that
you will need assistance on-site, please contact
[email-masked] to make necessary arrangements. ADA guests
are welcome to bring one guest with them into the ADA section.

This is going to be a great event and we're thrilled to have you -- one of
our best supporters -- there as we launch into the next phase of this
campaign.

Thanks,

Hillary for America

*HRC** NATIONAL COVERAGE*

*Hillary Clinton and Wishful-Thinking Politics
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/11/upshot/hillary-clinton-and-wishful-thinking-politics.html?abt=0002&abg=1&_r=0>
// NYT // Brendan Nyhan – June 11, 2015*

Hillary Clinton’s campaign took a beating among some pundits this week for
telling the truth: She’s going to employ a strategy focused on a narrow set
of the most competitive states.

In other words, she’s running as a modern presidential candidate.

Mrs. Clinton’s statement is what’s called a Kinsley gaffe — taking its name
from Michael Kinsley, a journalist who said a gaffe is something true that
a politician isn’t supposed to say. By conceding the obvious, she revealed
the disjunction between the politics we say we want and the kind we
actually have.

In reality, her approach is far less different from those of recent
candidates than it might appear. No presidential candidate — including Mrs.
Clinton’s husband, whose strategy was compared to hers — competes in every
state. The reason is the Electoral College, a winner-take-all system that
rewards candidates who focus almost exclusively on closely contested states.

The difference is in which states she will target. The electoral map has
changed since 1992, when the legacy of the old one-party South helped her
husband win a number of Southern states that are now out of reach for
Democrats. As a result, the targeting strategy that worked for her husband
would not succeed today despite wishful thinking that she could, for
instance, win Kentucky.

Most troubling to some observers, though, was the way that Mrs. Clinton’s
strategy dispensed with the pretense that she would create unity and
consensus by running to the center. The uncomfortable reality is that
presidents don’t magically unite us, especially in our highly polarized
era. With the public closely divided between the two parties, successful
politicians have to mobilize their base to win.

Consider recent history. The last three presidents — Bill Clinton, George
W. Bush and Barack Obama — were all elected after promising to transcend
partisanship. All failed in that aim after learning some hard lessons about
how Washington actually works. Mr. Bush and Mr. Obama then ran re-election
campaigns focused on turning out their core supporters — the same model
Mrs. Clinton plans to adopt.

Presidential candidates should still try to speak to all Americans. But we
shouldn’t pretend that pleasing words from Mrs. Clinton are going to bring
back the politics of 1952 or even 1992 — that era is gone and it’s not
coming back.

*Virginia Is Latest Front in Democrats’ Voting Rights Battle
<http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/11/newest-front-in-democratic-voting-rights-battle-virginia/?smid=tw-share>
// NYT // Maggie Haberman – June 11, 2015 *

Democrats allied with Hillary Rodham Clinton have filed a voting rights
lawsuit in Virginia, the third time they have done so in a crucial
presidential battleground state in the last two months.

The suit, like the others, was filed by Marc Elias, a Democratic election
lawyer whose clients include Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign and four
of the party’s major national committees.

Mrs. Clinton is not a party to any of the lawsuits, but her campaign aides
have expressed supported for the two earlier suits, in Ohio and Wisconsin.

The Virginia lawsuit is part of a broader effort by Democrats to try to
roll back voting laws that have been passed in nearly two dozen states
since 2010. Many of the laws were passed in states where Republican
governors and legislatures rose to power after the Tea Party wave.

The Virginia action, described by the California-based election law expert
Richard L. Hasen on his website, Election Law Blog, is primarily based on
the state’s voter identification law. The plaintiffs — which include the
Virginia Democratic Party — argue the law will suppress turnout,
particularly among blacks and Hispanics, the poor and college students.

Republicans have argued that the spate of new laws were important added
protections against election fraud. They dismiss the Democratic lawsuits as
publicity stunts to energize minority voters in support of Democratic
candidates.

*These 9 words prove that Bill Clinton still doesn’t get it on the Clinton
Foundation
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/06/11/these-9-words-prove-that-bill-clinton-still-doesnt-get-it-on-the-clinton-foundation/?postshare=6371434053846669>
// WaPo // Chris Cillizza – June 11, 2015 *

Bill Clinton sat for an interview with Bloomberg News on Wednesday to talk
about, among other things, the controversy surrounding the Clinton
Foundation and his wife's 2016 presidential bid.  And, in the course of
that conversation, he let loose with this stunner: "Has anybody proved that
we did anything objectionable? No."

Um, what?

This is the latest in a string of statements by the former president that
suggest he still doesn't grasp why the Clinton Foundation questions
continue to swirl and, because of that lack of understanding, remains
unable to effectively parry them. Let's go through the problems with
Clinton's answer.

First, there's little doubt that some of the donations accepted by the
Clinton Foundation have been viewed as objectionable by lots and lots of
people. To cite one example: Allowing the Qatar Supreme 2022 Committee,
organized to lure the World Cup to the nation, to serve as the main sponsor
for a 2013 Clinton Global Initiative event. Qatar has been tied to not only
allegations of wide-scale bribery of FIFA to acquire the games but is also
the subject of widespread humanitarian concerns regarding the number of
deaths related to the construction of the soccer stadiums to host the World
Cup in 2022.

So, on its face, the claim that no one has come forward to object to
certain donations/donors is just not right.

Then there is the fact that Clinton's answer on the foundation seems to be
based on the idea that he and his wife are operating in a legal sphere for
the next two years. They're not. They're living in the world of politics --
and the rules of that world are far different than those of a court of law.

Clinton's argument boils down to the idea of a burden of proof. As in, if
there's something truly objectionable in what the foundation has done, then
someone should prove it.  Legally speaking, Clinton's right.  If you think
he or the foundation broke some sort of law, then you should need to
provide conclusive evidence of when, where, why, what and how.

But  of course, what we are mostly talking about when it comes to the
Clinton Foundation is the gray area between contributions made by donors
and decisions made by the foundation that benefited those people.  Proving
that sort of quid pro quo in a legal setting is virtually impossible
barring a smoking gun -- like an e-mail that says: "Mr. X gave $300,000.
Let's fund his project now."

In politics, however, gray areas can be exploited to great advantage by
your political opponents. Raising questions about the timing between
donations to the Clinton Foundation and decisions made that lined the
pockets of those donors is totally within the bounds of acceptable -- and
effective -- negative messaging.  Republicans don't need to prove that the
Clinton Foundation did anything untoward. The burden of proof that there
was no wrongdoing lies with the Clinton Foundation.

That reality clearly annoys Bill Clinton, and somewhat understandably.
After all, the Clinton Foundation is a massive operation and, as Bill likes
to point out, does lots and lots of work that has nothing to do with
politics. "Do I have the most comprehensive disclosure of any presidential
foundation? Yes," Clinton said in that same Bloomberg interview. "Is our --
our disclosures more extensive than most private foundations? Yes, they
are, having nothing to do with politics." (Sidebar: It's not clear that
Clinton's claim about the foundation's disclosure policies is totally
accurate.)

Here's the problem for Bill: No other foundation in the world is run by a
former president and a former secretary of state who also happens to be the
de facto Democratic presidential nominee in 2016. That fact means that the
Clinton Foundation isn't like any other foundation in the world -- and
therefore, how all of those other foundations treat disclosure is sort of
immaterial.

It's also worth noting here that the successes of the Clinton Foundation in
terms of raising money are built on the prominence and political influence
of Bill and Hillary Clinton. There are lots and lots of organizations out
there that have been far less successful doing what the Clinton Foundation
does simply because they lack messengers like Bill and Hillary. And so,
when that prominence also subjects the Clinton Foundation to heightened
scrutiny, that's the sort of thing that comes with the territory.

Bill Clinton needs to understand that no matter how beneficent he believes
the Clinton Foundation is, it's now a major part of the broader political
conversation regarding Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign. (If you need
evidence of that politicization of the foundation, witness the furor over
donations to it by ABC newsman George Stephanopoulos.)

He may not like it, but good politicians -- and Bill Clinton is definitely
one of those -- deal with the world as it is, not how they want it to be.
He has yet to do that.

*She won’t back down. Or go away.
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/national/2015/06/11/hillary-clinton-wont-back-down-or-go-away/>
// WaPo // Kent Babb – June 11, 2015 *

Hillary Rodham Clinton looked into their eyes, her voice dropping. “I have
to confess,” she said, and the group surrounding her in this little
makeshift room leaned in.

Usually the atrium at PS/IS 41 in Brooklyn is a community area, kids’
voices echoing off the tile walls. On this Wednesday in April, it was a
political proving ground: Clinton alongside Chirlane McCray, the first lady
of New York City, to promote a campaign that encourages parents to talk or
sing to their children.

Clinton was just days away from launching a second run for the White House,
determined to win what she lost in spectacular fashion in 2008.

But her won’t-back-down resolve — the quality that could make her America’s
first female president if it doesn’t sabotage her first — was nowhere in
sight as she sat at a table with about a half-dozen parents and educators,
nodding at their stories.

This was a chance, in a carefully controlled setting, to project the
warmer, more intimate persona she would be unveiling in Iowa and New
Hampshire. She may have gotten her first campaign for the Democratic
nomination wrong, but now she was planning to get it right.

So here she was, in a neighborhood dominated by public housing projects,
trying to connect not as President Obama’s first secretary of state, or an
ex-U.S. senator, or the former first lady of the United States — though her
audience was acutely aware that she’d been all those things. Nor did she
want to be seen as a $200,000-per-speech megastar who was driven in a
private van to a public school where nearly all 525 students qualify for
free or reduced lunch.

Clinton was presenting herself as a mother, just like those gathered around
the table with her. And maybe if she said it often enough — believed it
hard enough — voters would see her as she likes to see herself.

And, anyway, about that confession: She can’t sing a lick. Years ago,
Clinton told the group, amid laughter, that she would rock young Chelsea to
sleep by singing her favorite song, “Moon River.” Her daughter was less
than appreciative, her tiny finger pressing into her mother’s lips.

“No sing, Mommy,” Clinton recalled Chelsea saying, some of the child’s
first words. Clinton was a young mother then and is a 67-year-old
grandmother now, and my, how fast the time goes. The parents nodded.

Clinton was grooving now, comfortable and in command, offering a tender
version of herself in a place where no one would challenge her about her
e-mail accounts, or the attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi,
Libya, or the ugly political fights of the past four decades. Where no one
would bring up the psychological Kevlar she wears into every room, the
unyielding mind-set that has defined her since she was a child and still
fuels her now.

“She will not give up when she knows she’s right,” says Sara Ehrman, a
friend and confidante of Clinton’s since the 1970s. “She will not give up.
And it is admirable — and annoying.”

Or as Clinton put it in a 2012 e-mail to a State Department colleague
bracing to testify on Benghazi before the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee: “Well, what doesn’t kill you, makes you stronger (as I have
rationalized for years), so just survive and you’ll have triumphed.”

Fifteen miles from Chicago, jets descended over the northern suburbs into
O’Hare International Airport. It was the early 1950s, and a 4-year-old girl
danced alone in her family’s back yard, reaching for the rumbling sky.

This is one of young Hillary’s earliest memories, recounted decades later
in her first memoir, “Living History.” She declined to be interviewed for
this article, but in her book she remembers her mother, Dorothy, asking her
why she wasn’t playing with other kids in Park Ridge, the suburb where the
Rodhams lived.

Hillary started to cry. The problem was a girl named Suzy. Suzy was bigger,
meaner, used to roughhousing with her older brothers, Hillary told her
mother. She was afraid of her.

“Go back out there,” Dorothy Rodham ordered her oldest child and only
daughter, nudging her out the door. Dorothy reminded her that if Suzy
bullied her, she had her mother’s permission to punch back. “You have to
stand up for yourself. There’s no room in this house for cowards.”

Though Dorothy deferred always to her opinionated, domineering husband,
Hugh, she was perhaps the household’s strongest soul. She had spent her own
childhood mostly alone, taking care of her sister when their parents left
them alone for days. Dorothy was 8 when her parents put her on a train in
Illinois bound for California, shuffled off to live with relatives who
weren’t any more caring.

Dorothy’s grandmother once confined her to a year in her room for the sin
of celebrating Halloween. She left at age 14 to work full time, as a
$3-per-week housekeeper and nanny for a family that actually seemed to love
one another.

Years later, Dorothy watched from behind a curtain as Hillary marched out
to confront Suzy. The bully backed down, and Hillary raced home to announce
her victory: “I can play with the boys now!”

Hillary began defying the limits imposed on girls in that era. She dreamed
of becoming an astronaut or a baseball player and ran unsuccessfully for
student government president at Maine South High. When she later applied to
law school at Harvard and Yale, a well-known professor told her at a
cocktail party that Harvard didn’t need more women, Hillary’s final nudge
toward Yale.

Still, Hillary sometimes harbored self-doubt. She was a freshman at
Wellesley College, an all-girls school near Boston, when her first math and
French grades came back. They weren’t A’s. She called home, holding back
tears. Hugh Rodham told her to come on back to Illinois. Dorothy, who had
never felt in control of her own life, said no such thing. She had been
offered no opportunities; she wasn’t going to let her only daughter give up
on hers.

“I realized,” Clinton would later write, “that I really couldn’t go home
again.”

They stopped twice in Virginia and again in Tennessee. The question was
always the same: “Are you sure?” And the answer was always yes, so they
kept driving.

Hillary had moved to Washington after graduating from Yale Law School,
where she had met a bright and charismatic student named Bill Clinton. She
worked as a staff attorney for the Children’s Defense Fund, then for the
House committee investigating Watergate. Home during those years had been
Ehrman’s Capitol Hill townhouse, where the roommates often talked about the
future. Hillary’s ambition was among the most popular topics.

“She wanted a job. She wanted a life. She wanted to be recognized for what
she was qualified to do,” Ehrman recalls.

Now, as they drove south, Ehrman was trying to talk her friend out of a
decision that contradicted all that: Hillary wanted to join Bill in
Arkansas, where he was a law professor with lofty ambitions of his own.
Ehrman agreed to drive her because it gave Ehrman time to talk Hillary out
of it. “Are you crazy?” she asked during one of their stops, telling her
friend that she was throwing her future away. Hillary's determination,
Ehrman learned, also came with a frustrating side.

They arrived in Fayetteville, Hillary taking her first steps toward a new
life that would eventually make her one of the most powerful — and most
controversial  — women in the world. Ehrman, still certain her friend was
making a terrible mistake, sat in her car and cried.

Hillary married Bill in 1975 but refused to take on Clinton’s last name,
raising eyebrows in conservative Arkansas. When Bill ran for governor in
1978, advisers urged her to rethink such a trivial matter, but the fact
was, this wasn’t trivial to her. Hillary, who would go on to be the first
female partner at Rose Law Firm, wouldn’t be talked out of flying to New
York a month before Chelsea was born to make a presentation alongside board
members of the Arkansas Children’s Hospital — and she wouldn’t be talked
out of this.

“I was still me,” she wrote in “Living History.”

“She has always done what she thinks is the right thing,” says Sheila
Bronfman, a longtime friend from Arkansas. “And she lives with her choices.”

Then Bill, seeking a second term as governor, lost to a Republican
challenger named Frank White, and advisers put some of the blame on
Hillary’s refusal to be a genteel Southern wife. When Bill announced he
would seek the office again in 1982, his wife began calling herself Hillary
Rodham Clinton — a notable compromise.

Winning, she realized, was more important. A few months later, Bill retook
the Governor’s Mansion in a landslide.

She stood alone sometimes looking out a White House window, watching as the
tourists strolled by. Years of fighting had helped Bill Clinton become
America’s 42nd president, but it had left Hillary with more enemies than
allies.

She spent her first two years in Washington in the center of bare-knuckle
exchanges: with media organizations, with Republicans, within her husband’s
administration — no battle too small.

“I’m used to winning, and I intend to win on my own terms,” she once said
to Diane Blair, one of her closest friends, according to a collection of
Blair’s notes archived at the University of Arkansas.

Hillary had demanded her own 20-person staff and West Wing offices,
unprecedented for a first lady, and was charged with running point on a
task force to reform the country’s health-care system. She conducted many
of the initial proceedings in secret, eventually leading to a lawsuit. The
initiative died a painful death; she was lampooned and attacked, and she
found herself unable to ignore barbs that grew increasingly personal.

During the dawn of the 24-hour news cycle, no topic was off limits. The
Clintons’ marriage was dissected as a union not of love but shared
ambitions; she was depicted as a ruthless woman who craved power. Her
approval rating dipped to 44 percent, and at a 1994 tobacco rally in
Kentucky, a Hillary effigy was burned.

When she felt bullied, as she had been so many years earlier in Park Ridge,
she wanted to punch back. “As always,” Blair once wrote in her journal,
“she thinks the only answer to anything is to go on the offensive.”

But more often she found herself in a defensive crouch, walling herself off
from her attackers, always seeking control.

Blair suggested she could spare herself headaches by being friendlier to
the press and dabbling in fewer political decisions.

“I know how to compromise, I have compromised,” Blair wrote that Hillary
told her during a phone call. “I gave up my name, got contact lenses, but
I’m not going to try to pretend to be somebody that I’m not.”

During the months before the Fourth World Conference on Women in 1995, she
insisted on traveling to the Beijing event — a move that had the potential
to offend the Chinese. When Democrats balked and the White House hesitated,
she threatened to board a commercial flight and attend anyway, not as first
lady but as a private American.

The administration relented, and she delivered the conference’s signature
speech. “Human rights are women’s rights,” she told the gathering, “and
women’s rights are human rights.”

When Hillary returned to Washington, it was as a global champion of
feminism and, perhaps, a future politician herself. For kicks, Blair
sometimes sent articles to her about the nation’s readiness for its first
female president.

Then, in 1998, two years into his second term, Bill Clinton admitted to
having an affair with a White House intern named Monica Lewinsky. The
scandal led to impeachment and to the spectacle of Hillary, who had once
dismissed questions about her marriage by declaring that she wasn’t “some
little woman standing by my man,” doing exactly that.

Although preserving her marriage confounded some feminists, Hillary’s
approval rating soared to 67 percent in December 1998, the highest it has
been before or since. Her husband survived impeachment, and Hillary
survived public humiliation and endless speculation about whether she
remained married out of love, ambition, or a combination of both.

The Clintons had just six months left in the White House in 2000 when
Hillary learned that her beloved friend Blair, who had been battling lung
cancer, was dying. Hillary visited her in Arkansas, asking Blair how
“Senator Hillary Clinton” sounded. Blair squeezed Hillary’s hand and
whispered, “Don’t ever give up on yourself or what you believe in.”

Hillary, Bill and Chelsea Clinton leave the White House for a Thanksgiving
getaway at Camp David in 1997. (Frank Johnston/The Washington Post) Sen.
Hillary Clinton is joined by Bill, Chelsea and her mother, Dorothy Rodham,
on June 7, 2008, at the National Building Museum in Washington as she
concedes the Democratic presidential nomination to Sen. Barack Obama.
(Richard A. Lipski/The Washington Post)

Hillary Clinton looked into their eyes, her voice dropping. “This is very
personal for me,” the senator from New York told a small group of undecided
voters in a Portsmouth, N.H., cafe in January 2008.

Her voice cracked with emotion. Clinton’s campaign for president was
foundering. Another history-seeking Democrat, Sen. Barack Obama of
Illinois, had won the Iowa caucuses, and polls showed him with a
double-digit lead over Clinton on the day before the New Hampshire primary.

A woman asked how Clinton did it — how, after all she had been through, she
remained so upbeat. Clinton paused, tears welling in her eyes. “I see
what’s happening,” she said. “And we have to reverse it.”

She had, until that point, been scripted and cautious, intent on projecting
the gravitas of a commander in chief. Voters struggled to connect, and the
campaign appeared adrift, beset by bickering and leaks that Clinton seemed
unable to control.

Then, whether it was authenticity or a Hail Mary by a desperate campaign,
Clinton went off the familiar script. Her voice softened. “I just don’t
want to see us fall backwards,” she said. “You know?”

The next day, she erased Obama’s lead and won New Hampshire, though Obama’s
historic momentum would be too much to overcome. Portsmouth, though, was
more meaningful than one primary win. “I found my footing,” Clinton wrote
in “Hard Choices,” her second memoir, “and my voice.”

She refused to concede to Obama, even when it was clear she couldn’t win.
And by the end of her campaign, 18 million people had voted to nominate a
woman for president of the United States.

When the time finally came to withdraw, an 89-year-old woman wearing green
entered the atrium of Washington’s National Building Museum to listen to
Clinton’s concession speech. “When you’re knocked down,” Clinton told
hundreds of supporters, “get right back up and never listen to anyone who
says you can’t or shouldn’t go on.”

The woman in green applauded, and Clinton continued.

“Although we weren’t able to shatter that highest, hardest glass ceiling
this time, thanks to you, it’s got about 18 million cracks in it,” she said
as Dorothy Rodham watched from a few feet away.

Clinton exits after delivering the keynote address April 29 at the David N.
Dinkins Leadership and Public Policy Forum at Columbia University in New
York City. (Kevin Hagen/Getty Images)

Ablack van traveled out of New York last month and into the heart of
America, through Pennsylvania, Ohio and Indiana, stopping at one point in
Joliet, Ill., about 40 miles from the Chicago suburb where a mother once
nudged her daughter outside to confront her tormentor.

The last of Dorothy’s fight had left her in 2011 as Hillary Clinton held
her dying mother’s hand. For the first time, she would have to take on all
those Suzys alone, no one but herself to push her out the door.

Clinton, who visited 112 countries in four years as secretary of state,
announced her second run for the White House on a Sunday in mid-April, and
Hillary haters cracked their knuckles. Her motives will again be
scrutinized, and so, of course, will her marriage. Can she go the distance,
avoiding the traps and attacks, including the self-inflicted ones? And what
if she wins — making her, at 69, not just the first woman but the
second-oldest president to assume office?

Clinton in 1985 wearing her inaugural-ball gown after Bill Clinton was
reelected as governor of Arkansas. (Associated Press)

“I’m aware I may not be the youngest candidate in this race,” Clinton told
Democrats in South Carolina in May. “But I have one big advantage: I’ve
been coloring my hair for years. You’re not going to see me turn white in
the White House. And you’re also not going to see me shrink from a fight.”

The day after her announcement video posted online, Clinton surrendered
catered meals, private jets and prized privacy for stops at Chipotle, a
converted van and unpredictable encounters  with strangers.

On a Tuesday in Iowa, seven vehicles passed grain silos, taking Exit 63
toward a community college in the rural town of Monticello. A small crowd
waited outside to see which Hillary Clinton would emerge from the back
seat: the defiant but locked-in former first lady, the controlled and
locked-down secretary of state — or some new version of a candidate
everyone thinks they know.

The van pulled up inside a loading area, and Clinton stepped out and waved.
Then a door opened, the same as it did more than six decades earlier in
Park Ridge, and she walked through it.

*Clinton’s Donor Dominance Not Absolute
<http://www.wsj.com/articles/clintons-donor-dominance-not-absolute-1434065493>
// WSJ // Peter Nicholas & Laura Meckler – June 11, 2015*

Hillary Clinton appears to be winning over the lion’s share of elite
fundraisers who powered President Barack Obama’s 2012 campaign, another
sign of her dominant position in the Democratic primary. But enough unease
about her candidacy has materialized to give fuel to one of Mrs. Clinton’s
rivals, Martin O’Malley.

A Wall Street Journal survey of many of the top Obama fundraisers found
that some are backing other candidates or weighing their options.
Interviews with donors also found that Mr. O’Malley, a former Maryland
governor, is making an aggressive push to win their allegiance.

Mr. O’Malley, who himself was an Obama fundraising “bundler,” has deep ties
to the Obama campaign finance apparatus and has won sympathetic hearings or
outright support from several of the people who helped pay for the $1.1
billion Obama re-election campaign.

Even a modest level of fundraising support could be enough to propel Mr.
O’Malley through Iowa and New Hampshire, states that hold the first
nominating contests and whose advertising markets are less expensive than
those of Florida and many other states that vote later.

Of 72 top Obama fundraisers from 2012 whose preferences could be learned
through interviews, campaign statements or invitations to fundraising
events, about three in four back Mrs. Clinton. The rest support someone
else, remain undecided or are sitting out the race for personal or other
reasons.

A handful of Mrs. Clinton’s backers said they are prepared to switch
allegiances or to fund more than one Democratic candidate. Kerman Maddox, a
partner at a public-affairs firm in Los Angeles, said that at a comparable
point in the 2008 race he was raising money and organizing events for
then-Sen. Obama. This time, he is considering his options after being
approached by both Mrs. Clinton’s campaign and Mr. O’Malley’s.

“The energy and enthusiasm of 2008 was so infectious, you had to get
involved, and that really doesn’t exist so far in 2016,” said Mr. Maddox.
This cycle “so far is underwhelming to me.”

But Mrs. Clinton has the bulk of the fundraisers in her camp, including
some boldface names and power brokers who raised millions for Mr. Obama,
such as Vogue magazine editor Anna Wintour, longtime Hollywood executive
Jeffrey Katzenberg and movie producer Harvey Weinstein.

In 2012, 249 people raised at least $500,000 each for Mr. Obama’s campaign.
Of them, at least 25 now serve as U.S. ambassadors or in other posts that
bar political work. The Journal determined the intentions of 72 of the rest.

Of the 72 people, 54, or 75%, said they were committed to raising money for
Mrs. Clinton. Six said they had chosen another candidate or were leaning
toward one. Four were undecided.

Eight people said they were sitting out the election for personal or other
reasons.

Mrs. Clinton and her husband have assembled their own network of
fundraisers through decades of campaigning, and a super PAC backing her is
raising money as well. Politics is a game of addition, though, and locking
in the Obama network would strengthen her hand both in the primary and
general election. Moreover, any defections from Mrs. Clinton are
noteworthy, because she is perceived as the overwhelming front-runner.

Mrs. Clinton is devoting considerable time to raising money. On Wednesday,
she attended three fundraising events, in Massachusetts and Rhode Island.
Aides said her aim is to raise $100 million this year to spend during the
Democratic primaries.

“We are in a competitive primary, and Hillary Clinton is working to earn
the support of Americans across the country,” said Josh Schwerin, a
campaign spokesman.

Andrew Weinstein, one of the top 2012 Obama bundlers, said he backs Mrs.
Clinton because “she’s the best chance to preserve the progress that this
president has made. She’s the LeBron James of the Democratic field: She’s
going to be impossible to beat in a primary in 2016, and very, very
formidable in a general election.”

Interviews suggest Mr. O’Malley has the potential to pry loose some of Mrs.
Clinton’s support, aided by his links to the Obama fundraising team. Mr.
O’Malley raised more than a half-million dollars for Mr. Obama in 2012,
when he was governor. His campaign’s national finance director, Michael
Kurtz, served as a Midwest finance director for the president’s 2012
campaign.

Mr. O’Malley is scheduled to attend a June 22 fundraising reception in Los
Angeles co-hosted by Dixon Slingerland, an invitation shows. Mr.
Slingerland raised more than $500,000 for Mr. Obama in 2012. Calls to Mr.
Slingerland seeking comment weren’t returned.

Doug Goldman, another top Obama bundler, said he has met privately with Mr.
O’Malley and is leaning toward supporting him. “Thus far, this race is not
going in the right direction for Hillary,” Mr. Goldman said. “That’s
opening the door for others, including Martin O’Malley. The situation is
causing me to consider the need to provide support elsewhere.”

Bill Hyers, Mr. O’Malley’s senior strategist, said it is possible for the
former governor to do well in Iowa with a small budget, perhaps $5 million
or $6 million. “Iowa’s a cheap state,” he said.

Interviews with former Obama fundraisers found little sign of outreach from
the other declared Democratic candidates, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and
former Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee.

George Tsunis, a New York-based hotel executive, is backing Mrs. Clinton
but said he would switch to Vice President Joe Biden should he enter the
race.

Some fundraisers say they want another option in case Mrs. Clinton
stumbles. Ken Solomon, who was Southern California finance chairman for Mr.
Obama in 2012, said he was inclined to raise money for Mr. O’Malley as well
as for Mrs. Clinton. The party must protect itself in case the leading
candidate should falter, Mr. Solomon said.

“We can’t be left without a Plan B,” he said.

*Inside Hillary's house-party strategy
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/inside-hillarys-house-party-strategy-118905.html#ixzz3cndq1vBH>
// Politico // Annie Karni – June 11, 2015 *

Since declaring her candidacy in April, Hillary Clinton has spent much of
her time attending house parties. Two months and over 30 fundraisers later,
Clinton has raised only a relatively modest $13 million or so from the
events, according to a POLITICO analysis.

For the hours she has invested meeting donors face to face, Clinton’s does
not seem like a cost-effective strategy — $13 million, after all, sounds
like one very good week for former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who has been
running his campaign out of his super PAC and is expected to raise
somewhere in the vicinity of $100 million in the first quarter. And it’s a
departure from her strategy last time around, when Clinton hauled in $36
million in the first three months of her 2008 presidential bid.

But Clinton’s gamble is that while collecting relatively small checks from
relatively small groups — the maximum is $2,700 per head and the average
party attracts about 120 people — she is also harvesting something else:
goodwill, in a business sense, among a cohort of early donors whose feeling
of personal connection to Clinton and her campaign are expected to pay
dividends down the line.

“This was a very unique opportunity, because she’s only raising primary
money, and when the campaign gets geared up and she starts raising general
election money, events will have to be bigger,” said Tom Nides, a longtime
Clinton donor. “It’s hard and she’s got a lot of stamina. But it was an
investment in the future.”

Clinton’s “ramp-up” period, as her campaign calls it, ends Saturday with
her big kick-off rally. During the two month ramp-up stretch, the roughly
60 donors who hosted her earliest fundraisers have acted like early stage
VCs investing in a new start-up. And they are expected to be valuable to
her beyond writing one big check.

A review of the first-wave hosts shows a varied group made up of
billionaire hedge fund managers and real estate honchos, personal injury
lawyers, professors, film producers, ambassadors — even the original tiger
mom.

They represent longtime Friends of Bill with ties to the Clinton
Foundation, former bundlers for President Obama, and individuals getting
involved in presidential politics for the first time. They live in cities
across the country, from New York City to San Francisco to Houston. Many of
them are women. Because of high demand to host and a tight schedule, some
who have never met before have been paired together by the campaign as
co-hosts.

Among the group are those mega-wealthy usual suspects who have backed the
Clintons in the past. They include philanthropist Susie Tompkins Buell, the
co-founder of Esprit and a close Clinton friend; banker Steve Rattner, who
served as Obama’s car czar; billionaires Cheryl and Haim Saban, the
chairman of Univision; billion venture capitalist J.B. Pritzker, media
mogul Fred Eychaner; hedge fund manager and Chelsea Clinton’s former boss
Marc Lasry; and billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer — all longtime
supporters who over the years have also donated millions to the Clinton
Foundation.

Two ambassadors are on the list: Elizabeth Bagley, who bundled $100,000 for
Clinton during her last run and who has given over $1 million to the
Clinton Foundation, and Ed Romero, who was appointed Ambassador to Spain by
Bill Clinton.

But the early host group also includes faces new to Clinton world. Former
Obama bundlers like Frank White and John Morgan, hosted events in
Washington, D.C. and Orlando. Another new addition to a Hillaryland: Eileen
Donahue, who chaired the National Women for Obama Finance Committee in 2008.

The list includes supporters who have never been deeply involved in
political fundraising before, like music producer LA Reid and his wife,
Erica, whose Manhattan event attracted pop star Beyonce and singer Meghan
Trainor. In Atlanta, A.J. and Judy Johnson hosted an event for Clinton on
May 28, part of their first foray into hosting events at the presidential
level. Jonathan Davis, the founder of a Boston real estate firm, and his
wife, Margot, hosted Clinton at their Chestnut Hill home on Wednesday —one
of their first political fundraisers.

“I have never done a fundraiser for her, or for presidential candidates
before,” said Yale Law professor Judith Resnik, who co-hosted a New Haven
event for Clinton last week after some of Clinton’s former classmates from
Yale Law School reached out and asked her to. Her co-host at the event, she
said, was Amy Chua, law professor and best-selling author of “The Battle
Hymn of the Tiger Mother,” another newer addition to Clinton’s coterie of
supporters.

“Having a grown-up woman in charge of the U.S. would not only be great for
the country but for the globe,” said Resnik. “I’m completely enthusiastic
and delighted to help.”

Resnik is not the only supporter motivated by electing the country’s first
female president. While Clinton has not been stressing the historic nature
of her run in public events so far, the early stage fundraisers include
many women who want to be in on the ground floor as Clinton gives it her
last go.

Silda Wall Spitzer, the former first lady of New York, hosted a
“conversation with Hillary Clinton” billed as a women’s-only fundraiser. At
the Women’s National Democratic Club in Washington, D.C., Clinton’s hosts
were Claire Lucas and Judy Dlugacz, founders of a cruise line targeting gay
women. Laura Ricketts, a co-owner of the Chicago Cubs, has previously
served as a top LGBT bundler for Obama. She co-hosted a house party for
Clinton in Chicago last month.

Another faction of the early-investor group are elected officials, like
Reps. Grace Meng and Joe Crowley of Queens, who co-hosted an event in
Queens on June 1, and are valuable because they can mobilize their
constituencies to get involved with the campaign down the line.

“I’ve been a Hillary supporter since day one,” said Crowley, who recalled
Clinton staying over at his home in Queens during her listening tour when
she ran for Senate. California Sen. Barbara Boxer also co-hosted an event
with television producer Steven Bochco and his wife, Dayna.

Some of the hosts proactively reached out to the campaign offering to help,
others were connected by mutual acquaintances, and others were asked by the
campaign to help.

Hillary Clinton speaks as J.B. Pritzker looks on at the Economic Club of
Chicago on Oct. 8, 2014.

“I know people who couldn’t get on the schedule,” said Jacobs, a prominent
New York Democrat and Clinton fundraiser who hosted the former Secretary of
State at his Long Island home on June 1. “I’ve been advocating to do an
early fundraiser for a long time. I let them know a long time ago, I mean
way longer ago than since she announced. I was chomping at the bit.”

The average house party, so far, has been limited to about 120 attendees.
At those events, Clinton typically delivers remarks for about 20 minutes,
and then circulates, spending some one-on-one time and taking a photo with
every attendee. She’s been known to linger longer than scheduled, taking
her time.

All in all, hers is a big pitch for some small checks — and the cheapest
way Democratic donors have been able to get real face time with a top-tier
presidential candidate since Barack Obama’s early fundraising events in
2007.

As the campaign heats up over the coming months, the small house parties at
low prices will be slowly phased out and replaced with larger, lower-dollar
events to attract bigger crowds, according to a campaign official.

But the investments Clinton is expecting from her early stage donors is
emotional capital, which will be used to spread much-needed enthusiasm
among a broader set of donors who can be hit up for money multiple times
over the next 18 months.

“This decision will pay enormous benefits to the campaign long term,” said
Nides. “There’s a multiplier effect.”

*The Real Felony: Denying Prisoners the Right to Vote
<http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/12/the-real-felony-denying-prisoners-the-right-to-vote.html>
// The Daily Beast // Barrett Holmes Pitner – June 12, 2015*

Of course ex-felons should have their voting rights restored. But let’s go
further: There’s no good reason to deny prisoners the franchise.

Recently, Hillary Clinton dramatically put voting rights back on the
national agenda with an audacious call to register every American citizen
when he or she turns 18. Voter ID laws are not new issues in our politics,
but Clinton’s full-throated appeal felt serious and sincere: Perhaps we
will finally tackle the perverse voter disenfranchisement of minorities and
the poor that still persists throughout this country.

But I’ll go her one better. If Hillary is serious about social justice and
equality, I hope she does not overlook one nearly voiceless population that
needs to be included in this debate: ex-convicts returning home from
prison, and, yes, even incarcerated prisoners.

The United States has the most prisoners of any developed country in the
world, and it has the largest total prison population of any nation.
Period. America’s prison population has increased 800 percent since 1980,
and much of the increase is due to harsher punishments for non-violent
crimes. As a result, more than 1.57 million inmates are behind bars in
federal, state, and county prisons and jails at any one time. And when you
consider the estimated 12 million Americans who cycle through county jails
for periods of less than a year, the total number of Americans behind bars
can jump to an estimated 2.4 million.

When you factor in released inmates who are barred from voting due to
felony convictions, the number of voter-disenfranchised Americans grows to
an estimated 5.85 million, or 2.5 percent of the nation’s voting
population, according to a recent report by The Sentencing Project.

Additionally, since America consists of a patchwork of laws varying from
state to state regarding the voting rights of convicted felons, many felons
who have the opportunity to vote are simply unaware or are unable to
overcome the bureaucratic hurdles that would allow them to vote, and as a
result they become de facto disenfranchised.

Some states allow felons to vote if they are on probation, but not if they
are on parole. In Tennessee a felon’s voting rights can be revoked if he is
late on child support payments.

According to Myrna Pérez, deputy director of the Brennan Center’s Democracy
Program, “There are some states where it does not matter what you did, how
long ago it was, how young you were, etc. If you have a felony conviction
in the past you have lost your right to vote permanently, unless the
governor specifically decides that he or she wants to pardon you.”

Yet finding various creative ways to keep certain Americans off the voting
rolls has not been adopted by all of America. Vermont and Maine have both
bucked the trend of voter disenfranchisement and allow inmates to vote.

In fact, Vermont’s 1793 Constitution stipulates that residents can lose
their right to vote only if convicted of voter fraud.

Vermont and Maine have both bucked the trend of voter disenfranchisement
and allow inmates to vote.

So to the Republicans such as New Jersey Governor Chris Christie who have
already scoffed at Clinton’s voter expansion proposal for fear that it
would create voter fraud, and would inevitably deride the expansion of
voting rights to felons and inmates, the State of Vermont successfully
handled this issue more than two centuries ago.

At a national level, one of the biggest questions regarding inmates voting
is what voting precinct these votes fall in. Many prisons are located in
rural areas that are represented by Republicans at the state and national
level, and as African-Americans make up a disproportionate size of the
prison population, many conservative areas would be less inclined to open
voting to a demographic that leans heavily Democratic.

The logical extension would be that we allow prisoners to vote absentee
ballot from their known address at the time of conviction, or the address
they intend to return to upon release, and not for the one where their
detention facility is located.

The debate on extending voting rights to inmates and convicts is more than
just an individual rights or social justice issue. It makes sense from a
public policy and law enforcement perspective too. Voting has been shown to
have a rehabilitative effect that can reduce recidivism and thereby, crime,
and save governments millions of dollars. Recidivism has been shown to drop
by at least 10 percent when voting has been extended to ex-felons.

“It is important for voting rights to be extended to those that are
incarcerated so that they can remain connected to the communities that they
will ultimately return to,” said Laurin Hodge, the president and executive
director of Mission Launch, a non-profit that works to reacclimatize the
previously incarcerated into civil society. “Ultimately prison should be
about rehabilitation and not ongoing punishment.”

Additionally, even for those with life sentences or on death row, the act
of voting can have an impact that reverberates throughout their communities
back home.

It is becoming more apparent that voting is a responsibility that needs to
be fostered, and many people develop the voting habit from observing
previous generations. Voting builds stronger communities of people who are
more likely to participate in the democratic process. Similarly, inmates
who are able to vote will feel more connected and invested in their
communities, and can set a positive example to the outside world while they
are behind bars.

It may be easy to discredit how informed inmates may be, but data are
emerging showing that “informed” voters by and large vote along party lines
and are not as well versed on the issues as we would like to believe. And
we need not forget that prisoners have plenty of spare time, and are one of
the few demographics that could leisurely read two newspapers a day and
still find time to watch the evening news.

The argument for keeping the incarcerated and the newly released off the
voting rolls is based on an archaic punitive disciplinary structure that we
need to move beyond. Maintaining an electoral process that actively works
to disenfranchise nearly 3 percent of eligible voters is a structure that
no democratic nation should support.

*Hillary Rally Vs. the Gun Show at Iowa State Fair
<http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/hillary-rally-vs-gun-show-iowa-state-fair_969226.html>
// The Weekly Standard // Jeryl Bier – June 11, 2015 *

Hillary Clinton will certainly have supporters at Sunday's rally in Des
Moines at the Iowa State Fairgrounds, but could face some stiff competition
from another event: the final day of a three-day gun show. The show is one
of six being held during 2015 at the fairgrounds, and one of more than a
dozen put on around Iowa during the year by the show's promoter, Trade Show
Productions:

The gun show is located in one of the fairground's 24 venues, the William
C. Knapp Building. The Clinton campaign does not specify the venue for
Sunday's rally, but a 2007 rally for Mrs. Clinton on her first run for
president was held at one of the fairground's outdoor staging areas.
According to CBS News, that event featured "an elaborate stage of hay
bales, American flags and even a fireworks show at the conclusion."

Last summer, Mrs. Clinton had some harsh words for Second Amendment
supporters, saying (via The Hill):

“We cannot let a minority of people, and that’s what it is, it is a
minority of people, hold a view point that terrorizes the majority of
people,” Clinton said during a CNN town-hall event.

It is unlikely Mrs. Clinton will address gun control Sunday, and not simply
because of the proximity of the gun show. The second-time candidate has
been hesitant so far in 2015 to articulate many specific policy proposals,
and The Hill even speculated that muting her support of gun control
measures could benefit Mrs. Clinton in the general election:

The extent to which Clinton embraces gun control in her White House bid
remains to be seen.

While an emphasis on guns could help Clinton win over the left, it could
prove to be a liability in several battleground states that could decide
the presidential election.

For the first time in decades, a majority of Americans say it is more
important to protect gun rights than it is to limit gun ownership,
according to a December poll from the Pew Research Center.

The same Pew poll found that a slight majority of women now believe owning
a handgun can protect them from becoming victims of crime.

The gun show is not the only event competing with the Clinton relaunch
rally. The Iowa State Fairgrounds schedule shows that a flea market is also
running Sunday concurrently with the rally. If Mrs. Clinton intends to
continue to make her appeal to be the "champion" of Everyday Americans,
plenty of them should be on hand this weekend in Des Moines.

*Hillary Clinton's Truth-O-Meter record
<http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/jun/11/hillary-clintons-truth-o-meter-record/>
// Politifact // Lauren // Carroll – June 11, 2015 *

Hillary Clinton formally announced her 2016 presidential campaign with a
video in April, and she’s been on the trail since -- but she’s courting
media attention with a major launch event on June 12 at New York City’s
Roosevelt Island, a site that invokes the legacy of its namesake, President
Franklin D. Roosevelt.

The former secretary of state is slated to deliver a speech to a large
audience, a contrast with her recent series of small, roundtable-style
events that she’s held in the early caucus and primary states of Iowa and
New Hampshire.

We’ve fact-checked Clinton more than 100 times since we began operations in
2007 -- a period that stretches back to her first presidential campaign. So
far during the 2016 campaign, we’ve checked nine of her claims.

Clinton, wife of former President Bill Clinton, is also a former Democratic
senator from New York. Her Truth-O-Meter record over the past eight years
includes 34 Trues, 19 Mostly Trues, 23 Half Trues, 18 Mostly Falses, 11
Falses and Two Pants on Fires.

We’ll continue to watch Clinton’s campaign closely looking for facts to
check, but for now, here are some of the most interesting fact-checks in
our Hillary Clinton file.

2016

Most recently, we looked into several claims from a speech in which Clinton
called for an expansion of voting rights. Clinton attacked what she
described as efforts to restrict voting by Republican governors who also
are potential presidential candidates. She singled out former Florida Gov.
Jeb Bush, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, former Texas Gov. Rick Perry and
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker. PolitiFact looked into specific claims related
to these four governors and found that her attack lines were largely
accurate but could have used some additional context. We gave her four
Mostly Trues.

Meanwhile, at a campaign event in Iowa, Clinton tried to show that she
understands the struggles of undocumented immigrants by saying that "all my
grandparents" immigrated to America. We found that not all of Hillary
Clinton’s grandparents were immigrants -- in fact, only one was. (Buzzfeed
fact-checked it first.) So we rated that claim False.

Also in Iowa, she lamented that "hedge fund managers themselves make more
and pay less in taxes than nurses and truck drivers." Looking at the amount
paid, we found that fund managers were paying multi-million-dollar tax
bills to the IRS, compared to an above-average example of a nurse paying
$15,700. Even her intended point -- that hedge fund managers pay a lower
tax rate --  isn’t clearly accurate. We gave that claim a False.

Earlier claims

Before her campaign launch, we looked into Clinton’s claim that she "fully
complied with every rule" while exclusively using private email while
secretary of state. We couldn’t put this claim on the Truth-O-Meter because
too much remains unknown. Still, we interviewed several experts on
government transparency and records preservation. They said a lawyer might
be able to put together a case that Clinton "complied" with the rules
governing federal employee email use -- but they added that her actions are
still hard to defend. (Read the full report.)

In 2014, while on a publicity tour for her book Hard Choices, Clinton said
that she and her husband "came out of the White House not only dead broke,
but in debt." It’s possible that the Clintons’ liabilities exceeded their
assets when Bill’s term ended in 2001, but they were able to muster a cash
down payment of $855,000 and secure a $1.995 million mortgage.
Additionally, in the months following their departure from the White House,
Bill Clinton regularly took in speaking fees of at least $125,000, and
Hillary Clinton received $2.84 million in book royalties. We rated that
claim Mostly False.

In an interview, Clinton said the number of jobs created and people lifted
out of poverty during Bill Clinton’s presidency was "a hundred times" what
it was under President Ronald Reagan. Clinton’s record on these issues does
outpace Reagan’s, but the differences were not like night and day, as her
phrasing claims. We rated this claim False.

Many Republicans have criticized Clinton’s actions before, during and after
the deadly 2012 attack on an American diplomatic compound in Benghazi. In
Clinton’s testimony before Congress, regarding the motivation behind the
attack, she asked rhetorically, "At this point, what difference does it
make?" The question became an oft-quoted sound bite, so we decided to lay
out the full quote in context.

Her 2008 campaign

In a 2008 foreign policy speech, Clinton reminisced about her days as first
lady and a trip to Tuzla, Bosnia, that she made in March 1996. She said, "I
remember landing under sniper fire." But that's not what happened, as
demonstrated by CBS News video that shows Clinton arriving on the tarmac
under no visible duress, and greeting a child who offers her a copy of a
poem. We rated the claim Pants on Fire.

Perhaps the strangest claim from Clinton’s first campaign was that "A ham
and cheese sandwich on one slice of bread is the responsibility of the USDA
... But a ham and cheese sandwich on two slices of bread is the
responsibility of the Food and Drug Administration." A USDA undersecretary
told PolitiFact that Clinton’s description of sandwich regulations is
accurate -- and that the rule "defies logic." We rated her claim True.

*Change she can believe in: Clinton bets voters want more of the same, only
better
<http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-hillary-clinton-theme-20150611-story.html#page=1>
// LA Times // David Lauter – June 11, 2015 *

the heart of Hillary Rodham Clinton's strategy for winning the presidency
lies a basic assumption about the public's desire for political change.

History says that after eight years of a presidency, Americans typically
want something different. Elections in which one party seeks a third term
in the White House tend to be tough slogs. Indeed, as Clinton prepares for
the first major rally of her campaign on Saturday in New York, Americans by
about 2 to 1 say the country is headed down the “wrong track.”

But what sort of change do Americans want?

Republican candidates, from former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush in the party's
center to Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas on its right, are betting that voters want
a major shift toward conservatism.

Clinton, the overwhelming favorite to win the Democratic nomination, has
made a different calculation. Her advisors believe that a significant share
of those who say the country is on the wrong track feel that Republican
policies would only make matters worse.

On the big issues, voters favor President Obama's values and priorities,
Democratic strategists say. What they want is to see that agenda
implemented more effectively.

That's why, while Clinton plans to roll out policy proposals this summer,
some of which will differ from or go beyond Obama's, the more crucial pitch
will be about her ability to govern.

As she told supporters at a recent speech in South Carolina: “I do know how
hard this job I'm seeking is. I've seen it up close and personal. You're
not gonna catch me wondering what it's like. Instead, I'm spending my time
planning for what I will do for you when I get there.”

“You're also not going to see me shrink from a fight,” she added. “I think
you know by now I don't quit.”

That emphasis on Clinton's toughness and tenacity aims to reach voters who
say in polls and focus groups that they supported Obama but have grown
disappointed about how much he's been able to accomplish. It addresses a
major concern for Democrats, but also poses some risks.

The concern could be seen at a focus group a few weeks before last fall's
midterm election, as an African American woman, the mother of a 7-year-old
girl, sighed slightly as she gave her opinion of the man she had twice
backed for president.

“I would say he seems depressed,” she said of Obama. “I really don't feel
he's had the opportunity to do the things that he is capable of doing
because different parties are holding him back.”

That's a view that strategists in both parties continue to see frequently.

“Most people don't blame the president,” said Democratic pollster Mark
Mellman. “But they do wish more had gotten done.”

The first big risk for Clinton in trying to turn that sentiment to her
advantage is the possibility that Republicans have better gauged the public
mood.

“An overwhelming majority of Americans want to see a new set of policies
from their next president, not a continuation of the same failed ones,”
said Republican National Committee spokesman Michael Short.

A second pitfall is that highlighting Clinton's skill

at political combat could worsen a problem that Obama famously poked when
the two opposed each other in 2008: “You're likable enough, Hillary,” he
dismissively quipped during a debate.

On the first concern, public polls offer considerable evidence for the
Democrats' view, with one major caveat about the role of government.

The RNC's Short points to polls showing that Americans want the next
president to “change direction” from Obama's policies. When asked about
specific issues, however, rather than Obama in general, the needle swings
in the other direction.

Asked, for example, whether the government should do more to address the
growing income gap between the very rich and everyone else, Americans
supported more government action by 57% to 39% in a recent CBS/New York
Times poll. Even larger majorities favored a hike in the minimum wage —
which all the current GOP candidates oppose — plus higher taxes on
millionaires and government-mandated paid family leave.

On social issues, numerous polls have shown the public growing more liberal
across the board. Most notably, surveys find that by roughly 60% to 40%,
the public favors marriage rights for same-sex couples, which the
Republican candidates oppose with varying degrees of fervor.

Half of Americans in a recent poll by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center
said they believe that the earth's climate is warming largely as a result
of human activity such as burning fossil fuels, the position espoused by
nearly all Democratic elected officials. Only about 1 in 4 said that no
solid evidence proves the climate is warming, the position taken by most
Republican hopefuls.

By 72% to 27% in a Pew survey last week, the public said that immigrants in
the country illegally should be allowed to stay. That majority favoring
what conservatives denounce as “amnesty” included 42% who supported
allowing the immigrants to seek citizenship, as Clinton advocates, and 26%
who favored permanent residency without citizenship, Bush's position.

But while the majority of Americans agree with Democrats on those specific
issues, Republicans stay competitive largely because of the deep, abiding
skepticism and frustration about government voiced by a majority of
Americans, most notably non-college-educated whites.

In a sharply divided nation, a majority of Americans agree with Democrats
on specific goals, but a crucial swing bloc mistrusts the ability of either
party to get much done or to make the nation's economic system work on
their behalf.

That's where touting Clinton's experience and reputation for political
shrewdness could pay off, Democratic strategists believe.

At the same time, campaign officials seem resigned to the reality that the
negative side of how the public sees her probably won't change.

Unlike most presidential hopefuls, Clinton has the luxury of not having to
introduce herself to the public or get over the hurdle of having people see
her as a plausible candidate. The flip side of that, however, is that she
enters the race with many Americans already opposed to her.

As she has moved back into the political arena from her days as secretary
of State, the percentage of Americans who see Clinton unfavorably has
risen. Amid controversy over her use of a private email server when she
headed the State Department and questions about the motivations of donors
to the Clinton Foundation, the share who see her as honest and trustworthy
has declined.

Democratic strategists insist that's a manageable problem. “It's an issue,”
said one strategist with long-standing ties to both Clinton and former
President Clinton. “But it's not the only thing.”

“We did a poll just before the 1992 election, and only about one-third of
people said Bill was honest and trustworthy, but they elected him anyway,”
he said, speaking anonymously to avoid straining ties with the Clintons.

Ironically, one factor helping Clinton is the partisanship that has stalled
large parts of Obama's agenda. As Democrats see Clinton under attack, polls
show they have started to circle the wagons, dismissing the criticisms as
political sniping from the other side. A recent Des Moines
Register/Bloomberg Politics poll of Democrats likely to vote in Iowa's
caucuses, for example, found that 7 in 10 thought the Clintons were getting
a “bad rap” on the controversies.

America's partisan lines have hardened dramatically during the George W.
Bush and Obama presidencies, notes Alan Abramowitz, a political science
professor at Emory University in Atlanta and an expert on U.S. elections.
Because of that, the Clinton campaign's main task is to keep Democrats
motivated to vote while reaching out to a relatively small slice of voters
who are truly up for grabs, including those disappointed by the
achievements of the last eight years.

“It's almost certainly a close election,” Abramowitz said. “The partisan
divide is so strong. There's less room for movement.”

*Hillary Clinton's big bet: Stress toughness, tenacity, Democratic agenda
<http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-hillary-clinton-theme-20150611-story.html?track=rss&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&dlvrit=1115915#page=2>
// LA Times // David Lauter – June 11, 2015 *

At the heart of Hillary Rodham Clinton’s strategy for winning the
presidency lies a basic assumption about the public’s desire for political
change.

History says that after eight years of a presidency, Americans typically
want something different. Elections in which one party seeks a third term
in the White House “tend to be toss-ups” at best, said Alan Abramowitz,
political science professor at Emory University.

As Clinton prepares for the first major rally of her campaign, Saturday in
New York, Americans by about 2-1 say the country is headed down the “wrong
track.”

But what sort of change do Americans want?

Republican candidates, from former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush in the party’s
center to Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas on its right, are betting that voters want
a major shift toward conservatism.

On the big issues, voters favor President Obama’s values and priorities,
Democratic strategists say. What they want is to see that agenda
implemented more effectively. Clinton, the overwhelming favorite to win the
Democratic nomination, has made a different calculation. Her advisors
believe that a significant share of those who say the country is on the
wrong track feel that Republican policies would only make matters worse.

That’s why, while Clinton plans to roll out policy proposals this summer,
some of which will differ from or go beyond Obama’s, the more crucial pitch
will be about her ability to govern.

As she told supporters at a recent speech in South Carolina: “I do know how
hard this job I’m seeking is. I’ve seen it up close and personal. You’re
not going to catch me wondering what it’s like. Instead, I’m spending my
time planning for what I will do for you when I get there.

“You’re also not going to see me shrink from a fight,” she added. “I think
you know by now I don’t quit.”

That emphasis on Clinton’s toughness and tenacity aims to reach voters who
say in polls and focus groups that they supported Obama, but have grown
disappointed. It addresses a major concern for Democrats, but also poses
some risks.

The concern could be seen at a focus group a few weeks before last fall’s
midterm election as an African American woman, mother of a 7-year-old girl,
sighed slightly as she gave her opinion of the man she had twice backed for
president.

“I would say he seems depressed,” she said of Obama. “I really don’t feel
he’s had the opportunity to do the things that he is capable of doing
because different parties are holding him back.”

That’s a view that strategists in both parties continue to see frequently.

“Most people don’t blame the president,” said Democratic pollster Mark
Mellman, “but they do wish more had gotten done.”

“An overwhelming majority of Americans want to see a new set of policies
from their next president, not a continuation of the same failed ones,”
said Republican National Committee spokesman Michael Short.The first big
risk for Clinton in trying to turn that sentiment to her advantage is the
possibility that Republicans have better gauged the public mood.

A second pitfall is that highlighting Clinton’s skill at political combat
could worsen a problem that Obama famously poked when the two opposed each
other in 2008: “You’re likable enough, Hillary,” he dismissively quipped
during a debate.

On the first concern, public polls so far offer considerable evidence for
the Democrats’ view, with one major caveat about the role of government.

Short points to polls showing that Americans want the next president to
“change direction” from Obama’s policies. When asked about specific issues,
however, rather than Obama in general, the needle swings in the other
direction.

Asked, for example, whether the government should do more to address the
growing income gap between the very rich and everyone else, Americans
supported more government action by 57%-39% in a recent CBS/New York Times
poll. Even larger majorities favored an increase in the minimum wage, which
all the current Republican candidates oppose; higher taxes on millionaires;
and government-mandated paid family leave.

On social issues, numerous polls have shown the public growing more liberal
across the board. Most notably, surveys find that by roughly 60%-40%, the
public favors marriage rights for same-sex couples, which the GOP
candidates oppose with varying degrees of fervor.

Half of Americans in a recent poll by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center
said they believe that the Earth’s climate is warming largely as a result
of human activity such as burning fossil fuels, the position espoused by
nearly all Democratic elected officials. Only about one-in-four said that
no solid evidence proves the climate is warming, the position taken by most
GOP hopefuls.

By 72%-27% in a Pew survey, the public said that immigrants in the country
illegally should be allowed to stay. The majority that favors what
conservatives denounce as “amnesty” is divided, with 42% favoring allowing
the immigrants to seek citizenship, as Clinton advocates, while 26%
supported permanent residency without citizenship, Bush’s position.

But while the majority of Americans agree with Democrats on those specific
issues, Republicans stay competitive largely because of the deep, abiding
skepticism and frustration about government voiced by a majority of
Americans, most notably non-college-educated whites.

In a sharply divided nation, a majority of Americans agree with Democrats
on specific goals, but a crucial swing bloc mistrusts the ability of either
party to get much done or to make the nation’s economic system work on
their behalf.

That’s where touting Clinton’s experience and reputation for political
shrewdness could pay off, Democratic strategists believe.

At the same time, campaign officials seem resigned to the reality that the
negative side of how the public sees her probably won’t change.

Unlike most presidential hopefuls, Clinton has the luxury of not having to
introduce herself to the public or get over the hurdle of having people see
her as a plausible candidate. The flip side of that, however, is that she
enters the race with many Americans already opposed to her.

As she has moved back into the political arena from her days as secretary
of State, the percentage of Americans who see Clinton unfavorably has
risen. Amid controversy over her use of a private email server when she
headed the State Department and questions about the motivations of donors
to the Clinton Foundation, the share who see her as “honest” and
“trustworthy” has declined.

Democratic strategists insist that’s a manageable problem. “It’s an issue,”
said one strategist with long-standing ties to both Clinton and former
president Bill Clinton, “but it’s not the only thing.”

“We did a poll just before the 1992 election, and only about one-third of
people said Bill was honest and trustworthy, but they elected him anyway,”
he said, speaking anonymously to avoid straining ties with the Clintons.

One factor helping Clinton is the partisanship that has stalled large parts
of Obama’s agenda. As Democrats see Clinton under attack, polls show they
have started to circle the wagons, dismissing the criticisms as political
sniping from the other side. A recent Des Moines Register/Bloomberg
Politics poll of Democrats likely to vote in Iowa’s caucuses, for example,
found that seven in 10 felt the Clintons were getting a “bad rap” on the
controversies.

And because America’s partisan lines have hardened dramatically during the
Bush and Obama presidencies, the Clinton campaign’s main task is to keep
Democrats motivated to vote while reaching out to a relatively small slice
of voters who are truly up for grabs, including those disappointed by the
achievements of the last eight years.

“It’s almost certainly a close election,” Abramowitz said. “The partisan
divide is so strong. There’s less room for movement.”

*Centrist Dems wary of Hillary’s move to the left
<http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/244631-centrist-dems-wary-of-hillarys-move-to-the-left>
// The Hill // Alexander Bolton – June 11, 2015 *

Moderate Democrats are worried about Hillary Clinton’s recent embrace of
liberal policies.

After positioning herself as a centrist and steely potential commander in
chief in the 2008 Democratic primary, Clinton has shifted.

Clinton is now to the left of President Obama on the federal minimum wage.
While Obama has endorsed a $10.10 hourly rate, Clinton has signaled support
for more than doubling it, to $15 an hour.

The former first lady says same-sex marriage should be a constitutional
right and endorsed Obama’s executive action shielding millions of illegal
immigrants from deportation. She wants broad reform of a criminal justice
system and calls for automatic voter registration.

Red-state Democrats in Congress don’t want Clinton to lose sight of a
broadly appealing economic message that can win over white working-class
voters who have deserted the party in droves recently.

“It’s important that she has an economic platform that people can get on
board with regardless of what state they live in,” said Sen. Jon Tester
(Mont.), the chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.

“Be everywhere — Montana, Missouri, everywhere,” Tester added.

Centrist Democrats say Clinton should broaden, not narrow, her approach.

“I don’t think you write anything off. You show that you’re not afraid and
you show the ability to go into an area, and it will help lift spirits,”
said Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.). “I always do visit all 55 counties in my
state. So when I ran statewide, I didn’t give up on certain counties and
never visited. So you don’t give up on anybody.”

It is very common for presidential candidates to move closer to their base
in the primary and shift back to the center in the general election. But
Clinton’s strategy suggests she needs to shore up more of the base and is
responding to pressure from liberal leaders such as Sen. Elizabeth Warren
(D-Mass.).

Still, moderate Democrats are particularly concerned about Clinton’s
potential effect on state legislative races in Republican dominated states.
They worry if she stays away from solid-red states, they will have a hard
time winning down-ballot races that could shape the congressional districts
of the future.

Some were alarmed when The New York Times reported that she is discarding
the nationwide electoral strategy that her husband employed in the 1990s to
win Southern states such as Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana and
Tennessee.

The Times reported she is poised to “retrace Barack Obama’s far narrower
path to the presidency” by focusing on the liberal base in a handful of
battleground states in the Midwest and West instead of persuading undecided
voters.

They fear a reprise of the failed electoral strategies of John Kerry in
2004 and Al Gore in 2000, who poured their resources into a handful of
swing states instead of attempting to widen the playing field by playing
offense in traditionally Republican territory.

“The election to look at was in 2004. John Kerry had conceded 227 electoral
votes before Election Day. That means George Bush only had to get 43. That
is the danger you run into. It took Al Gore down in 2000. You can’t concede
but so much. I don’t think you concede anything. I think you battle them
everywhere,” said David “Mudcat” Saunders, a Democratic strategist who
specializes in reaching white, working-class voters.

Saunders says Kerry blundered by suspending campaign operations in seven
states — Virginia, Louisiana, Arkansas, Missouri, Nevada, Arizona and
Colorado — after winning the Democratic nomination in 2004. It didn’t help,
he added, that Democrats decided to nominate him at a convention held in
liberal-leaning Boston.

While Clinton might not have much hope of winning in Louisiana, Missouri or
South Carolina, strategists argue that making a good-faith effort in those
states can help candidates down ballot.

“The problem you got is the state legislatures. Take South Carolina for
instance. In 2016 they’re going to have house elections and senate
elections in their statehouse. If the Democrats don’t play there, it
doesn’t increase turnout. Turnout in all cases always helps the Democrats
in those areas,” Saunders said.

Clinton’s current chief rival, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, has
aggressively pushed a 50-state strategy for more than a year.

Last year he met with activists, unionized workers and college students in
Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi and South Carolina. This month he wrote a
letter to Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz
calling for presidential debates in red states.

“By expanding the scope geographically of debates beyond the early calendar
states we can begin to awaken activism at the grassroots level in those
states and signal to Democrats and progressives in places like Texas,
Mississippi, Utah, and Wyoming that their states are not forgotten by the
Democratic Party,” he wrote.

Rep. David Price (N.C.), one of only a handful of white Southern Democrats
left in the House, said, “I agree with what people in the so-called red
states are saying about the down-ballot effects. A successful president is
going to have to have some support from those states and members elected
from those states.

“There’s a stake for the presidential candidate in spending a reasonable
amount of time in non-blue-state areas,” he added.

The Clinton campaign, which did not comment for this article, has not
publicly acknowledged giving up on a 50-state strategy.

It unveiled a nationwide organizing effort in April with a video in which
Clinton vowed “there’s gonna be campaigns in all 50 states and we’re gonna
need as many people as we can to volunteer, to sign up, to help us organize
because I need your voices to be speaking out.”

Rep. John Yarmuth, a Democrat from Kentucky, said he has heard Clinton
already has a field director in his home state.

He believes Clinton has a chance of winning Kentucky, which her husband
carried twice; he urged her to visit.

Some Democrats, however, argue that Clinton won’t alienate voters in
Southern states if she pushes immigration reform and same-sex marriage.

“In my district we have over 100 languages spoken in the public school
system. It’s become a very diverse population,” said Yarmuth. “We have a
huge thoroughbred breeding operation and thoroughbred breeding industry
that relies heavily on immigrant labor. The people of Kentucky understand
how important immigration reform is.

“Voting rights are important everywhere. Gay marriage is an issue right now
that doesn’t move voters away from somebody,” he added.

*Hillary Clinton's Economic Inequality Whisperer
<http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/hillary-clinton-s-economic-inequality-whisperer-20150612>
// National Journal // Eric Garcia – June 12, 2015*

Heather Boushey’s work on income inequality, paid family leave, and more
may provide a preview of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 messaging.

June 12, 2015 In her first campaign video, Hillary Clinton talked about how
"the deck is still stacked in favor of those at the top" and how she wanted
to be the champion for "everyday Americans." In one of her first campaign
stops, she criticized outsized CEO compensation. And in March, before her
official announcement, she said Americans should "think hard" about ways to
make sure cities deal with inequality. But despite Clinton's talk, the
actual specifics of what she would do as president to ameliorate growing
wealth and income inequality in the United States have been quite thin.

To get an idea of what Clinton's proposals could be, talk to Heather
Boushey, an economist who's regarded as a valuable adviser to the former
secretary of state on economic policy.

"In terms of what I have been talking to her about, it has been about the
big questions about what we should do for our economy and how we should
think about the interventions that policymakers should make," Boushey told
National Journal.

Boushey, who is advising Clinton in a private capacity, serves as executive
director and chief economist of the Washington Center for Equitable Growth,
which aims to make wonky research tangible for policymakers. In a way,
that's what Boushey is working to do for Clinton. Boushey has researched
the role of women in the workforce, income inequality, and paid family
leave—all things that Clinton will be talking about in 2016.

Elisabeth Jacobs, senior director for policy and academic programs at the
Washington Center, says Boushey is good at it, too. Boushey and Jacobs once
explained French economist Thomas Piketty's landmark book on wealth
inequality, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, to Sen. Angus King. That,
Jacobs said, was like giving the senator "the Cliff Notes" version, and
then starting "a conversation about what this might actually mean based on
what he was thinking."

"She's really exceptional in doing that translational work between the
serious economic and other social science academic work into the policy
space," Jacobs says of Boushey.

Boushey's work on paid family leave has lent some potential clarity to the
candidate's policy gaps. Clinton hasn't said much about how she would enact
the policy, and Jane Waldfogel, a professor at Columbia University School
of Social Work, says it's difficult to get that done at the national level
versus at the state level. Three states that have started paid family leave
policies have used their already-existing temporary disability insurance
programs to do so, and only five states and Puerto Rico have temporary
disability insurance (Washington State had its program signed in 2007 but
is not yet in effect.).

Boushey thinks a national paid family leave policy is possible. In a 2012
paper for Center for American Progress, where she is a senior fellow,
Boushey laid out plan for a paid family leave program that would be
administered by the Social Security Administration.

On CEO pay, Boushey again gets more detailed.

"There's a lot of wiggle room to be taxing at the top, but how you do that
actually has implications for compensation," Boushey says, citing a study
by Piketty, University of California, Berkeley's Emmanuel Saez, and
Harvard's Stefanie Stantcheva. Boushey had the economists' study out in
front of her during our interview. "There's a lot of evidence that the way
we've been structuring tax policy vis–à–vis those at the top is not
creating the right incentives for investment, [research and development]
and shared prosperity," she said.

Boushey is glad that the wealth gap has come to the forefront of the 2016
political debate.

"I have to say that it is beyond exciting to see things that you have been,
for me, working on spreadsheets for and thinking about for a really long
time actually entering the political discourse," she said.

Boushey said recoveries from the last three national recessions, including
the most recent one, have seen anemic job growth, which has made people
more aware of the gap between rich and poor—and what that means for the
economy.

"What you're seeing are repeated recoveries that just aren't cutting it,"
she said. "We've been like ostriches putting our heads in the sand going,
'What has changed in the past two decades?'" Boushey answers her own
question: "Well, one of the biggest things is inequality."

Other researchers emphasize Boushey's realism and attempts to convert ideas
that are being discussed in research circles into tangible policies.

"Heather really has been the person over the last several years who has
taken the lead of just thinking really hard what it would take to enact
paid family leave on the national level," said Jane Waldfogel, a professor
at Columbia University School of Social Work. "She has her feet on the
ground and has a very firm grasp of the economic principles."

For Boushey, an important part of being an income inequality-focused
economist interested is trying to make the results of her research tangible
for the average citizen.

"Where I think you hit the sweet spot in research is when what you can
actually tease out of these datasets actually resonates with people's
real-lived experiences," Boushey said. "For me, those moments come when I
talk about my own research with my allergist, with my mom, and my
mother-in-law."

By translating income inequality to people's experiences, Boushey could
help Clinton craft a message on inequality that could appeal to ordinary
Americans—and present inequality not through a divisive prism of class war,
but as a matter of economic security.

*THE LEGACY TRAP
<http://www.nationaljournal.com/next-america/newsdesk/hillary-clinton-jeb-bush-and-the-legacy-trap-20150612>
// National Journal // Ronald Brownstein – June 12, 2015*

Can Clinton and Bush transcend debates about their families’ pasts to offer
answers for the country’s future?

As Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush formalize their presidential candidacies
over the next few days, both face the complex challenge of adapting their
family legacies to their parties' new dynamics.

Compared with Bill Clinton's era, the Democratic Party today is more
culturally liberal and economically populist. Compared with George W.
Bush's era, the GOP is more dogmatically committed to shrinking government.
These changes have presented Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush with the common
puzzle of appealing to parties that have grown more ideologically militant
without renouncing the policy agendas and political strategies associated
with their family names—agendas and strategies that often defied each
party's traditional orthodoxy.

So far, this test has stumped Bush more than Clinton—as underscored by the
campaign-staff reshuffle the former Florida governor announced this week,
just before he is due to officially declare his candidacy next Monday. His
lackluster first months exploring the race have been dominated by questions
of where he would extend the policies of his brother, George W. Bush. That
has exposed Jeb Bush to darts from both ideological conservatives and party
pragmatists most concerned about finding a candidate who can win.

The pragmatists were dismayed by Bush's recent struggles to explain what he
would have done differently than his brother in Iraq. That ordeal left
Republicans fearing that if the party nominates Bush, Democrats would find
it too easy to convert the campaign into a referendum on returning to the
policies of the last Bush administration.

Bush's problems with the Right are rooted in two other elements of his
brother's legacy. Though staunchly conservative on most issues, George W.
Bush backed a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants and an
aggressive role for Washington in education reform. Politically, each idea
was intended to court voters beyond the GOP base.

Conservatives chafed against those policies during George W. Bush's
presidency and, after he left office, successfully eroded support in the
party for both ideas. Jeb Bush, though, threatens that victory. The younger
Bush has said he would accept either a pathway to citizenship or permanent
legal status for the undocumented, and he has defended the Common Core
curriculum reform (while rejecting President Obama's effort to advance it
through federal policy).

Can Bush win these arguments in the GOP? Despite loud resistance from
prominent conservatives, "Jeb Bush's view on immigration is … more
acceptable to Republican primary voters than most people assume," notes
Peter Wehner, senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. While
many Republican voters view immigration skeptically, in the latest Pew
Research Center survey, nearly three-fifths of the party (including
GOP-leaning independents) said the undocumented should be allowed to remain
legally inside the country. That number reached nearly two-thirds among the
college-educated Republicans who are Bush's natural constituency.

Bush's continued support for Common Core may be a tougher sell with
Republican voters. But it's probably less important for Bush to win the
specific debates over immigration and education than to subsume both issues
beneath bold new domestic and foreign policy ideas that excite GOP voters.
So far he hasn't done that. Unless Bush can shift his campaign's focus
toward the country's future, he's likely to remain stuck in debates over
his party's past. And driving in reverse is no way to win a race.

Hillary Clinton, who kicks her campaign into higher gear with a major
address on Saturday, hasn't faced nearly as much pressure yet within her
party but could eventually confront her own legacy trap. Her announced
rivals, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and former Maryland Gov. Martin
O'Malley, have denounced free-trade and financial-deregulation policies
that Bill Clinton pursued. Other Democrats worry about the Clinton family
heritage of ethical controversy. On both fronts, Hillary Clinton's
challenge will be less to defend that record than to transcend it.

On social issues such as gay marriage, Hillary Clinton has already embraced
the Democrats' more liberal consensus. But for all her fiery economic
rhetoric, it's not clear where she will land between her husband's
business-friendly, deficit-conscious centrism and her party's rising
populist current. It seems inevitable that Clinton, like Obama, will
propose more responsibility for Washington than her husband envisioned when
he declared, "The era of big government is over." Less certain is whether
she will challenge her party to simultaneously reform government, as Bill
Clinton did when he restructured welfare and balanced the federal budget.
If she embraces reform (for instance, by streamlining entitlements for
seniors to fund investments in kids), she risks antagonizing the Left; if
she doesn't, she risks helping Republicans tag her as a return to
uncontrolled big-government liberalism.

Like Jeb Bush, Hillary Clinton has to convince Americans that she is
offering not just a dusted-off collection of ideas stored in the family
attic but an agenda attuned to the challenges people face today. Their
famous families make almost everything else about running for president
easier, but no contenders may find that bar harder to clear than the
candidates named Clinton and Bush.

*POLITICAL INSIDERS POLL
<http://www.nationaljournal.com/magazine/poll-does-hillary-clinton-s-wealth-pose-a-problem-for-democratic-messaging-in-2016-20150612>
// National Journal // Sarah Mimms – June 12, 2015*

"I think the contributors to the foundation pose the biggest problem."

Q: Does Hillary Clinton's wealth pose a problem for Democratic messaging in
2016?

DEMOCRATS (91 VOTES)

Yes: 30%

No: 70%

Yes

"Clouds the income-inequality message, which is not necessarily a winning
message, but complicates it nonetheless."

"Nothing says 'middle class' quite like a $250,000 speaking fee."

"Hillary's camp will continue to protest that she's operated in a lawful
way, but traction on speeches-for-hire and suspect activities of [the
Clinton Global Initiative] are too inviting to ignore by ad-makers.
Problem."

"Best case, we won't be able to attack Repubs as out of touch. Worse case,
they turn HRC into Romney."

"It's not the wealth itself but the means by which she accumulated it that
makes it hard for 'ordinary Americans' to relate."

"I think the contributors to the foundation pose the biggest problem."

No

"Voters respect wealth. The issue is what you do with it and how you got
it. She will be fine."

"FDR, JFK, HRC. No."

"As long as she doesn't build a car elevator in her house, she will be
fine. Americans still admire success, although not ostentatiousness."

"Last time I checked, Lifestyles of the Rich & Famous and Keeping up with
the Kardashians were very popular TV shows. She's fine as long as she keeps
a common touch."

"If she were new to the electorate, possibly. But that's not the case. If
you like her, you like her regardless. Who are the nonwealthy candidates?"

Q: Does Hillary Clinton's wealth pose a problem for Democratic messaging in
2016?

REPUBLICANS (88 VOTES)

Yes: 82%

No: 18%

Yes

"Hypocrisy anyone?"

"Both her declared primary opponents will put her on the defensive on this."

"It's going to be very hard for her to talk about income inequality when
she's been getting six figures for an hour-long speech."

"Her definition of 'flat broke' is different from most people's."

"In the context of income inequality, it takes away a huge issue for the
Democrats."

"Wellesley, Yale, corporate boards, governor's mansion, White House,
Senate, Foggy Bottom, back to the White House…  just like you and me."

"Not because of how much money she has but the way she has made it and the
way they have operated the Clinton Foundation."

"Like Romney, it is not the fact [that]she is wealthy that is a problem; it
is her inability to talk about it that is a killer."

"Not as bad as Romney's car garage, but makes her Warren channeling seem a
bit hollow."

No

"Rich Democrats get a pass in a way that rich Republicans never could."

"People generally expect politicians to be rich."

"She'll argue she can't be bought. The irony will be lost on the stupid."

. . . . . . . . . . . .

*What Hillary Clinton Can Learn from Michelle Kwan's Figure Skating Career
<http://www.newrepublic.com/article/122008/what-if-hillary-clinton-michelle-kwan>
// The New Republic // Elspeth Reeve – June 11, 2015 *

Hillary Clinton has hired beloved Olympic figure skater Michelle Kwan. But
if you followed the athlete’s career, the symbolism couldn’t be more
disastrous for Clinton’s 2016 campaign. Clinton’s career has some
uncomfortable parallels with Kwan’s: No one could beat the Kween. Until
someone did.

Some political writers (dudes) like to compare politics to football or
baseball, team events with many players and many games. But clear-eyed
sport-loving political writers (me) know that politics is actually like the
glamour sports—ice skating and gymnastics—which involve years of unseen
training and a whole team of coaches and image-makers who sit on the
sidelines on the big night as the athlete competes alone in the spotlight.

The tortured but entertainingly ominous HillKwan analogy goes like this:
The 1998 Olympics Games in Nagano are the 2008 election. HillKwan is the
beloved favorite. Kwan was the U.S. national champion; Clinton had coasted
to reelection in the Senate. But a year before the Olympics/election, a
fresh-faced youngster named Tara Lipinski [Barack Obama] had been getting
attention. At the Olympics, HillKwan won over the judges [super delegates],
but in the free skate, Tarack competed dazzling feats of difficulty and
strength [doing the math on the primaries and caucuses]. In the end,
HillKwan was defeated by the upstart Tarack.

Now, the important and serious question we face today is: Is the 2016
election exactly like the 2002 Olympic figure skating competition? Like
Clinton in 2016, the graceful Kwan was the favorite in Salt Lake City, too.
It was her turn. Despite troubles with her longtime coach [staff?], she was
again U.S. national champion. Sure, Kwan faced tough competition from
Russians [Republicans?] in the form of Irina Slutskaya [war on women!], but
she was the battle-tested veteran, competing on home turf [friendly
demographic trends!]. She started strong, winning the short program [the
invisible primary?]. But in the free skate, Kwan stumbled. She was
surpassed not only by Slutskaya, but by another teammate, the 16-year-old
athletic snoozefest Sarah Hughes [Martin O’Malley??], who became 2002
Olympic champion. After the competition, Kwan skated the exibition she’d
planned long before—in a gold dress, to the song “Fields of Gold.” That,
sports fans, is hubris. As she finished, tears ran down her cheek. Take
note, Hillary.

“Every four years a new person arose to take out Michelle,” former pairs
skater Chris Schleicher told Deadspin last year. Sound familiar? Kwan is
now fully on board with Clinton’s campaign to make sure Olympic past is not
political prologue.

*With boost from Clinton, efforts to expand voting access advance
<http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/boost-clinton-efforts-expand-voting-access-advance>
// MSNBC // Zachary Toth – June 11, 2015 *

States from Rhode Island to Louisiana took steps this week toward making
voting easier. In Washington, a new bill that would automatically register
citizens to vote when they turn 18 is gaining traction among Democrats. And
Ohio’s top voting official blocked a Democratic lawmaker on Twitter amid a
spat over efforts to increase access to the ballot in the nation’s most
pivotal swing state.

It’s more evidence that Hillary Clinton’s major speech on voting last
Thursday helped move along a conversation – already underway, to be sure –
about how to to expand access to the ballot, especially by modernizing
voter registration systems. It’s a conversation that threatens to put
Republicans on the defensive after years of playing offense on the issue
with a wave of restrictive voting laws.

In her speech in Houston last Thursday, Clinton laid out an expansive and
positive agenda to boost voting participation. The centerpiece was
automatic voter registration, in which any citizen who has contact with the
DMV is automatically registered unless he or she chooses to opt out—putting
the responsibility for registering on the government rather than the
individual. But Clinton also talked up online voter registration, a
nationwide standard of at least 20 days of early voting, a full restoration
of the Voting Rights Act, and a loosening of felon disenfranchisement laws,
among other ideas.

In March, Oregon became the first state in the nation to pass automatic
voter registration. Since then, 14 other states plus the District of
Columbia—including deep red ones like Texas and Georgia—have introduced
automatic registration bills, according to a tally by the Brennan Center
for Justice. And three states plus D.C. have this year passed online voter
registration, bringing the total number of jurisdictions that offer it to
27.

In just the week since Clinton spoke, Ohio and Rhode Island have both moved
forward with online voter registration bills, and Louisiana passed a bill
to study automatic voter registration. If it weren’t for the fact that most
state legislatures have already adjourned for the session, the number of
states moving forward with expansive legislation would likely be larger.

“Many, many states are moving in the direction toward a more modern voter
registration system,” said Wendy Weiser, the director of the Democracy
Program at the Brennan Center. “I’m really glad that this issue is now at a
national stage, that we sort of set our sights toward the end goal of a
real modern system that registers every eligible voter, that’s accurate,
that’s updated, and where the government takes responsibility.”

U.S. Rep. David Cicilline on Wednesday introduced a federal automatic voter
registration bill modeled on Oregon’s. The measure already has around 50
Democratic co-sponsors, including powerful figures like DNC Chair Debbie
Wasserman Schultz, former Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee
Chairman Steve Israel, and civil rights icon Rep. John Lewis.

Cicilline’s bill was in the works before Clinton’s speech, but he said it
could still get a boost from her high-profile embrace of the idea.

“Hopefully the secretary’s comments will bring some more attention to this
issue, and help us build momentum,” Cicilline said.  I think we have a
responsibility to do everything we can to remove as many obstacles as
possible to voting.”

The bill is unlikely to go anywhere in a Republican Congress that won’t
even restore the Voting Rights Act. But Cicilline suggested his legislation
could nonetheless provoke a useful and clarifying debate about whether
Republicans actually want to make voting easier.

“I think if there’s substantial resistance from the leadership in the
House, it will invite a real conversation,” he said. “You know: Why is it
that one political party is not supporting this effort, and one is?”

But Ohio might be ground zero for how Clinton’s ambitious plan may already
be boosting those looking to make voting easier.

On Wednesday afternoon, State Rep. Kathleen Clyde, a Democrat, was notified
on Twitter that she’d been blocked by an account in the name of Secretary
of State Jon Husted. The move came after Husted, a Republican, responded
defiantly to Clinton’s criticism of Ohio’s voting policies, among other
states, in her speech. Husted, rebutting Clinton, called the state “the
gold standard” for election administration.

That led to a series of tweets by Clyde Wednesday mocking the “gold
standard” claim. Clyde accused Husted of improperly purging the vote rolls,
and failing to mail absentee ballots to around 1 million eligible voters
just because they hadn’t voted recently. And she noted, accurately, that
Husted has waged a years-long campaign to reduce early voting.

Husted and Clyde also have been sparring over how and whether to advance
some of the expansive voting policies Clinton proposed. Though he’s gained
a national reputation as an advocate of restrictive voting policies, Husted
has long been an advocate of online registration, and he testified
Wednesday in support of a Republican-sponsored online registration bill,
calling it “a common sense reform that is long overdue.” The bill is
expected to pass the Senate, but its prospects in the House are far less
clear.

But in a letter sent the same day, Clyde wrote that Husted doesn’t need new
legislation to implement online registration. She said it’s already in
place, but it currently only accepts registration updates, not new
registrations. All that’s needed to change that is for Husted to “switch
on” full online registration.

“He’s been talking about this for years. How about some action?” said Clyde
in an interview. “This is the type of thing that we should get up and
running well before the presidential election in Ohio.”

Husted has said he needs further legislative authority, and election law
experts in Ohio say the question is debatable.

In the letter, Clyde also urged Husted to support a bill she introduced
earlier this year that would establish automatic voter registration.
Husted’s office has opposed that measure, misleadingly suggesting – despite
the opt-out provision – that it would require people to be on the rolls
even if they didn’t want to be.

A Husted spokesman didn’t respond to a request for comment about blocking
Clyde on Twitter, or about the secretary of state’s positions on online or
automatic voter registration.

*De Blasio says he will not endorse Hillary Clinton until she clearly
opposes Trans-Pacific Partnership
<http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/de-blasio-not-back-hillary-opposes-trade-deal-article-1.2255489>
// NY Daily News // Jennifer Fermino – June 11, 2015 *

He's really playing hard to get.

Mayor de Blasio, who has said he won’t endorse Democratic presidential
front-runner Hillary Clinton until he’s convinced she’s got a plan to
battle income inequality, is now calling on his old boss to speak out
against a controversial trade deal.

Hizzoner said Thursday he’s looking for a “very clear statement” from
Clinton opposing the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which is loathed by the
left but being pushed by President Obama.

“I think it’s very important she speak up, make clear . . . that this trade
deal is unacceptable,” de Blasio said on a phone call he held with
reporters blasting the deal.

He said it was important both as a matter of policy, and politically.

“People all over the country at the grass roots – certainly Democrats all
over the country – are looking to her for leadership and her strong voice
at this moment would make a very big difference,” he said.

It’s his latest attempt to push the traditionally centrist Clinton further
to the left as she gears up for the 2016 Democratic primary.

It’s his latest attempt to push the traditionally centrist Hillary Clinton
(pictured) further to the left as she gears up for the 2016 Democratic
primary.

Clinton has so far been mum on the trade deal, which would remove tariffs
and other barriers to trade between the U.S. and 11 other nations.

Supporters say it will help the U.S. compete globally, but detractors —
including many unions — insist it’s a jobs killer.

In another snub to Clinton, he praised two of her rivals for the Democratic
nomination — U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont and former Maryland Gov.
Martin O’Malley — for their opposition to the trade deal, which Congress is
currently debating.

“They both said very important and appropriate things on trade, and I give
them both credit for that,” said de Blasio, who headed Clinton’s 2000
Senate campaign in New York.

“And I think that represents what a lot of people in this party feel on the
ground all over the country.”

De Blasio declined to say whether Clinton’s support for the deal would be a
deal breaker in terms of his endorsement.

“I don’t deal with hypotheticals,” he said.

On Wednesday, de Blasio announced that he would not be attending Clinton’s
campaign kick-off on Roosevelt Island on Saturday because he still hadn’t
heard her vision for combating income inequality, which he has made the
cornerstone of his mayoralty.

Although he’s repeatedly declined to endorse Clinton since she announced
her candidacy in April, de Blasio has taken pains to praise the former
secretary of state.

On Thursday, he said he is impressed with her so far.

“I’m very optimistic about where she and her campaign are going,” he said.

*Dem operative Woodhouse says NYT retracted charges of illegality in
Clinton email story
<http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/jun/11/brad-woodhouse/dem-operative-woodhouse-says-nyt-retracted-charges/>
// Politifact // Jon Greenberg – June 11, 2015 *

Questions about Hillary Clinton’s handling of her email records during her
time as secretary of state are likely to dog her throughout her
presidential campaign. But the candidate will have many defenders,
including Correct the Record, a super PAC created to support Clinton.

Correct the Record president Brad Woodhouse, a long-time Democratic
operative, dismissed the entire email matter during an interview recently
on CNN.

"Every federal employer has to consider what they archive as work-related
and what they consider personal, and she did what every other federal
official did, what every other previous secretaries of state did,"
Woodhouse told New Day co-hosts Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota on June 5,
2015. "Look, nobody has found -- you know, the New York Times  wrote a
story that some type of laws had been broken. Turns out they had to retract
that. People had to back off that, and it's totally not true."

In the news business, retractions don’t come lightly and we wondered if in
fact, the newspaper of record had taken back part of what it reported on
Clinton.

In reality, the New York Times hasn’t retracted a word. The closest it came
was in acolumn from public editor Margaret Sullivan, who wrote that the
article that broke the story "was not without fault." But the lapse,
Sullivan continued, was a failure to list exactly which regulations Clinton
might have ignored.

That lack of specificity, Sullivan wrote, allowed Clinton supporters to
score political points. "Not because it highlighted a factual error — the
story was accurate — but because it kicked up enough dust to obscure the
facts."

Sullivan, we should note, doesn’t speak for the newspaper. Her job is to
serve as an internal but independent critic of the paper’s work, something
akin to an inspector general in government.

Formal retractions or corrections come from the editors themselves, and as
we noted, that has not happened.

Adrienne Watson, a spokeswoman for Correct the Record, said Woodhouse was
not using the word retraction in an official sense. Rather, he was speaking
of the gradual fade in New York Times coverage that insinuated that Clinton
had broken some law.

"Ultimately the charge was retracted, even if the New York Times never
issued a correction," Watson said. "Their own experts changed their minds."

Let’s unpack that.

What the ‘New York Times’ said

The newspaper broke the story under the headline "Hillary Clinton Used
Personal Email Account at State Dept., Possibly Breaking Rules." It’s
opening lines were "Hillary Rodham Clinton exclusively used a personal
email account to conduct government business as secretary of state, State
Department officials said, and may have violated federal requirements that
officials’ correspondence be retained as part of the agency’s record."

So the top of the story suggested a possible violation, which falls short
of charging outright that she broke a law, as Woodhouse said.

But the article does lay the groundwork to add weight to the idea of a
potential violation.

"Under federal law, however, letters and emails written and received by
federal officials, such as the secretary of state, are considered
government records and are supposed to be retained so that congressional
committees, historians and members of the news media can find them."

And:

"Regulations from the National Archives and Records Administration at the
time required that any emails sent or received from personal accounts be
preserved as part of the agency’s records.

But Mrs. Clinton and her aides failed to do so."

About week and half after the initial story, the New York Times wrote that
theregulations on preserving emails were vague.

"Although the White House has strict requirements dating back two decades
that every email must be saved, there is no such requirement for federal
agencies. Instead they are in charge of setting their own policies for
determining which emails constitute government records worthy of
preservation and which ones may be discarded."

While, as the story noted, President Barack Obama signed a 2014 bill that
required government officials who use personal email accounts to hand over
those records in 20 days, that law took effect after Clinton left the State
Department. According to Thomas Blanton, a government disclosure expert
cited in the story, this gave Clinton "wiggle room."

Blanton was also cited in the original article. However, it is not accurate
to say he changed his mind from one week to the next. In the first New York
Times story, Blanton said "it was a shame" that the emails from Clinton’s
personal account had not been turned over automatically.

The New York Times also cited in its first story Jason Baron, a lawyer at
Drinker Biddle and Reath, who is a former director of litigation at the
National Archives and Records Administration. At the time, Baron said he
could not think of another instance when a high-ranking official used a
private email account for all government business. Blanton described
Clinton’s email scenario as a serious breach.

However, Baron did not say the practice was illegal. In the weeks that
followed, he consistently said it was a bad practice.

Our ruling

Woodhouse said that the New York Times retracted the charge that Clinton’s
handling of her email broke a law. That's wrong on two points. The
newspaper never accused Clinton of breaking a law. Also, while the
newspaper’s public editor said the original story should have included more
details, the paper never issued a retraction or a correction. A spokeswoman
for Woodhouse’s organization agreed with that point.

The claim is not accurate, and we rate it False.

*Bill Clinton’s Labor Secretary Urges Hillary Clinton to Oppose TPP at
Kickoff
<http://observer.com/2015/06/bill-clintons-labor-secretary-urges-hillary-clinton-to-oppose-tpp-at-kickoff/#ixzz3cmUfLHyo>
// The Observer // Jullian Jorgensen – June 11, 2015 *

Former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich, who served under President Bill
Clinton and oversaw the roll-out of the North American Free Trade
Agreement, joined Mayor Bill de Blasio today in urging Hillary Clinton to
use her presidential campaign kickoff speech to oppose the Trans-Pacific
Partnership trade pact—a deal Mr. Reich deemed “NAFTA on steroids.”

“I would hope that she very clearly, specifically opposes the Trans-Pacific
Partnership,” Mr. Reich said of the former secretary of state in a media
conference call this afternoon.

Mr. de Blasio, Ms. Clinton’s former Senate campaign manager who has yet to
offer up an endorsement in the Democratic primary, also urged Ms. Clinton
to come out against the trade deal, which unions and progressive
politicians have derided as bad for American workers.

“I’d like to see a very clear statement that this trade deal should be
opposed and should be stopped,” Mr. de Blasio said.

While he knew what he’d like to hear, Mr. de Blasio has said he will not
attend Ms. Clinton’s campaign kick-off, which is being held Saturday just
down the East River from Gracie Mansion on Roosevelt Island. Today, he
recalled her speaking on trade issues in 2008 in a way that “resonated” in
states like Ohio, which he visited to campaign for her in that year.

“I think it’s very important she speak up make clear that there will be no
more NAFTAs,” Mr. de Blasio said. “People all over the country, at the
grassroots, certainly Democrats all over the country, are looking to her
for leadership, and certainly her strong voice would make a very big
difference.”

Mr. Reich noted it would not be the first time Ms. Clinton, as a candidate,
has taken a position that differed from the policies of her husband, former
President Bill Clinton. He noted her recent push to end mass incarceration.

“I hope that she does the same with the TPP, relative to NAFTA,” Mr. Reich
said.

Mr. Reich was charged with rolling out NAFTA under Mr. Clinton and, like
many who oppose the TPP, said the 1990s trade pact had delivered poor
results for American workers.

“Once the dust cleared, we did find that a lot of manufacturing jobs left
the U.S., they first went to Mexico and then they promptly went to
Southeast Asia,” Mr. Reich said.

He was also charged with enforcing the trade deal’s guidelines for better
labor conditions in other countries, but said it proved “extraordinarily
difficult to do,” something he suspected would hold true for the TPP as
well.

Mr. Reich and Mr. de Blasio bashed the idea of Congress holding a
“fast-track” up or down vote on the trade pact, very little of which has
been made public. The deal has pitted many in the left wing of the
Democratic party against President Barack Obama, who backs the deal.

“To have this large a trade agreement or investment agreement negotiated in
secret and fast tracked through Congress without any opportunity for
amendment, when most of America has no access to this trade agreement at
all—what I know about it was leaked through Wikileaks—it seems to me makes
a mockery of democracy,” Mr. Reich said.

*Bill Clinton brushes aside foundation criticism
<http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/11/politics/bill-clinton-foundation-hillary-2016/index.html>
// CNN // Dan Merica – June 11, 2015 *

The entire Clinton interview will air Sunday at 9 a.m. on CNN's "State of
the Union" with Jake Tapper.

Denver (CNN)Bill Clinton aggressively denied allegations that donors to his
family's foundation were given special treatment by Hillary Clinton's State
Department in a lengthy interview with CNN set to air on Sunday.

The former president told CNN's Jake Tapper that no Clinton Foundation
donor has "asked me for anything," adding that his wife was too busy as
secretary of state to do favors for foundation supporters.

"She was pretty busy those years," Clinton told Tapper. "I never saw her
study a list of my contributors, and I had no idea who was doing business
before the State Department."

The Clinton Foundation and their rolls of foreign and corporate donors have
become a flashpoint for Hillary Clinton's newly announced presidential
campaign. Critics and investigative reporters have sought to prove that
supporters of the Clinton Foundation were currying favor with the Clintons
when they donated, but no blatant example of influence peddling has been
revealed in months of scrutiny.

Clinton said that any crossover between Clinton Foundation donors and
companies the State Department was lobbying for abroad was more
happenstance than nefarious.

"America's always had to lobby for American-made airplanes," Clinton said,
referring to the fact that Boeing, an American airplane manufacturer, had
worked with both the State Department while also donating to the
foundation's work in Haiti.

"I don't think they (donated) to make the government like them better. We
do like them better. All Americans are grateful that there are American
jobs and businesses around the world," Clinton said. "So I don't know of
anything, if there was even an appearance of conflict, except all these
folks helped us do what we do, which I think is good work."

While Clinton said nothing was ever given to the foundation's donors, he
said that he could not outright deny that any of his donors were hoping for
anything in return when they cut his foundation a check.

"I know of no example, but I don't ever know what people's motives are," he
said.

Clinton echoed many of his wife's supporters and aides when he said attacks
on his foundation were strictly about politics.

"Nobody even suggested it or talked about it or thought about it until the
political season began," Clinton said..

The foundation, however, has admitted they've made missteps in the past,
particularly on the reporting and approval of their foreign donations.
Foundation aides admitted earlier this year they "made mistakes" in
reporting, but did nothing intentionally wrong.

Clinton's comments came during the annual meeting of Clinton Global
Initiative America in Denver, where foundation supporters made nearly 80
pledges to address issues such as providing low-income Americans with
alternatives to predatory loans and providing Navajo Nation with solar
power.

In his interview with Tapper, Clinton described his foundation as an
endeavor to "get people who have money to people who don't, and to give it
to them in a way that's empowering so it actually changes their lives."

Clinton reiterated that the foundation's aim was to help the powerless;
people "who are working as hard as they can, but who don't have enough
money to support their kids and meet basic human needs."

"They can't change the future," he said. "(For them) every tomorrow is just
like yesterday. That's how I define powerless. Not poverty. Not adversity
alone. But the inability to alter your condition."

The entire Clinton interview will air Sunday at 9 a.m. on CNN's "State of
the Union" with Jake Tapper.

*'Conversation' with Hillary Clinton? That'll be $2,700
<http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/afp/article-3121244/Conversation-Hillary-Clinton-Thatll-2-700.html>
// Daily Mail // AFP - June 12 2015 *

Four, five, even six times per week, Hillary Clinton meets deep-pocketed
supporters eager to shake hands with the celebrity Democrat --
all-but-obligatory encounters helping her amass the war chest needed to win
the White House.

Qualifying guests are invited to hold what is described as a "conversation
with Hillary," at a cost of $2,700 -- the legal limit set by the Federal
Election Commission (FEC) on donations to candidates in the 2016
presidential primary cycle.

Once the primaries are decided, a supporter can contribute a fresh $2,700
maximum to a candidate in the presidential election.

Clinton, a former secretary of state and the prohibitive favorite for the
Democratic nomination, has participated in some 40 fundraising receptions
since launching her campaign in April, according to the Sunlight
Foundation, a nonpartisan Washington organization that studies campaign
financing.

By any measure it is an intense schedule to follow from now until Election
Day 17 months away, and more rigorous than the smattering of public events
she has held as a candidate.

Clinton, 67, holds her first major campaign rally Saturday in New York, one
expected to draw thousands of voters.

But who attends the swankier, less publicized functions?

Friends of Clinton, influential Democrats, executives, a Facebook
co-founder, her husband Bill, and clean-energy billionaire Tom Steyer have
participated in the events. On June 29, rocker Bon Jovi will sing for one
of the gatherings.

Clinton participated in three receptions Wednesday in three cities in the
US northeast.

Regulatory loopholes could allow Clinton to extract more money from her
donors, but the candidate has publicly committed to reforming campaign
finance laws in order to dampen the growing influence of private donations
on US elections.

Prominent Republican rival Jeb Bush regularly commands tens of thousands of
dollars per attendee at certain events, in extraordinary cases up to
$100,000.

He avoids campaign ceilings through a legal formulation known as a "super
PAC."

These types of political action committees were born from a 2010 Supreme
Court decision allowing unlimited contributions to such groups as a form of
free expression, provided the entities remain independent from the
candidates and their campaigns.

But the alleged independence of such super PACs has come into question. Jeb
Bush's "Right to Rise" group is led by a close associate of the
all-but-declared candidate, and the organization is exclusively dedicated
to supporting Bush's run.

Bush, a former Florida governor, has yet to announce his candidacy -- that
is expected to occur Monday in Miami. But the PAC's staffers are already
talking openly about preparing for Bush's campaign.

By delaying formal declaration of his candidacy, Bush can continue to raise
unlimited funds for his super PAC, bypassing campaign contribution caps.

- 'Obscene moment' -

Clinton herself will likely hold her nose and open the fundraising
floodgates in order to fill Democratic campaign coffers if she is to match
Bush's money juggernaut.

A specific goal is already said to have emerged: exceed the $1 billion
raised by President Barack Obama, the Democratic Party and affiliated
groups for his successful 2012 re-election effort.

Several Democrats allied with Obama, and close to Clinton, are expected to
launch a fundraising effort seeking contributions to Priorities USA Action,
a super PAC formerly committed to Obama.

Clinton is expected to tap into such flows.

"She does not have clean hands," said Bill Allison, a senior fellow at
Sunlight Foundation.

"She would argue that she's forced to do it because that's the system we
have," Allison added. "That to some extent is true, but that doesn't make
her noble."

One candidate who says he refuses to embrace the fundraising leviathan is
independent Senator Bernie Sanders, a "Democratic socialist" and Clinton
rival in the primaries who believes campaign finance will be a central
theme of the election.

"We live in an obscene moment," Sanders said Thursday.

"Billionaires are now literally buying American elections and candidates."

*Duggan's power now rivals Putin, Bill Clinton jokes
<http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/detroit-city/2015/06/11/bill-clinton-detroit-bankruptcy-duggan-putin/71084104/>
// Detroit News Washington Bureau – June 11, 2015 *

Former President Bill Clinton heralded Detroit's turnaround after the Motor
City's exit from a record setting Chapter 9 bankruptcy restructuring — and
jokingly compared the city's mayor to Russian leader Vladimir Putin.

At a Clinton Global Initiative event Wednesday in Denver, Clinton held a
panel discussion with Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan, Kresge Foundation
president and CEO Rip Rapson and a Detroit baker and business owner, April
Anderson.

During the nearly 40-minute discussion on neighborhood revitalization,
Clinton said that being mayor of Detroit could be America's "most coveted
municipal job" — and noted that with the Detroit land bank, much of the
city's 139 square miles is controlled by the city.

Detroit's 2013 bankruptcy restructuring allowed Duggan to "basically become
the most powerful municipal official in the country. He controls over half
the land mass in the city of Detroit now. He's making old Putin look like a
piker — and people actually like (Duggan)," Clinton said to laughter,
according to video of the event posted online by the Clinton Foundation.

Rapson said Duggan may not live that image down: "That's a great image. I
like to think of Mayor Duggan as our Mayor Putin. That's terrific. I think
that's going to stick," Rapson said.

The city owns nearly half the city's property, Duggan said, or about 40,000
vacant parcels. Clinton compared Detroit to the "Homestead Act" in 1862
that convinced Americans to help settle the west by offering them free
land. Duggan didn't directly respond to the Putin comparison.

Kresge was one of the nonprofits that helped Detroit exit bankruptcy more
quickly by contributing to a fund that saved city-owned art at the Detroit
Institute of Arts from being sold and defrayed pension losses for retirees.

Clinton praised the city's revitalization, but noted that the city lost 60
percent of its population since the 1950s — and is down a quarter since
2000.

Duggan, 56, said that he is focused on boosting the population — and has
said he wants to be judge when he is up for re-election if the city is
growing again. Detroit has lost population for every year that Duggan has
been alive.

"You can drop Manhattan, Boston and San Francisco in the city of Detroit
boundaries — and still have room left over," Duggan said. The real
challenge is revitalizing the neighborhoods after the dramatic turnarounds
in downtown and midtown, he said.

Duggan said there are 5,000 new housing units under construction in
Detroit. Duggan said he is working to sell the 40,000 vacant houses in the
city. The city is auctioning three homes a day. On Tuesday, three homes
sold for a total of $100,000, Duggan said.

Duggan noted that the city is offering to allow homeowners to buy next door
vacant lots for just $100. The city is now also offering to lease vacant
land if the neigbhorhood association signs off on the use — such as a
playground or urban farm.

During the event, Duggan said Clinton is the single biggest customer of
Detroit watchmaker Shinola. Clinton bought customized watches for the
Secret Service agents on his security detail that featured the presidential
seal as Christmas presents.

*Speech inflation: Why Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and others get massive
speaking fees
<https://fortune.com/2015/06/11/politician-speaking-fees-speeches/> //
Fortune // Ben Geier – June 11, 2015 *

In just under two years, President Obama will be out of office, leaving the
White House and giving way for another politician to start taking flak.
What, pray tell, will he do with all that free time? If his predecessors
offer any clue, he won’t do much, but he’ll get paid a lot for it.

Last week, Politico reported that former President George W. Bush makes
between $100,000 and $175,000 for every speech he gives and that he has
given at least 200 speeches since leaving office in 2009. A bit of simple
math translates that activity into more than $30 million for the former
president in speech fees alone. Compare that to the relatively paltry
$400,000 a president makes a year while in office, and you can see why
presidents look forward to their retirement.

Paying ex-presidents to give speeches really took off with Gerald Ford,
Politico notes—which makes sense, since Ford didn’t ever really plan to run
for president and likely figured he would stay in the House much longer
than he did. Ford took umbrage when he was criticized for making money off
of his former job, saying that as a private citizen he could leverage his
past however he pleased.

Not long after Ford started hitting the lecture circuit, the Washington
Speakers Bureau—home to many high-powered speakers, including George W.
Bush and his wife Laura—was founded in 1979. These agencies have played a
major role in the skyrocketing fees that high-powered speakers now command.

“Whenever you have a middleman, that adds to the cost,” said Lance Strate,
a communications professor at Fordham University. The desire among agencies
to maximize fees, and the added ability to negotiate that comes with having
professional representation, means organizations are more likely to see
speaking fees grow. Plus, the agency system simply provides more access to
influential figures like ex-presidents, meaning more groups are able to get
the power elites they want, if they are willing to pay the price.

But why exactly are organizations willing to pay so much for an hour of a
former politician’s time? It isn’t for the content, that’s for sure.
Generally, speakers and those who hire them are mum on just how much money
gets handed over for these engagements—which, by the way, aren’t usually
the most thought-provoking or newsworthy speeches. (Politico notes that in
one speech to a bowling industry group, Bush let loose the earthshaking bon
mot that “bowling is fun.”)

“The speech is kind of secondary to … just being able to have a big name at
your event,” Strate said. “It might get reported on some form of TV or
cable news, which further adds to the prestige and the publicity of the
event.”And even if it doesn’t end up on the evening news, almost every
conference will put their speeches on YouTube, where there is always a
chance it will go viral.

Though speakers fees are often kept confidential, we do have a few
estimates of what famous ex-politicians make:

Bill Clinton supposedly made around $225,000 for a gig last February.

Rudy Giuliani, the former mayor of New York and one-time Republican
presidential hopeful, is said to have pulled up to $270,000 for a speech.

Sarah Palin, former Alaska Governor, former Republican vice-presidential
candidate, and all-time cable news and tabloid fixture—is said to have made
$115,000 for a speech in 2011.

These are just the big guns. Even the fringiest of also-rans—think Howard
Dean and Herman Cain—have big-time speakers agents and can pull in serious
coin for giving a fluffy 45-minute talk. Given that most of the declared
2016 candidates on both sides of the aisle have a fairly slim chance of
becoming president, perhaps financial incentives, rather than the pull of
public service, has some impact on just how many people run for high office.

*Clinton rally coincides with gun show at fairgounds
<http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/caucus/2015/06/11/hillary-clinton-gun-show-iowa-state-fairgrounds/71074790/>
// The Des Moines Register // Josh Hafner – June 11, 2015 *

Hillary Clinton's Iowa campaign kickoff event will share the Iowa State
Fairgrounds this Sunday with an established gun show.

The gun show's organizer, a Republican county supervisor, has welcomed
Clinton, a Democratic frontrunner for president, to visit to learn about
Iowa gun enthusiasts and hunters.

"If Hillary Clinton would come through, I would welcome her," said Daryl
Klein, 56, of Dubuque County, who's operated gun shows in Iowa for more
than 30 years." I would like her to see what we do instead of the rhetoric
put out by the media a lot of the times, what and who we are."

Clinton, the former first lady and secretary of state, has called for
tighter gun regulations in the U.S. as recently as last year, calling the
country's handling of firearms "way out of balance" in an address to the
National Council for Behavioral Health in Maryland.

"We have to rein in what has become (an) almost article of faith, that
anybody can own a gun anywhere, anytime. And I don't believe that," she
said, according to Politico.

When informed of Klein's invitation to the Clinton campaign, Iowa
spokeswoman Lily Adams said she would pass it along.

"Hillary has been to the state fairgrounds before and is excited to host
the launch party there on Sunday. It's no surprise to us that other
organizations found a home at the fairgrounds as well."

Security at the gun show

Klein stressed to The Des Moines Register that ample safety rules enforced
by his gun show should prevent any worry about the amount of firearms that
the gun show will draw to the same site of Clinton's event.

The show's team of private security ensures each gun that enters the show
is empty, marked and rendered inoperative with a cable tie, he said. His
security guards also check guns upon exit, Klein said.

Still, accidents happen: During the show's 2012 event at the fairgrounds,
one vendor shot his own hand while setting up a gun display. That vendor,
now banned from the show, was not seriously injured.

"We are a family event. We have lots of women and children come through
also," Klein said. "I think sometimes we get a bad rap."

Other candidate visits

Clinton wouldn't mark the first presidential candidate to visit one of
Klein's gun shows, held under his banner of Trade Show Productions, Ltd.,
which have taken place at the fairgrounds for years.

Republican Rick Santorum, the 2012 Iowa caucuses winner now on his second
White House campaign, has visited the gun show in the past, Klein said, as
well as Iowa U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley, also a Republican.

One-time GOP candidates Tom Tancredo and Sam Brownback also visited in
years past, Klein said.

*Hillary Clinton Supports Women's Rights, Gay Rights in "Living History"
Instagram Video
<http://www.eonline.com/news/665831/hillary-clinton-supports-women-s-rights-gay-rights-in-living-history-instagram-video-watch-now>
// E! Entertainment – June 11, 2015 *

Hillary Clinton's Instagram game is on!

The 2016 presidential hopeful only joined this realm of filtered squares
yesterday, but she's already got a lifetime of accomplishments up on
display! In a mere six posts--including one "Living History"
video--@hillaryclinton has brought the social media world up to date on
what she's been doing throughout the years to advance women's rights and
gay rights.

This particular clip includes photos from Hillary's childhood, her wedding
to Bill Clinton (!), family trips to Disneyland and her own daughter
Chelsea Clinton becoming a mother. We also look back and see her as first
lady, New York's first elected female Senator and U.S. Secretary of State.
In videos pieced together from decades back to the present, she champions
the a similar message: "Human rights are women's rights, and gay rights are
human rights."

Brava! Ms. Clinton even had time to put up a most impressive #throwback
Thursday photo that shows she's had lots of ambition from the get-go!

Hillary, who made her Insta-debut with a cleverly captioned pantsuit pic,
is using this feed to rally her supporters, too. She's got a graphically
pleasing countdown to her official campaign kickoff on New York City's
Roosevelt Island, urging her current followers to "Get in a New York State
of Mind" and "tag a friend who should follow before Saturday"!

#SomebodyHiredAGoodSocialMediaManager!

*Lady Gaga and Tony Bennett to sing for Hillary
<http://pagesix.com/2015/06/09/lady-gaga-and-tony-bennett-to-sing-for-hillary/>
// NY Post // Emily Smith – June 9, 2015 *

Lady Gaga and Tony Bennett will serenade Hillary Clinton at a fundraiser
for the presidential candidate at Manhattan’s Plaza Hotel.

Tickets for the June 27 event are $2,700 a pop with a limited number of
$1,000 tickets.

But the devoted few who raise $50,000 get blessed with host status, a photo
with Clinton (and possibly Gaga and Bennett) and an invite to a VIP
after-party.

A source said, “They’re not sure if it’ll be a seated affair or if people
will be standing — it’s a pricey night to be standing.”

Gaga has long supported Clinton, calling for her to run for president and
blasting Tim Gunn for criticizing her pantsuits.

Gaga said in 2011, “I think Hillary Clinton has more important things to
worry about than her hemline.”

*Quote Of The Day
<http://www.theskimm.com/2015/06/10/skimm-for-june-11th-3?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+theSkimm+%28theSkimm%29>
// The Skimm – June 11, 2015 *

“Hard choices” – The caption on Hillary Clinton’s first Instagram post that
featured red, white, and blue pantsuits. House of Uncle Sam would approve.

*OTHER DEMOCRATS NATIONAL COVERAGE*

*O’MALLEY*

*O'Malley: I haven't seen video of pool party brutality
<http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/11/politics/martin-omalley-mckinley-pool-party/index.html>
// CNN // Alexandra Jaffe & Betsy Klein – June 11, 2015 *

As a former mayor of Baltimore, Martin O'Malley has made racial unrest and
law enforcement reform an issue in his nascent presidential campaign.

But on Thursday night, he said he had not seen the video of the latest
incident that's sparked cries of police brutality against minorities: an
officer's apparent disproportionate reaction to reports of a group of teens
fighting at a pool party in Texas.

The video of the incident went viral and critics accused the officer Eric
Casebolt of racism. Casebolt was caught on tape responding to reports of
fighting at a pool party by slamming a bikini-clad, teenage girl to the
ground and waving his gun at a group of boys, most of them black.

He resigned on Tuesday, amid a police investigation into his actions.

When CNN asked O'Malley about the incident, he said, "I haven't seen it,
I've heard of it."

O'Malley said because of the widespread use of camera phones, "we're going
to be seeing more incidents that involve police officers and citizens," but
did not comment on substance of the specific incident in Texas.

"And often times, those incidents will involve issues of race and legacy of
race that all of us, whether black or white, share as Americans. And that
issue of race in America and law enforcement have been intertwined for 300
to 400 years in this country," he said.

O'Malley said that officers who are "well-trained and play by the rules"
are the "norm," but acknowledged videos like these make Americans question
that. Officers should adopt body cameras and other tools to combat the
negative perception of police officers and protect themselves, O'Malley
said.

"With the advent of new technology in the hands of every citizen, we need
to put better technology in the hands of police departments so they can be
open and transparent and accountable," he said.

During his campaign launch, O'Malley touched on the death of Freddie Gray,
who died in the back of a police van in Baltimore.

"There is something to be learned from that night, and there is something
to be offered to our country from those flames," he said.

*O’Malley touts progressive values, experience, results
<http://qctimes.com/news/local/government-and-politics/elections/o-malley-touts-progressive-values-experience-results/article_9387cb37-a722-5799-8872-edd63daedc77.html>
// Quad City Times // James Lynch – June 11, 2015 *

Selling himself as a progressive who gets things done, Martin O’Malley
engaged in classic Iowa retail politics Thursday afternoon at a Mount
Vernon house party.

O’Malley, who later had a campaign rally at Sanctuary Pub in Iowa City,
emphasized his experience and record of getting things done as Baltimore
mayor and two terms as Maryland governor.

“I am the only candidate in this race with 15 years of elected executive
experience.” O’Malley said more than once during a 13-minute stump speech
and about 20 minutes of question-and-answer.

That’s important, he told more than 120 people who crowded into Nate and
Maggie Willems’ home, because “getting things done matters."

“It matters not only for the accomplishment of the task at hand, it matters
for restoring the public trust necessary to build the deeper and larger
consensus so we can start acting like Americans again,” O’Malley said.

The 52-year-old O’Malley also drew a generational distinction between
himself and the “very honorable and good people” — Hillary Clinton, 67, and
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, 73 — who also are seeking the Democratic
presidential nomination.

His perspective is one that will “speak to where our country is going
rather than where our country has been,” O’Malley said.

His audience liked the merchandise, but for many, it is too early to commit
to a candidate.

“He’s an impressive guy,” said Linda Yanney of Iowa City, who asked
O’Malley about the disparate incarceration rates for blacks and whites. “He
could play well, but there’s a lot of time between now” and the
first-in-the-nation precinct caucuses scheduled for Feb. 1.

O’Malley offered “the right ideas, progressive ideas,” said Terry Lessmeier
of Mount Vernon and might be a nice fit compared to Sanders “who is not
discreet and Clinton who is too discreet” in expressing progressive values.

That was part of O’Malley’s sales pitch, too.

Voters who look at his “15 years of elected executive experience” will see
“a fearless advancing of progressive goals and progressive values,”
O’Malley said. “I don’t apologize for them. I plan to speak fearlessly
about the progressive values and progressive goals that are going to make
our country better.”

O’Malley, Lessmeier said, may have an advantage in that “he’s the most
telegenic, and in today’s world, that’s important.”

O’Malley will be back in Iowa July 17 for the Iowa Democratic Party Hall of
Fame Celebration in Cedar Rapids. Clinton, Sanders and former Virginia Sen.
Jim Webb are scheduled to participate, too.

*SANDERS*

*Bernie Sanders Demands Hillary Clinton Take Trade Stance ‘Right Now’
<http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/11/bernie-sanders-demands-hillary-clinton-take-trade-stance-right-now/>
// NYT // Alan Rappeport – June 11, 2015 *

Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont delivered a sharp critique of Hillary
Rodham Clinton on Thursday for her reluctance to talk about issues as a
presidential candidate and vowed that he is running against her to win.

Mr. Sanders, an independent who is seeking the Democratic nomination, said
he is offended by Mrs. Clinton’s silence on trade and urged her to share
her real views with voters.

“Trade policies have been disastrous,” Mr. Sanders said at a breakfast
hosted by The Christian Science Monitor in Washington. “If she’s against
this, we need her to speak out, right now.”

Mr. Sanders then listed a number of issues where he said Mrs. Clinton has
failed to share her views, including climate change, the Keystone Pipeline
and the renewal of the Patriot Act.

“What is the secretary’s point of view on that?” he asked of the act that
he voted against.

Promising to run a campaign without personal attacks, Mr. Sanders
questioned Mrs. Clinton on how she plans to address the influence of the
“billionaire class” and said that her vote to authorize the 2003 Iraq War
raised questions about her judgment.

“I’m not here to criticize a vote that she cast years ago,” Mr. Sanders
said. “But what does that mean about your judgment assessing information?”

The comments from Mr. Sanders come as Mrs. Clinton is about to formally
kick off her campaign with a rally in New York this weekend.

The senator acknowledged that he remains an underdog in the race but said
that he is picking up momentum in terms of crowds and fund-raising. He
estimated that he has received about 200,000 donations averaging about $40
each.

“This is not a protest campaign,” Mr. Sanders said when asked if he really
believed he could beat Mrs. Clinton. “I am in this election to win.”

*Rival Challenges Clinton to Say Where She Stands on Trade
<http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/rival-challenges-clinton-stands-trade-31690650>
// AP // Ken Thomas – June 11, 2015 *

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders called on Democratic presidential rival Hillary
Rodham Clinton on Thursday to say exactly where she stands on President
Barack Obama's trade agenda now that Congress is considering it.

"I think our trade policies have been disastrous," Sanders said during a
breakfast sponsored by The Christian Science Monitor. "Secretary Clinton,
if she's against this, we need her to speak out right now. Right now. And I
don't understand how any candidate, Democrat or Republican, is not speaking
out on this issue right now."

The House was starting debate on so-called fast-track authority, which
would let the administration complete a trade deal with Pacific countries
that Congress could accept or reject, but not change. The proposed
Trans-Pacific Partnership would lower trade barriers among 12 nations.

Clinton, a former secretary of state, has expressed concern that the deal
may allow currency manipulation and fall short on health and environmental
protections. But she's said she wants to see the agreement in its final
form before judging it. Sanders and former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley,
who is also seeking the Democratic presidential nomination, vigorously
oppose the deal.

Clinton aides did not immediately comment on Sanders' remarks. Clinton has
been under pressure to oppose Obama's plan from labor unions and liberal
groups, which say it would ship jobs overseas and undermine health and
environmental standards.

Republicans who lead Congress are planning votes Friday on a program to
retrain workers displaced by trade agreements, called Trade Adjustment
Assistance, and fast-track authority may be voted on then, too.

Sanders, who launched his presidential bid in late April, has drawn large
crowds to his events in Iowa and New Hampshire and estimates he has raised
$8 million for his presidential campaign, based on about 200,000
contributors donating an average of $40.

The Vermont independent, who sides with Democrats in the Senate, predicted
he can raise $40 million to $50 million by the Iowa caucuses and New
Hampshire primary in early 2016.

The self-described democratic socialist said his campaign manager had
recently traveled to Iowa and was hiring staff in preparation for the
caucuses. "We're gearing up," he said.

"This is not an educational campaign," Sanders said. "This is not a protest
campaign. This is a campaign to win."

Sanders acknowledged Clinton is the "heavy favorite" at the start of the
campaign but said "we have momentum. And our numbers are growing."

*Bernie Sanders insists his momentum is no fluke
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/bernie-sanders-2016-president-momentum-hype-polls-118877.html>
// Politico // Jonathan Topaz – June 10, 2015 *

Bernie Sanders, enjoying a rise in early-state and national polls and
attracting large crowds at his rallies, has a message for voters: believe
the hype.

The Vermont senator, an Independent who is running for the Democratic
nomination for president, said on Thursday he has no illusions about the
gap between himself and far-and-away front-runner Hillary Clinton.

But the self-described democratic socialist said his promising early
returns aren’t a fluke.

“This is not an educational campaign. This is not a protest campaign. This
is a campaign to win,” said a confident Sanders to a group of reporters at
a Christian Science Monitor breakfast.

Sanders has fashioned himself as the authentic progressive and the
preferred liberal alternative to Clinton, who herself has been veering
leftward, promoting grassroots issues such as college affordability and
criminal justice reform.

On Thursday, Sanders acknowledged, as he has in the past, that Clinton is a
“heavy favorite,” but argued that he’s making ground and that name
recognition plays a big role in polling.

“I think the secretary may well be one of the best-known people in the
United States of America. I am not,” Sanders said.

Sanders grabbed attention this week for scoring over the weekend a
surprising 41 percent in an official Wisconsin Democratic Party straw poll
at the state convention, losing to Clinton by just eight points.

The Vermont senator has also been creeping up in the national polls. He’s
climbed to 15 percent in the Democratic field, up from single digits before
his kickoff rally in Vermont on May 26. And the most recent Iowa and New
Hampshire polls showed him at 16 and 18 percent, respectively — also a jump
from earlier polling.

Sanders, the longest-serving independent in congressional history, has also
been drawing pretty impressive crowds. More than 3,000 supporters showed up
to a fiery Sanders rally on a Sunday in Minneapolis. Last week, an
estimated 1,000 people showed up in Keene, New Hampshire, and most events
in his recent trips to Iowa were standing-room only, including 700 people
who showed up in Davenport, the largest Iowa rally for a candidate in
either race.

Sanders said on Thursday that his campaign has at least 200,000 campaign
contributors and that his team is staffing up in Iowa and New Hampshire.
His team is expected to open its Iowa office shortly.

“We have momentum. Our numbers are growing,” said Sanders, adding that his
campaign is less than two months old and still in its early stages.

During the breakfast meeting, Sanders continued to pressure Clinton on
several policy areas, notably on the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the
free-trade deal opposed by the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. He
said Clinton’s failure to take a stand on the issue offends him.

“If she’s against this, we need her to speak out right now. Right now,” he
said.

He also contrasted his leadership on several core progressive issues with
Clinton — noting his efforts taking on corporate interests, in trying to
block the Keystone XL pipeline and speaking out against the PATRIOT Act.

“Where is the secretary on that?” he asked.

The senator also offered some kind words for New York City Mayor Bill de
Blasio, a progressive leader who has declined several times to endorse
Clinton despite running her 2000 Senate campaign. De Blasio at a press
conference this week called Sanders a “great senator” and confirmed that he
wouldn’t attend Clinton’s campaign kickoff rally on New York City’s
Roosevelt Island.

“I have a lot of respect for Mayor de Blasio,” Sanders said, calling the
mayor one of the nation’s “leaders” on income inequality. He said that he
would call de Blasio at a certain point and that he’d love to have his
endorsement.

Still, Sanders avoided attacking Clinton too harshly. Unlike fellow
Democratic presidential hopeful former Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee, he
said her vote for the Iraq War was not disqualifying — “everybody makes bad
votes.”

And asked about contributions to the Clinton Foundation from foreign
governments, Sanders pivoted to the Koch brothers, the GOP mega-donors who
he argued were having a more corrosive impact on the democratic process.

In calling for more presidential debates, including those with Republicans,
he called on Democrats to have a 50-state strategy — part of a larger
argument that his progressive policies will play well with a majority of
Americans and even traditionally conservative voters.

“It is not a radical agenda. In virtually every instance, what I’m saying
is supported by a significant majority of the American people,” Sanders
said, calling out Republican candidates former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, New
Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and former Texas Gov. Rick Perry by name for
wanting to cut Social Security.

Sanders, who wrote Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman
Schultz to call for more debates earlier in the cycle, called the current
structure “much too limited” and said he regretted that the DNC didn’t
consult his campaign before rolling it out.

One of Sanders’ most direct contrasts with Republicans came during his
initial discussion about paid sick leave, maternity leave and vacations —
labor protections he said are central to his new “family values” agenda.

The senator, who is laying out his plan more specifically later on
Thursday, said he borrowed the phrase from Republicans who have used it to
restrict reproductive rights for women. Sanders, who has visited several
union halls since announcing his candidacy and is a favorite of organized
labor, said he will introduce legislation to guarantee ten days of vacation
time for workers and keep working to institute the 40-hour work week.

Elsewhere on policy, Sanders, who has called for a single-payer health care
system and typically offers only mild praise for the Affordable Care Act,
confirmed that he would try to “move away from the ACA” toward a
Medicare-for-all system if he were to become president.

He also added that he’d soon be unveiling a comprehensive tax plan —
including a tax on Wall Street speculation and ending loopholes that allow
corporations to stash income in tax havens abroad. Sanders said that those
moves, plus an unspecified increase in taxes on wealthy individuals, would
help pay for his investments in health care and education, including his
recently introduced bill to have tuition-free four-year public college.

“I believe the overwhelming majority of Americans support it. I suspect
Wall Street does not,” he said of a tax on Wall Street speculation.

Sanders will head to Iowa this weekend for a three-day swing through the
Hawkeye State, and will be there at the same time as Clinton, who kicks off
her Iowa campaign Saturday and Sunday.

*Bernie Sanders: Hillary Clinton's Silence on Trade Deal 'Offensive'
<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-11/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-s-silence-on-trade-deal-offensive->
// Bloomberg // Sahil Kapur – June 11, 2015 *

Hillary Clinton's refusal to take a stand on a controversial Asia trade
deal is offensive, one of the Democratic presidential front-runner's
challengers, Senator Bernie Sanders, said Thursday.

"I don't understand how, on an issue of such huge consequence, you don't
have an opinion," Sanders, a self-described democratic socialist who
launched a bid for Democratic nomination earlier this year, told reporters
at a Christian Science Monitor breakfast.

The Vermont lawmaker is an outspoken opponent of the trade deal, known as
the Trans Pacific Partnership. Clinton, who spoke in favor of giving
President Barack Obama authority to negotiate a sweeping trade deal with
Asian countries while she was serving as his secretary of state, has
demurred about taking a stand on the legislation now before Congress.

“This is a campaign to win.”

Senator Bernie Sanders

Asked if Clinton's refusal to take a position offends him, Sanders said:

"Yes, it does."

The trade debate cuts across party lines and divides Democrats like Obama
from key parts of the party's constituency: labor unions and
environmentalists oppose the deal because they fear it would undercut wages
in the United States and permit air and water pollution globally. The
Senate approved authority for Obama to cut a deal that could not be amended
by Congress; the House is currently considering the bill.

"If she's against this, we need her to speak out, right now. Right now,"
Sanders said. "I don't understand how any candidate, Democrat or
Republican, is not speaking out on that issue."

Sanders is making economic inequality and the struggles of middle-class and
poor workers the centerpiece of his admittedly long-shot bid for the
Democratic nomination. He  said he plans to introduce legislation later
Thursday to extend sick leave rights.

He insisted he's not the Don Quixote of 2016.

"This is not an educational campaign. This is not a protest campaign. This
is a campaign to win," he said. While "I freely admit that Secretary
Clinton comes into this a heavy favorite," the senatoradded that "we have
momentum. And our numbers are growing."

Sanders also said he would not approve a super-PAC. Such entities can
establish themselves without the backing of candidates, who are legally not
permitted to coordinate with them. But many candidates — including Clinton
— have effectively allied themselves with the outside spending groups,
signaling to supporters who want to write large checks where they should
send them. Sanders, who considers the amount of money that has flowed into
campaigns after the Supreme Court effectively gutted legal limits on
contributions "obscene,"  said he won't do that.

"I don't want the money of the billionaire class," he said. "Which is easy
for me to say because I wouldn't get their money if I wanted to."

*Sanders Explains Obama’s Biggest Mistake And What Clinton Is Doing Wrong
<http://www.buzzfeed.com/evanmcsan/sanders-explains-obamas-biggest-mistake-and-what-clinton-is#.gl9o73RzG>
// Buzzfeed // Evan McMorris-Santoro – June 11, 2015*

President Obama turned his back on the millions who rallied to support him
when he assumed office, cutting off the only means he had to effect the
sweeping changes he promised on the campaign trail in 2008 and leaving him
at the mercy of Republicans in Congress.

That’s the diagnosis from Bernie Sanders, the independent Vermont senator
and Democratic presidential candidate who held court as the left-wing
attack dog in the presidential race for about an hour Thursday surrounded
by reporters at one of Washington’s fanciest hotels.

Sanders proclaimed himself the man with the “most progressive views of any
candidate” in the race — “philosophically, I am a Democratic Socialist,” he
said at one point — and proceeded to prove the point, detailing broad
support for western European economic and education policy, attacking
Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton for declining to publicly join the
progressive push against free trade expansion, bemoaning money in politics
while also promising never to have his own super PAC and proudly noting he
never voted for any of the U.S. wars in Iraq, including the one launched in
1991.

He spoke about how the faith he was born into motivates him, addressed a
weird interview with public radio in which he was accused of having joint
US-Israeli citizenship, and spoke about his surprising success in the
nascent days of his presidential bid.

The impassioned critique of Obama summarized Sanders’ skill at vocalizing
the frustrations of the president’s progressive allies, laying out
succinctly what anyone who has been within distant earshot of a progressive
activist has heard many times.

“The biggest mistake Barack Obama made in my view is that after his
brilliant campaign in 2008 where he mobilized millions of people, ran one
of the great campaigns in American history, essentially what he said to his
supporters was, ‘thank you very much for electing me, I’ll take it from
here on myself. I’ll sit down with John Boehner, I’ll sit down with Mitch
McConnell, we’ll negotiate, we’ll come up with some compromises, thanks
very much for what you did,’” Sanders said. “I will not make that mistake.
The point that I’m making is, and this is where my campaign is very
different from the others, I do not believe that any president who is
standing up for the working class of this country can be successful without
the mobilized activist grassroots movement behind him or her. So I will be
working hard to make sure that mobilization exists.”

As for Clinton, Sanders expressed bewilderment that the former Secretary of
State hasn’t publicly chosen sides in the trade debate with hours to go
before a House vote on fast-track trade authority that the activist left
has made defeating as its number one goal.

“You can be for the [Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal], I think the
president is dead wrong, he is for it,” Sanders said. “You can be against
it, I’m against it, Warren’s against it, Sherrod Brown’s against it, the
majority of Democrats in the Senate are against it. You can be for it, or
against it. I don’t understand how on an issue of such huge consequence,
you don’t have an opinion.”

Clinton has been playing it very cautiously on the president’s trade
agenda, avoiding directly pitting herself against either Obama or his
progressive opponents.

“There are questions being raised about this agreement. It hasn’t been
negotiated yet,” Clinton said on the trail in Iowa recently. “I have said I
want to judge the final agreement.”

Sanders also spoke of big marches on Washington by students demanding a
better deal on college costs and marches by workers demanding an increase
in the minimum wage.

Sanders’ Obama history is a little off, though his tactical critiques are
often raised by liberals. Obama turned his campaign into first Organizing
for America and then Organizing For Action, nonprofits whose goal in part
was to keep Obama’s campaign infrastructure in place for the reelect but
also to use his massive list of supporters to pressure Congress via online
campaigns and public rallies. Large OFA marches and rallies, feared by some
of Obama’s opponents after he won in 2008, never really materialized,
although digital campaigns in support of the president’s policies are still
blasted out of OFA’s Chicago headquarters on a regular basis.

Sanders has done well in his opening weeks as a candidate, amassing, he
said, more than 200,000 small-dollar donors and racking up poll numbers
that make him number two in the Democratic nomination contest, albeit one
running far behind the frontrunner Clinton. Sanders said he’s in it to win
it, and promised an increase in poll numbers as his name ID increases. He
also promised to be outpspent by the impressive financial operations of
Clinton. On the whole, he was comfortable in the role of pugnacious
underdog, dismissing the Democratic Party’s plan for primary debates and
promising to open discussions with the party chair and his fellow
candidates about how best to build a debate calendar.

The Washington event, a breakfast sponsored by the Christian Science
Monitor, came just a day after Sanders’ appearance on the Diane Rehm Show,
a syndicated public radio program. Sanders said he forgave Rehm for her
question about joint Israeli-American citizenship, a longstanding and
wholly incorrect conspiracy theory labeled anti-Semitic by some Jewish
groups in the hours after Rehm’s broadcast.

“I like Diane Rehm. She is a good radio interviewer,” he said. “I suspect
what happens is her staff gives her a list of questions and someone screwed
up pretty bad.”

Sanders was asked to weigh in on how his relationship with Judaism affects
his political outlook.

“I’m proud to be Jewish, I’m not particularly religious,” he said. He said
growing up Jewish in the post-World War II years taught him elections like
the one that put Adolf Hitler in office can have very serious consequences.

“The lesson that I learned as a little kid was to understand in a very deep
way what politics is about,” he said.

Reporters also wanted to know a lot about Sanders’ opinion of Europe.
Sanders has long called for Western European-style social safety nets,
universal healthcare programs, and structures that make higher education
free or next to free for most students. America has a lot to learn from
Europe, Sanders said. A reporter asked if he thinks Europe has much to
learn from America.

“As a former mayor, what mayors look at is the concept of best practice.
What best practices means…you look all over the country and you say, ‘what
are other cities doing that would be good?’ and you steal those ideas,” he
said. “That’s what we should be doing as a world. Are we doing things
better than other countries? Of course we are, we have a lot to be proud
of. We are a very entrepreneurial country, I mean every other day someone
is coming up with another great idea, another great invention. We do that
probably better than any other country on earth, and people should learn
from us.”

But in terms of protecting and taking care of the needs of working people,”
Sanders continued, “we have a lot to learn from many other countries around
the world.”

Sanders promised to bring many of those western European-style programs to
the United States if he becomes president. Dinging the president again,
Sanders said it was time for a more progressive approach than Obamacare.

Sanders seemed pleased by his growing standing as the Democratic Party’s
progressive-in-chief, a position fueled by a campaign that has lit up the
grassroots on the left despite the lack of initial support from many
activist left organizations who were until recently pouring all their
efforts into trying to cajole Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren into the
presidential race. His campaign building steam, Sanders, said he’s been
amazed by the DC money machine he’s discovered as he’s emerged as a
prominent presidential candidate.

“A lot of people want to make a lot of money off of campaigns,” Sanders
said, when asked what he has learned so far. “There is an entire industry
here in Washington, D.C. of folks who are prepared to help you for some
extravagant fees.”

*Bernie Sanders hires Elizabeth Warren 'draft' director for progressive
campaign
<http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/11/bernie-sanders-hires-elizabeth-warren-draft-director>
// The Guardian // Ben Jacobs – June 11, 2015 *

Bernie Sanders’ campaign for president isn’t just trying to harness the
lingering progressive energy behind the failed attempt to draft his fellow
liberal senatorElizabeth Warren.

Now they’re hiring the minds behind her grassroots movement, too.

The Guardian has learned that the Sanders campaign has hired Blair Lawton,
who served as field director in Iowa for the Run Warren Run effort, which
announced it was shutting down last week.

Lawton will serve as political director for Sanders in Iowa, the early
primary state where Sanders and Hillary Clinton will both visit this
weekend. He previously worked as a regional field director in Iowa for
Barack Obama’s re-election campaign, then managed Democratic
get-out-the-vote efforts in Alaska in 2014.

Sanders long positioned himself as a leading progressive voice in the
Democratic party, and has declared he is “in this race to win” as a liberal
alternative to Clinton.

The grassroots efforts to recruit Warren, however, put up a road block
among the party’s left-leaning base – until Run Warren Run gave in to the
Massachusetts senator’s repeated insistence that she would not challenge
Clinton for the nomination.

“To be sure, Warren – and grassroots economic populism more broadly – was
already a rising force well before our efforts began,” the group’s
organizers wrotein preparation to fold last week. “Although Run Warren Run
may not have sparked a candidacy, it ignited a movement.”

Warren has long been an icon on the left, but an Iowa poll released earlier
this month showed Sanders jumping ahead in the caucus state as he began to
draw crowds at double capacity.

The hiring of a top staffer from the Run Warren Run effort signals an
opportunity for the Sanders campaign to tap into both the enthusiasm for
Warren and the organizing already done in the state on her behalf.

Sanders has also hired several other staffers to fill key positions in
Iowa, including Justin Huck to serve as the campaign’s state field director
and Tara Thobe to oversee logistics.

*Youth Unemployment and Dr. King’s Dream
<https://medium.com/@BernieSanders/youth-unemployment-and-dr-king-s-dream-9b96997d1c8>
// Medium // Bernie Sanders – June 11, 2015 *

Many years ago I was honored to be among those who marched on Washington
with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. I was there for his famous “I Have a Dream”
speech, and I heard him say that African-Americans live “on a lonely island
of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity.”

Dr. King taught us that the struggle for justice is economic, as well as
social and legal. As he said in Memphis, a few short weeks before his death:

Our struggle is for genuine equality, which means economic equality. For we
know now that it isn’t enough to integrate lunch counters. What does it
profit a man to be able to eat at an integrated lunch counter if he doesn’t
have enough money to buy a hamburger?

“We have come here today,” Dr. King told us in Washington, “to dramatize a
shameful condition.” We have seen progress, but that shameful condition
persists. Too many Americans still live in poverty. Many are working in
poverty, too, because they can’t earn a living wage. And if we don’t do
something about it, the generations to come will have it even worse.

That’s why I have joined with Rep. John Conyers to introduce the Employ
Young Americans Now Act. It will provide $5.5 billion in immediate funding
to employ one million young Americans between the ages of 16 and 24, and to
provide job training to hundreds of thousands of others.

Let me tell you why this is so important. The Economic Policy Institute
studied the real unemployment figures for recent high school graduates aged
17–20, including people who have given up looking for work and those who
are working part-time but seek full-time employment. They are devastating.
More than one third of white and Hispanic youth (33.8 and 36.1 percent,
respectively) are looking for work. Shockingly, so are more than half of
African-Americans (51.3 percent).

I want to emphasize that:

When you look at the real job figures, more than 50 percent of young
African-Americans are looking for work.

Recent college graduates are struggling, too. The real unemployment rate
for young white graduates is 12.9 percent. And it’s nearly double that for
young African-Americans and Hispanics (23 percent 22.4 percent,
respectively). That’s nearly one in four.

Worse, studies have shown that a person’s lifetime earnings are heavily
influenced by the amount of money they make in the first few years of their
working lives. We’re not just hurting these young people today. If we do
nothing, they will be deprived economically for the rest of their lives.

The picture is already grim. More than one in six part-time workers, and
nearly one in twenty full-time workers, is impoverished despite their own
labors. And African-Americans and Hispanics are twice as likely to among
the working poor as their white counterparts. If we do not address the
crisis of youth unemployment, these statistics are likely to become even
worse.

One thing is clear: We are not making the progress that Dr. King called us
to achieve in the 1960s. More than one in four African Americans live in
poverty, while that figure is less than one in ten for whites. The median
income for African-American households is less than 60 percent that of
white households. And a recent study from Brandeis University shows that
the wealth gap between black and white families has nearly tripled over the
last twenty-five years.

There is much that we must do to address these inequities. We need to raise
the minimum wage to a livable amount. This is not unreasonable.

If the minimum wage had kept pace with productivity, it would be more than
$16 per hour today. It is only the greed of the few, and the political
disenfranchisement of the majority, that has kept the minimum wage so low.

When I heard Dr. King speak in on that afternoon in 1963, the actual
minimum wage was actually higher than it is today. 1963's Federal minimum
wage was worth $8.37 in today’s dollars. Today it’s $7.25.

We must not condemn young people, especially in our minority communities,
to lives that are even harsher than those of their parents. It is time to
declare once and for all: Black lives matter — on the streets, and on the
job too.

As Dr. King told us on that sunny day in Washington, “1963 is not an end,
but a beginning.” It’s our turn to do the work of justice. Our young people
are our nation’s future, and it is time to give them the future they
deserve.

*Sanders hires key Iowa staff members
<http://qctimes.com/news/local/government-and-politics/sanders-hires-key-iowa-staff-members/article_17cf980d-ada2-53eb-b1a8-d2f15fbbd888.html>
// The Quad City Times // Ed Tibbetts – June 11, 2015 *

Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders, who turned a lot of heads
last month with big crowds in Iowa, is putting staff in place to try to
capture some of that enthusiasm.

On Thursday, the campaign said Blair Lawton, the man who ran the Iowa arm
of the now-suspended effort to convince U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren to run,
is moving over to be the Vermont senator's political director in the state.
Lawton's hiring was one of three positions the campaign confirmed Thursday.

"He's a good get for us," said Pete D'Alessandro, a longtime Democratic
operative who has been charged with putting together a staff in Iowa for
Sanders.

Lawton said that Sanders was a logical choice for him. "I've always admired
the senator," Lawton said. "He's a great progressive we need in the race."

D'Alessandro also said that Justin Huck, the field director for the League
of Conservation Voters in Iowa, has been picked to be the field director
for the Sanders campaign here.

In addition, Tara Thobe, who worked in New Mexico the last election cycle,
has been tapped to be statewide operations director.

Early polls still say former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton holds a
wide lead, both in Iowa and nationally.

A Des Moines Register/Bloomberg Politics poll, released last week, said
that 57 percent of likely Iowa Democratic caucus-goers support Clinton

Sanders was next at 16 percent. Former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley and
ex-Sen. Jim Webb, of Virginia, both were at 2 percent.

Clinton also has an organizational head start. The campaign has opened
offices across the state and has more than two dozen field organizers
working here.

Sanders, O'Malley and Webb all are in various organizational stages.

Still, the Sanders campaign says it is seeing dividends from the early
interest in the senator.

D'Alessandro said of the more than 600 people who signed in at Sanders'
event in Davenport, twice as many as he would have expected indicated they
were willing to caucus for him. "This early in the game, that's a really
good sign," he said.

Sanders, Clinton, O'Malley and Webb will all be in Iowa over the next few
days.

O'Malley will make a trio of stops on Thursday.

Clinton, who is launching her campaign with a speech in New York on
Saturday, will be in Iowa the same day. On Sunday, she will hold her first
large-scale event in the state with a rally at the state fairgrounds in Des
Moines.

Webb will be in central Iowa on Sunday, Monday and Tuesday.

Sanders, meanwhile, will be holding a half dozen events across the state
Friday, Saturday and Sunday.

None of the visits are to the Quad-Cities.

*Sanders pushes paid vacation legislation
<http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/local/2015/06/10/sanders-pushes-paid-vacation-legislation/71037360/>
// Burlington Free Press // Nicole Gaudiano – June 11, 2015 *

Sen. Bernie Sanders will introduce legislation Thursday that would require
paid vacations for millions of workers as part of a "true family values"
agenda he's pushing as he runs for the Democratic presidential nomination.

The bill would provide 10 days of paid vacation for employees who have
worked at least one year at a job, ensuring them access to the minimum
vacation benefits most companies already offer white-collar, high-salary
workers, according to his office. The bill would apply to employers with at
least 15 employees.

Sanders, I-Vt., said the U.S. is a "stressed out nation," with nearly one
in four workers getting no paid vacation time. It's also the only advanced
economy that doesn't guarantee workers some form of paid family leave, paid
sick time or paid vacation time, he said.

"The idea that people do not have the time to take a few weeks off to be
with their kids, to enjoy themselves, to relax, is really not what America
should be about and is certainly not a family value," Sanders said in a
Wednesday interview. "The bottom line of all of this is to bring reality to
the concept of family values."

Sanders also is co-sponsoring a bill by Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand
of New York to guarantee workers at least 12 weeks of universal paid family
and medical leave, and a bill by Democratic Sen. Patty Murray of Washington
to guarantee at least seven paid sick days per year.

Murray's bill passed the Senate 61-39 in March as an amendment to a budget
resolution, but that measure doesn't carry the weight of law.

In January, President Barack Obama granted federal employees six weeks of
paid parental leave, and he endorsed seven days of paid sick leave during
his State of the Union address.

Opponents of mandates to provide paid sick and family leave say they would
hurt businesses, cost jobs and could damage job opportunities for women.
But Sanders said the idea a woman could lose her job because she had a baby
is "completely unacceptable."

It's "horrendous" that mothers have to rush back to work during the most
important bonding time with their babies because they don't have enough
money to stay home, he said.

"I know that the right wing will oppose all of this," he said. "But the
question they have got to answer is, 'How come these ideas can exist in
every other major wealthy country on earth except in the United States of
America?"

*OTHER*

*Bayh won’t seek Indiana Senate seat
<http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/senate-races/244721-bayh-wont-seek-indiana-senate-seat>
// The Hill // Jonathan Easley – June 11, 2015 *

Former Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) will not enter the race to replace retiring
Sen. Dan Coats (R-Ind.) in Indiana, a source familiar with Bayh’s thinking
told The Hill on Thursday.

Bayh instead will focus on helping former Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton win the White House, according to the source.

Bayh would have been a formidable candidate had he run. He has high name
recognition and remains popular in Indiana. In addition, he still has
nearly $10 million in his campaign war chest.

Many Democrats believed Bayh’s entrance in to the race would be a
game-changer for their party, but political watchers in the state were
doubtful he would take the plunge. In 2010, Bayh decided against seeking a
third term in the Senate, citing frustration over gridlock in Congress.

With Bayh on the sidelines, the path to the Democratic nomination is
currently clear for former Rep. Baron Hill (D-Ind.), who previously served
four terms representing Indiana’s 9th district in the House.

Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and House Minority Whip Steny
Hoyer (D-Md.) will host a Washington, D.C., fundraiser for Hill’s Senate
bid later this month — a sign that establishment Democrats may be
coalescing around his candidacy.

However, State Rep. Christina Hale (D-Ind.) has also said she’s considering
running. And John Dickerson, the former director of The Arc, a nonprofit
that helps Indianans with intellectual and developmental disabilities, is
also mentioned as a potential contender.

So far, there are two Republicans in the race.

Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.), a Tea Party-aligned candidate, will be
seeking to rally the conservative base in the state. Coats’s chief of
staff, Eric Holcomb, is also running, and considered a more
establishment-friendly candidate.

Rep. David Young (R-Ind.), who defeated Hill in a 2010 House race, is also
believed to be considering a bid.

The GOP candidate will likely be favored going into the race. Indiana has
only gone for the Democratic presidential candidate once since 1968.

*GOP*

*BUSH*

*Wall Street lining up for Jeb Bush campaign fundraiser in New York // WaPo
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/06/11/wall-street-lining-up-for-jeb-bush-campaign-fundraiser-in-new-york/?postshare=5471434050390682>
// Matea Gold – June 11, 2015 *

Wealthy hedge fund managers, bankers and private equity investors have
signed on to host one of the first official fundraisers for Jeb Bush's
soon-to-be-announced presidential campaign, a June 24 breakfast reception
in New York that is on track to bring in at least $1 million.

Already, three dozen heavyweight players have committed to raise a minimum
of $27,000 each for the event, according to a copy of the invitation
obtained by the Washington Post.

Among them are New York Jets owner Woody Johnson, former Barclays chief
executive Robert E. Diamond Jr., private equity executive Emil Henry,
investment banker Jeff Bunzel, hedge fund manager Duke Buchan, and Alex
Navab, who heads KKR's private equity business in the Americas.

New Jersey state Sen. Joseph M. Kyrillos, who chaired Chris Christie’s 2009
New Jersey gubernatorial campaign, is also listed as a co-chair of the
fundraiser. He defected to Bush  this spring, as The Post previously
reported.

Co-chairs of the June 24 event, set to be held at a midtown Manhattan
hotel, get access to a 7:45 a.m. photo reception, an 8 a.m. host reception
and then the larger breakfast event. They also will be invited to a retreat
in Kennebunkport, Me., for bundlers who bring in $27,000 in the first 15
days of the campaign.

Bush, who spent the last five months stockpiling tens of millions in an
allied super PAC, is set to officially announce his White House bid Monday
in Miami. After that, he's planning two intense weeks of campaigning and
fundraising, hoping to bring in millions for his official campaign
committee by the close of the quarter on June 30.

*Jeb Bush’s legally nonexistent campaign has had a lot of problems
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/06/11/wonkbook-jeb-bushs-legally-nonexistent-campaign-has-had-a-lot-of-problems/>
// WaPo // Max Ehrenfreund – June 11, 2015 *

Disagreement, distrust and dysfunction: That's a whole lot of trouble for a
campaign that legally does not exist.

The Washington Post's Ed O'Keefe and Robert Costa describe how even though
former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) has not declared himself a candidate for
president, his campaign has already found the time for a few serious
internal squabbles. The organization has been "disjointed in message and
approach, torn between factions and more haphazard than it appeared on the
surface," O'Keefe and Costa report. "Bush's first six months as an
all-but-declared candidate have been defined by a series of
miscalculations, leaving his standing considerably diminished ahead of his
formal entry into the race on Monday."

When Bush does formally declare himself a candidate, presumably he and his
campaign will stop coordinating strategy with the independent committees
supporting him — coordination that is illegal for a candidate for elected
office, as Eric Lichtblau and Nick Corasaniti discussed in The New York
Times last week.

The thing is, the law does not distinguish between candidates who claim
they haven't decided whether they're running but secretly (or not so
secretly) are running, and candidates who have launched their campaign
already (or who have launched it more than once). Even candidates who are
just "testing the waters," which is a technical term, are subject to rules.

Yes, there are gray areas, and the law isn't completely clear, but here's
O'Keefe and Costa's summary of what Bush has been up to over the past few
months:

Bush revived a 650-member alumni network of aides who worked for him as
governor, and he recruited 21 veterans of his father’s and brother’s
administrations to advise him on foreign policy. He hired state directors
in the first four early states, aides for outreach to evangelical
Christians and Hispanics, and a spokeswoman dedicated to fielding questions
from the Spanish-language press.

As Bush travels the country, he has fielded more than 900 questions from
donors, reporters and voters, according to aides. He has maintained a busy
schedule that stretches from the early-voting states of Iowa, New
Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada — where conservative Republicans
remain skeptical — to places visited less frequently at this early stage by
presidential candidates, including Denver, Seattle and Puerto Rico.

Watchdogs have accused Bush — along with other Democratic and Republican
candidates — of violating the law, but given partisan gridlock at the
Federal Election Commission, their complaints will probably go unheeded.

Bush's non-candidate candidacy isn't just a clever manipulation of obscure
election law. Donors have given millions of dollars to the un-campaign —
although, as O'Keefe and Costa report, probably not nearly the $100 million
his advisers had predicted. The money raises serious questions about
whether the only people who can fully participate in American democracy are
people who have rich friends.

Bush's GOP primary opponents see him as out of touch with the party's base
and more concerned about what his donors think. Ideally, good election laws
would prevent candidates from relying on exorbitant fundraising dinners to
buy their way into races and force them instead to win votes the hard way,
by talking to citizens.

*In Europe, Jeb Bush sounds like Barack Obama
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/europe-jeb-bush-foreign-policy-barack-obama-similar-118894.html#ixzz3coaMQQvT>
// Politico // Eli Stokols – June 11, 2015 *

Jeb Bush, now on the third day of a European tour meant to showcase his
foreign policy chops, is sounding a little bit like the man he’s trying to
replace: Barack Obama.

Stylistically, Bush is a striking a more aggressive posture than the
president, warning about Russian encroachment and vowing to more staunchly
defend America’s allies in Eastern Europe.

But on substance, Bush has offered little to differentiate himself from
Obama’s cautious, consensus-driven approach to confronting Russian leader
Vladimir Putin — aside from a vague call for “defensive military support”
for the Western-backed Ukrainian government.

On Thursday, Bush told reporters that his meetings with the Polish
president and other government and business leaders here in Warsaw have
confirmed his belief that Poland wants America to play a bigger role in
Europe and the world and that “it’s really important for the United States
to stay active and be clear about the role that we can play.

“When there’s doubt, when there’s uncertainty, when we pull back, it
creates less chance of a more peaceful world,” Bush said.

He repeated his call for bolstering U.S. military forces in the Baltic
states, where Obama last year ordered a buildup of air force units. “The
numbers are, I understand, in the hundreds, and that doesn’t send a signal
of strength. We need to be more robust, and need to encourage our allies to
invest more in security,” Bush said.

And Bush again went further than Obama has, calling for sending defensive
weapons to the embattled government in Kiev. Lawmakers on both sides — as
well as many of his own top advisers — have urged the president to arm the
Ukrainians with lethal weapons, but he has thus far demurred.

“I think we need to provide defensive military support, because it’s very
hard to make the structural reforms necessary and grow the economy in a
world where there’s a threat of further aggression,” Bush said. “That would
be the first step.”

But he provided few specific ideas for challenging Putin, calling vaguely
for “a strategy” that is “comprehensive” and “forward-leaning.”

He reiterated his line that the U.S. “can’t be all things to all people; we
can’t be the world’s policeman” — a refrain that echoes Obama’s own
September 2013 declaration that “America is not the world’s policeman.”

And Bush’s calls for reassuring nervous NATO allies ignored Obama’s Sept.
14, 2014, speech in Talinn, the Estonian capital, in which the president
bluntly declared, “We will defend the territorial integrity of every single
ally” and warned Putin against further aggression, as he did again during
last weekend’s G-7 summit in Bavaria.

Nor has Bush differentiated himself much on economic issues.

In Berlin, he stressed the importance of the Transatlantic Trade and
Investment Partnership, a U.S.-European trade deal that Obama supports.

In Warsaw, he met with the Polish-American Freedom Foundation and lauded
the group, which he described as “an offshoot by the way of a U.S. effort
investing in the future of this country and it was an extraordinary
success”; Obama has hailed the foundation several times.

But on the question of whether the U.S. and Europe should invest more
foreign aid in Ukraine, Bush was noncommittal.

So far, the U.S. has provided Kiev with $2 billion in loan guarantees; the
European Union has coughed up $1.8 billion in economic aid, which The
Economist has called “contemptible.” Additional economic aid, many believe,
could loosen Russia’s grip by helping Ukraine develop its own natural gas
resources, making it less reliant on Moscow.

Bush also said any future aid should be tied to economic reforms, and that
Europe “should play a leading role” in this area.

Asked about whether Georgia or Ukraine should join NATO, Bush again agreed
with Obama.

“There’s a process that these countries need to go through,” he said. “I
think that process is established and it’s the right one.”

As for whether the U.S. should consider putting permanent military bases in
Poland, Bush was careful not to over-commit, pointing out that he’s not yet
privy to the intelligence he’d need to decide.

“Maybe I should get classified briefings,” Bush said with a chuckle. “I’ll
talk to my national security adviser and get back to you, how about that?”

*Sean Hannity scores first Jeb Bush interview
<http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/06/sean-hannity-scores-first-jeb-bush-interview-208681.html>
// Politico // Hadas Gold – June 11, 2015 *

Fox News host Sean Hannity continues his streak as conservative king maker,
as the network announced Thursday that he will have the first interview
with Jeb Bush after his presidential campaign announcement next week.

The former Florida governor is expected to announce his presidential
campaign Monday in Florida. On Tuesday, Hannity will interview Bush. Bush
will also appear on "The Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon" that same night.

Bush campaign spokespeople confirmed that Bush will not hold any interviews
Monday and that Hannity will be his first.

Four GOP hopefuls have given Sean Hannity dibs on their first interviews as
candidates: former Texas Gov. Rick Perry and Sens. Ted Cruz, Rand Paul and
Marco Rubio. Other candidates have tried to land an interview with the
conservative host, campaign sources have previously said, only to be turned
down — either because they had given their first interview to another media
outlet or because they weren't popular enough.

The interview with Bush will air next Tuesday at 10 p.m.

*Jeb Bush: 'Putin has changed' since brother George saw his 'soul'
<http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/10/politics/jeb-george-bush-russia-putin/> //
CNN // Tom LoBianco & Dana Bash – June 11, 2015 *

Asked his opinion on the Iraq War recently, Jeb Bush struggled to find his
footing while supporting his brother. But ask about Russian President
Vladimir Putin -- of whom former President George W. Bush once said that he
"got a sense of his soul" -- and older brother Jeb gets right to the point:
"He's a bully."

How does he square that difference? Jeb Bush said Thursday that Putin has
evolved over the years.

"I think Putin has changed, for sure. He has changed over time and he has
been emboldened by, whether it's true or not, the perception is that we've
pulled back," Bush said. "So people do change and this is an example of
that."

READ: Jeb Bush's foreign policy strategy: 'I am my own man'

Indeed, George Bush's own relationship with the Russian leader deteriorated
over his term, to a point where he and just about every other Republican
agree Putin is a threat that needs to be contained.

Jeb Bush has not said exactly how he would handle Putin if elected
president, but he did say Thursday that the U.S. needs to step up its
military presence in Eastern Europe to support allies like Poland.

"We need to be more robust, we need to encourage our NATO allies in Europe
to invest more in their own national security. We need to do the same In
our country. We need to be consistent about what types of actions we will
take should there be more aggression," he said.

On the crisis in Ukraine, where leaders are begging for more assistance
from the West, Bush said they should be provided with more military help.

"We need to provide defensive military support. It's hard to make the
structural reforms and grow the economy in a world where there is
aggression," Bush said.

The theme of Bush's trip this week to Germany, Poland and Estonia -- ahead
of his expected announcement Monday that he's running for president -- is
to highlight what he calls the importance of a "forward leaning" American
approach here, one he argues is lacking under the Obama administration.

But just how Bush would take the forward leaning concept, and turn it into
policy as president, is a work in progress.

He would not say, for example, whether former Soviet countries like Ukraine
should be accepted into NATO, instead saying he would defer to the process
that allows that.

Still, he sees plenty of room to attack the current president and
implicitly criticize leading 2016 Democratic contender Hillary Clinton for
an unsuccessful "reset" with Russia.

"I think to deal with Putin, you need to deal from strength. He's a bully,"
Bush said in Berlin Wednesday, repeating a message he's using throughout
his Europe trip this week. "You enable bad behavior when you're nuanced
with a guy like that."

He continued, "I'm not talking about being bellicose, but saying, 'Here are
the consequences of your actions.' And that would deter the kind of bad
outcome that we don't want to see."

And at the close of separate remarks in Berlin Tuesday, Bush took a final
shot at Clinton and Obama.

"I think there's lots to do, and we're beginning to realize the 'reset
button' didn't turn out so hot," he said.

Putin is a perfect whipping boy for Republicans as his support for
separatists' hostile takeover of Ukraine combined with his condescending
rhetoric toward the United States have revived Cold War rivalries between
the two countries.

Since then, Western powers have pushed to isolate Putin. At the same time
Bush was in Germany, Obama was in the country for a meeting of the G7,
which kicked out Russia roughly a year ago. High on the agenda was whether
economic sanctions against Russia were working.

Back home, the politics are easy for Republicans. Democrats have set the
policy for the last seven years and one of the chief architects also
happens to be the likely Democratic presidential nominee: Hillary Clinton.

"It makes sense that the Republican candidates are out to critique, and
Hillary Clinton tries not to say much," said Leon Aron, U.S.-Russia
relations expert at the American Enterprise Institute, who consulted with
2012 Republican nominee Mitt Romney but has not signed onto any 2016
campaign yet.

Aron noted that he has been contacted by several prospective Republican
presidential campaigns and said the fact that candidates have been reaching
out to him so early in the election cycle is a clear sign of the importance
foreign policy -- and specifically U.S.-Russian relations -- will play in
this race.

The interest so early in Russia, he said, is part of a broader trend which
has American voters focused abroad this cycle, including deep worries about
Middle East unrest.

But for all the clear advantages of using Putin as a punching bag, that
role also has a liability when it comes to the Bushes.

In his book "Decision Points," George Bush recounted a meeting with Putin
in 2001. At one point he asked if it was true that Putin's mother had given
him a cross blessed in Jerusalem. Putin then softened somewhat as he told
the story of how he lost the cross in a fire.

"I thought of the emotion in Vladimir's voice when he shared the story of
the cross. 'I looked the man in the eye,' I said, '... I was able to get a
sense of his soul,'" Bush wrote. Bush also assessed then that Putin was
"straightforward" and "trustworthy."

Even fellow Republicans have criticized the president's comments. As the
2008 GOP presidential nominee, Arizona Sen. John McCain said, "I looked
into Mr. Putin's eyes and I saw three things — a K and a G and a B." The
2012 Republican candidate, Mitt Romney, also warned that Putin posed a much
more serious threat than was perceived by the Obama administration.

Yet by the time George Bush left the White House, he, too, had soured on
Putin. In the final year of his term, Bush struggled to decide how to
handle Russia's stunning invasion of Georgia. In his book, published two
years after he left office, Bush called the invasion a "low point" in his
relationship with Putin. He also noted that in the years following his 2001
meeting with the Russian president, "Putin would give me reasons to revise
my opinion."

That makes it easier for his brother Jeb to take on the Russian leader
during his trip to parts of the former Soviet Union this week.

And it also helped that George Bush's role in bolstering Eastern European
countries is well-regarded in those states, making the Bushes sympatico on
their over-arching foreign policy stance toward Russia.

Though Jeb Bush's last name can be a negative when he travels abroad, given
how disliked George Bush became in most of Europe, his campaign stops on
this trip emphasize areas where there is public support for either his
brother or his father.

Former President George H. W. Bush helped reunify Germany with the fall of
the Soviet Union -- a fact son Jeb pointed out to applause during his
speech in Berlin.

And George W. Bush stood fast with former Soviet states, proposing a
missile defense shield in Poland as a means of deterring Iran, which Obama
later scrapped.

Candidates often spend more time criticizing policies and decrying
international villains than spelling out their own course of action. And
while Jeb Bush has used tough rhetoric, his actions may prove different.
Aron said the usual approach is for U.S. presidents to open their terms
with a general policy of détente with Russian leaders before relations
deteriorate.

He pointed to President John F. Kennedy and Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev
as the model and Reagan's encounters with the Soviets early in his first
term while they were fighting in Afghanistan as the exception. George W.
Bush's ability to see Putin's soul? That fit into the pattern, too.

Dmitri Trenin, director of the Carnegie Moscow Center, said that based on
what Jeb Bush had said so far, Russians watching America would conclude
that "Jeb has said the minimum that is now required in the West" so "he is
generally sober."

That means he would potentially be welcomed as an alternative to the
current man in the Oval Office. "'The U.S. will not turn into a friend if
he is elected, but at least we will have a change of partner,'" Trenin said
they would assess. "'We are so tired of Obama.'"

*Jeb Bush says view on unwed births ‘hasn’t changed at all’
<http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/jeb-bush-says-his-views-havent-changed-all-unwed-births>
// MSNBC // Benjy Sarlin – June 11, 2015 *

Facing scrutiny over his rhetoric and record regarding single mothers,
former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush told reporters on Thursday that two-parent
homes help children “live lives of purpose and meaning.”

In a chapter of his 1995 book ”Profiles of Character” entitled “The
Restoration of Shame,” Bush, who is in Europe this week on an international
tour, complained that having children outside of marriage had become common
because there was “no longer a stigma attached to this behavior” and that
“parents and neighbors have become ineffective at attaching some sense of
ridicule to this behavior.”

Asked by msnbc whether his views regarding the application of shame had
changed, Bush suggested his book’s warning had proved prophetic and
stressed the importance of encouraging young people to get married before
having children.

“My views have evolved over time, but my views about the importance of dads
being involved in the lives of children hasn’t changed at all,” he said.
“In fact, since 1995 … this book was a book about cultural indicators [and]
the country has moved in the wrong direction. We have a 40-plus percent
out-of-wedlock birth rate.”

Bush has talked on the trail about research showing improved economic
fortunes for children who are raised with two parents and on Thursday
reiterated the importance of family structure.

“It’s a huge challenge for single moms to raise children in the world that
we’re in today and it hurts the prospects, it limits the possibilities of
young people being able to live lives of purpose and meaning,” he said.

After a follow-up question on whether the chapter was meant to apply to
policy, Bush said that he was “speaking of [marriage] in the policy context
and the focus was on men.”

In responding to the story, Bush’s staff has pointed reporters to a later
passage in the book noting that raising the issue “does not mean we should
demean the heroic efforts of single parents who are trying to raise good,
decent children.”

A number of news outlets and commentators this week are also revisiting a
2001 law Bush allowed to pass that included a so-called “Scarlet Letter”
provision requiring mothers who give their children up for adoption to
publicly post records of their sexual histories that might alert potential
fathers about the birth. Bush raised concerns about that provision at the
time but allowed the bill to pass into law without signing it. He later
signed a repeal of the controversial section in 2003 after it was struck
down by a court.

Asked by msnbc whether he had regrets about how the issue was handled, Bush
said he could not recall the full details but that the broader law was
intended to support single mothers by improving collection of child support
from fathers.

“To assume you can create a fatherless society and not have bad outcomes I
think is the wrong approach,” he said. “I don’t remember what the repeal
was, I can remember the purpose of the law was to enhance the ability to
collect child support because men have the responsibility of taking care of
their children.”

Bush’s latest remarks prompted an unsolicited one-sentence response from
Democratic National Committee spokeswoman Holly Shulman.

“Shame on you, Jeb,” Shulman wrote in an e-mail.

*Jeb Hated Easy Divorce. So Did Hillary.
<http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/11/dems-weak-jeb-divorce-hit.html>
// The Daily Beast // Betsy Woodruff – June 11, 2015 *

Sometimes in the course of campaigns, opposing sides circulate information
that comes back to bite them.

This is one of those times.

On Wednesday, Democrats were up in arms over comments Jeb Bush wrote in his
1995 book that expressed criticism of divorce that occurred without a clear
cause.

“[No]-fault divorce quickly became a tool for those who used the law not to
escape physical or mental cruelty but to pursue career dreams and trade in
their wives for something more appealing,” he wrote in Profiles in
Character.

Cue the outrage.

“Bush has to hope the book stays out of print,” wrote Joan Walsh, Salon’s
editor-at-large.

And at the Washington Post, opinion writer Catherine Rampell criticized
Bush’s “histrionics about no-fault divorce” and called his views on the
issue “strange and/or relatively retrograde.”

Behind the scenes, Democratic communicators pushed the “Jeb is
anti-divorce” narrative calling it “insane.”

But here’s the thing:

In her 1996 book, It Takes A Village, Hillary Clinton took the same
position.

Oops.

Let’s compare.

Bush argued that no-fault divorce generally hurt kids, and that lawmakers
might want to consider making parents to be more circumspect about ending
their marriages.

In a 1996 Orlando Sentinel op-ed, Bush wrote that Florida’s no-fault
divorce law provided important protections for women in abusive situations
but also “threw the baby out with the bath water.”

“In real terms, divorce meant parents spending less time with their
children,” he continued. “According to a number of studies, the absence of
one parent in the household has been enough to result in an increased
propensity for crime, suicide, out-of-wedlock births, depression and
truancy.”

He then noted that some argued for “an extended mandatory cooling-off
period” before letting parents with minors finalize their divorces, but
added he wasn’t sure the cooling-off periods would be good policy.

Ultimately as governor, he didn’t move to implement such a rule.

The AP reported in 2002 that “Bush said that he does not want that
[no-fault divorce] law changed, saying it could lead to abusive situations
if it is more difficult for couples to split up.”

Now, in her 1996 book, It Takes A Village, Hillary Clinton argued a
strikingly similar position.

“[W]ith divorce as easy as it is, and its consequences so hard, people with
children need to ask themselves whether they have given a marriage their
best shot and what more they can do to make it work before they call it
quits,” she wrote, echoing Bush’s concerns about how divorce impacts
children. “For this reason, I am ambivalent about no-fault divorce with no
waiting period when children are involved. We should consider returning to
mandatory ‘cooling off’ periods, with education and counseling for
partners.”

So both Bush and Clinton were open to—but ultimately noncommittal
about—policies designed to make it harder for parents of minor children to
get divorced.

Clinton’s campaign didn’t respond to a request for comment.

In one sense, Clinton went even further than Bush on the issue, suggesting
in her book that divorce is a public health problem.

“I admire the way the Parent Education Program in Columbus, Ohio, treats
divorce as a public health issue,” she wrote.

And she even invoked Bill Bennett, the Reaganite and conservative culture
warrior, to make the case against divorce.

“One does not have to agree with all the remarks of former Secretary of
Education William Bennett to welcome his acknowledgment before the
Christian Coalition that divorce is hard on children,” she wrote.

Clinton didn’t leave her anti-divorce rhetoric in the 90’s.

During a Senate floor speech in 2004 arguing against a constitutional
amendment that would have barred same-sex marriage (she was opposed to gay
marriage until 2013), she invoked no-fault divorce again.

“Now, if we were really concerned about marriage and the fact that so many
marriages today end in divorce, and so many children are then put into the
incredibly difficult position of having to live with the consequences of
divorce,” she said. “Perhaps 20, 30 years ago we should have been debating
an amendment to the Federal Constitution to make divorce really, really
hard, to take it out of the states’ hands and say that we will not
liberalize divorce, we will not move toward no-fault divorce, and we will
make it as difficult as possible because we fear the consequences of
liberalizing divorce laws.”

Elsewhere in the speech, she was explicit about her concerns over the
divorce rate.

“We are living in a society where people have engaged in divorce at a
rapid, accelerated rate,” she said. “We all know it is something that has
led to the consequences with respect to the economy, to society, to
psychology, and emotion that so often mark a young child’s path to
adulthood.”

It just goes to show when your potential nominee has a long record, it
might pay to check it before you start questioning the other candidate’s
sanity.

*RUBIO*

*Marco Rubio, like a lot of Americans, is terrible with money
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/get-there/wp/2015/06/11/marco-rubio-like-a-lot-of-americans-is-terrible-with-money/>
// WaPo // Jonnelle Marte – June 11, 2015 *

Marco Rubio has been getting a lot of attention for his financial blunders.

He once cashed out a retirement account to help pay for a new refrigerator
and to cover his kids’ private school tuition, despite having cash on hand.
And in a deep dive into his finances, the New York Times reported this week
that Rubio has saved very little, even when making a decent amount of
money. In addition to paying off his student loans, he used part of his
book advance to splurge on an $80,000 boat.

Rubio has been talking more openly about his struggles on the campaign
trail, using the story to relate to voters. His campaign says that the boat
was a fishing boat and that he isn’t like other presidential candidates who
came from wealth. The son of Cuban immigrants — his father was a bartender
and his mother was a hotel maid — he didn’t grow up with a lot of money, he
says. “Like most Americans, I know what it’s like for money to be a limited
resource and to have to manage it accordingly,” he told the Times in a
statement.

Are his mistakes really that different from that of other people who are
struggling to pay off student loans, raise their families and pay their
mortgages? Here’s what some of the numbers say.

Saving rates.

Rubio often struggled to save, even during times when he was earning high
income, the Times reported. He’s better off than a lot of consumers but
still falls within the bottom 90 percent of households when it comes to
wealth. By that standard, his saving habits are in line with that of other
people who have similar amounts of wealth. As the chart below shows, people
in the bottom 90 percent save close to zero percent of their pay each year,
according to an analysis by Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman, economists
with the University of California, Berkeley. Saving rates jumped to 15
percent for people in the top 10 percent, or those with more than $660,000
in net worth.

Cashing out retirement accounts.

This is a mistake that financial pros warn about constantly. When Rubio
cashed out nearly $70,000 in retirement savings from an IRA last year to
buy a new refrigerator and help pay for his children’s private school
tuition costs, he likely faced a steep tax bill and set back his retirement
readiness. (He has other retirement savings, but he also had other cash on
hand, according to reports.)

Early retirement withdrawals usually come with a 10 percent penalty and the
requirement to pay taxes on the cash that’s taken out. They also puts a
dent in retirement income by cutting down on the amount of savings invested
that can grow over time. Still, plenty of people dip into retirement
savings before they should to pay for more immediate needs like college
tuition or to cover the bills after a job loss. About 8 percent of people
in their 40s and 10 percent of people in their 50s took early withdrawals
from their IRAs in 2013, according to the Employee Benefit Research
Institute. Those rates increased as people got closer to retirement age.

Income fluctuation.

Another part of Rubio’s story is that his income has changed dramatically
over the years. Last year he made $174,000 as a U.S. senator last year and
earned another $52,000 from book royalties and a teaching position at
Florida International University, as my colleague Sean Sullivan reported.
But that’s still not as much as he was making when he worked as a lawyer in
the private sector. And he’s had other ups and downs: He earned a modest
salary as a member of the Florida state legislature, then saw a huge pay
raise when he landed a job at a private law firm, before taking a pay cut
to join the U.S. Senate. His $800,000 book advance in 2012 was another big
windfall.

Turns out that a surprising number of Americans see income fluctuate from
year to year, or from month to month. While that kind of income volatility
is more pronounced for the poor, it’s not limited to them. One in four
people saw their incomes rise or drop by 30 percent or more from 2013 to
2014, according to an analysis of  100,000 Chase Bank account holders by
the  JPMorgan Chase Institute.

Still a top earner.

To be sure, Rubio is better off than a lot of consumers in a key way. His
annual pay, while not in the millions, still put him in the top 5 percent
of households when it comes to income. That leaves him in a better position
to build wealth and to have enough savings to ride out emergencies when
they happen. The majority of households, or 55 percent, do not have enough
cash on hand to replace one month’s worth of income, according to a study
by Pew Charitable Trusts. People in the bottom quintile of earnings only
had enough savings to replace a median of nine days of income. For the top
quintile, median savings were enough to stretch for 52 days.

*Rubio And Five U.S. Congressmen Voted For Florida's 'Scarlet Letter'
Adoption Bill
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/11/florida-adoption-bill_n_7565046.html?1434061537>
// HuffPo // Laura Bassett – June 11, 2015*

Sen. Marco Rubio (R) was among the Florida state legislators who voted for
the so-called "Scarlet Letter" law in 2001 that required single mothers to
publish their sexual histories in the newspaper in order to place their
babies up for adoption.

Five U.S. congressmen -- Reps. Mario Diaz-Balart (R), Lois Frankel (D),
Jeff Miller (R), Gus Bilirakis (R) and Dennis Ross (R) -- were state
legislators at the time and voted for the controversial bill. Reps. Debbie
Wasserman Schultz (D), Frederica Wilson (D), Daniel Webster (R) and Bill
Posey (R), who were also state legislators back then, voted against it.

The law, which passed with overwhelming majorities in the House and Senate,
required unwed moms who wished to put their babies up for adoptions to post
details about their recent sexual encounters in the newspaper in an attempt
to contact the father, even if the woman was a victim of rape or incest.
The purpose of the bill was to inform estranged biological fathers that
their children were being adopted and give them the chance to intervene.

The "Scarlet Letter" law gained media attention this week after The
Huffington Post reported that former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) had
advocated for the public shaming of unwed parents in his 1995 book. Bush
allowed the controversial law to go into effect in 2001, but signed a
repeal of it two years later after it was successfully challenged in court.

The fact that Rubio, a 2016 presidential candidate, supported the bill
could inoculate Bush from criticism that he allowed it to go into effect if
Bush decides to throw his hat in the ring.

The Gainesville Sun reported in 2002 that some lawmakers -- including
Frankel, a longtime women's right activist -- did not realize the newspaper
publication provision was in the bill when they voted for it. "I have to
admit I'm horrified that I voted for this," Frankel told the Sun at the
time.

Rubio and the other current members of Congress who supported the bill did
not immediately respond to a request for comment.

*Is the GOP heartland ready to embrace Marco Rubio?
<http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-marco-rubio-heartland-20150611-story.html#page=1>
// LA Times // Lisa Mascaro – June 11, 2015 *

Marco Rubio sliced through a pork roast at an Iowa fairgrounds, not even a
softball question about his family's beloved Cuba could get the Republican
presidential hopeful to veer from friendly chit-chat to engage in a more
substantive political conversation.

The Florida senator, who is beginning to introduce himself to the American
heartland, preferred to stick to safe topics like the deliciousness of the
Iowa-made pork seasoning or roasting techniques.

Had this been his hometown of Miami, there would have almost certainly been
a reference to carnitas, a favorite Latino pork dish. But this being Iowa,
Rubio hardly breathed a word of Spanish throughout the event, which brought
together several GOP presidential candidates hoping to make an impression
in the state with the nation’s first presidential caucus.

Asked by a reporter to address more serious issues, Rubio again brushed
questions off with a smile, keeping his eye on the roast pork. “We’re
working here,” he said cheerfully.

Rubio’s candidacy has steadily and quietly ascended in the complicated
Republican primary field. Even though he rarely tops the polls, Rubio seems
to be everyone’s first pick as a second choice, reflected in a recent Des
Moines Register poll. Strategists say that gives Rubio the potential to
emerge as a strong consensus candidate in a GOP field that already features
nearly a dozen aspirants.

Rubio, 44, has a youthful, upbeat message that he hopes will contrast not
only with Democratic favorite Hillary Rodham Clinton, but also with former
Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and other Republican contenders.

Rubio’s potential appeal to minority voters, particularly Latinos, is
another key selling point as the Republican Party struggles to broaden its
base.

But it’s unclear whether he can parlay boyish charisma and soaring rhetoric
into a viable presidential bid, and some voters and strategists are asking
the same disarmingly simple question about Rubio: Is there any there there?

And as he moves his campaign into Midwestern and early nominating states
with less diversity -- Iowa is about 92% white -- it remains to be seen
whether Rubio’s appeal will translate with traditional GOP voters.

“I really need more information on him,” said Janelle File, a retired bank
vice president, after listening to Rubio speak. “He’s really well-spoken
and has a great background. But I really want to see more.”

Last weekend's pig roast and motorcycle ride, hosted by Republican Iowa
Sen. Joni Ernst in Boone, could have been Rubio’s moment to shine. It was
his second trip to the state, and highly anticipated. With his message of
economic conservatism, Christian values and a strong national defense,
Rubio was poised to capitalize on his early support for Ernst, the popular
senator elected last November.

Marco Rubio enters 2016 race touting youth, avoiding messy issues

Marco Rubio enters 2016 race touting youth, avoiding messy issues

But Rubio didn’t seem to impress the crowd as much as he has in other
settings. In pressed khakis and a starched-collar shirt, Rubio could barely
compete with Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and former Texas Gov. Rick Perry,
who swaggered into the roast-and-ride event wearing blue jeans and leather.

Rubio skipped the motorcycle ride and politely declined Ernst’s offer to
ride on the back of her bike. He joked that he would do better at a Jet Ski
race.

In many ways, Rubio is an outsider here in middle America, and he takes
care not to come off as too youthful, urban or ethnic. In telling his
family’s immigrant story here, he didn’t mention his parents' journey from
Cuba, as he usually does.

Rubio instead presented himself as someone just like them: a dad who pays
the mortgage, sends his kids to Christian school and believes the new
generation will do better.

“I had some people say I’m not old enough or haven’t been in government
long enough,” he told the crowd. “I’m 44 years old, but I feel 45, and I’ve
been in government long enough to know that what we’re doing now doesn’t
work. If we keep promoting the same people, we will get the same result and
the future will leave us behind.”

Rubio’s aides characterize his campaign strategy as “lean and mean,” and
deny any desire to push Rubio more out front than he is, preferring a
come-from-behind strategy. He has yet to hire a director for his Iowa
operations, as others have, though aides insist the campaign is ramping up
and more staff is coming.

Iowa voters are a famously persnickety bunch, both aggressive in their
expectation that every candidate will court their vote and passive in their
unwillingness to commit to any one presidential hopeful too soon.

That might be in part because Republicans here have picked a string of
losers recently in a statewide caucus that prides itself on being the first
testing ground for presidential candidates. Their past GOP choices, Mike
Huckabee in 2008 and Rick Santorum in 2012, failed to win the party’s
nomination, let alone the White House.

That could provide an opening for Rubio as Iowans look for a viable
alternative to likely front-runners Bush and Walker. “Many of us Iowans are
super-sensitive to this: We’re tired of being the angry white-guy party,”
said one senior Republican in the state, granted anonymity to speak frankly
about the choices. “It doesn’t hurt that [Rubio is] a different face.”

Younger voters in particular call Rubio a favorite, and at the Iowa event
the few Latino voters in the predominantly white crowd dashed over to Rubio
for selfies.

“You’re going to be all over Facebook,” shouted one fan.

“That’s great; we need to be!” Rubio responded.

“I love Rubio,” swooned Laurie Millam, who runs the business school at an
online university. She said she particularly liked how the Latino candidate
smoothed racial and partisan distinctions with a “one America” message.

Recent media scrutiny about Rubio’s personal debt and his family’s many
traffic tickets may only be helping him among ordinary Americans. At the
speech, one Iowan jokingly offered driving lessons. The campaign has taken
it all lightly, starting the satirical Twitter hashtag, #RubioCrimeSpree.

They attribute nearly $100,000 in online donations over the last few days
to people sending money in response as a gesture of support.

At some point, Rubio will need to sit down at the kitchen table and display
the skills and resources necessary to tell voters his vision for the
nation, much like he did when he was a long-shot Senate candidate going
door-to-door five years ago in Florida.

Cornered by one young voter with questions about the future of federal
spending, Rubio broke from script and launched into a discourse on the
economics of Medicare costs and need for entitlement spending reforms.

But several Iowans were less than impressed with Rubio’s performance.

When asked about Rubio’s speech, Joe Wells, a retired aviation services
manager from Cedar Rapids, responded in a distinctly Iowa-nice way: He
changed the subject.

“I never heard from Carly before,” he said, referring to Carly Fiorina, the
former Hewlett-Packard executive turned presidential candidate, who also
attended the event.

When pressed for his views on Rubio, Wells gave a lukewarm assessment:
“He’s certainly better than Bush or Christie,” a reference to the New
Jersey governor.

Brenda Remsing, a homemaker from Corydon who rode to Boone on the back of
friend’s motorcycle, likes Sen. Ted Cruz, the firebrand Texas Republican,
but she puts Rubio as her second favorite.

“He’d be a good No. 1 -- if I can’t have No. 1,” she said.

For Rubio, for now, that might be endorsement enough.

*Liberals defend Marco Rubio against blistering New York Times attacks
<http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/politics/2015/06/11/liberals-defend-marco-rubio-against-blistering-new-york-times-attack-on-him/>
// Fox News – June 11, 2015 *

It’s not often that Jon Stewart, host of “The Daily Show,” defends
conservatives, but that is what he did Wednesday.

Stewart became the latest critic of The New York Times recent stories
attacking presidential contender Sen. Marco Rubio, a Florida Republican,
for everything from having four traffic tickets in almost 20 years to
having had a large student loan and buying expensive items.

"I can't think of a single person who would be bothered by this," Stewart
said on his show, in reference to the condemning tone of the Times stories
against the senator’s tickets and how he used money from his book to lease
an Audi, and buy a fishing boat.

The Washington Post quoted some of the Times’ findings – which included
announcing that Rubio’s wife had gotten 13 traffic tickets – and noted,
sarcastically, “Outrageous!”

Rubio has somewhat turned the Times seeming hatchet job in his favor,
mocking it in emails to supporters and the press, and even getting campaign
donations because of the newspaper’s attacks.

Said the Post of the Rubio campaign: “Now, they've even got ‘The Daily
Show’ on their side for the moment.”

Some publications cast the Times’ stories as elitist and gossipy.

“If the Times wanted to make Rubio look relatable to the average
American—more like them than his potential opponents—they couldn’t have
come up with much better than show he has had financial problems,’” wrote a
Bloomberg News writer. “Rubio took out $100,000 in student loans that he
just paid off three years ago; most of his opponents have probably never
even seen a tuition bill. These are points in Rubio’s favor. People will
like this about him.”

*PAUL*

*How Rand Paul Has Already Changed the 2016 Race
<http://time.com/3917723/chatty-and-thoughtful-rand-paul-has-already-changed-the-2016-race/?iid=toc_061115>
// TIME // Joe Klein – June 11, 2015 *

Rand Paul has been a bad, bad boy. Just ask him. “I’m not very popular in
Washington right now” was his opening line at a series of town-hall
meetings in New Hampshire, two weeks after he had filibustered and,
temporarily, crashed the bulk collection of phone data by the federal
government. “I messed up their Memorial Day plans.” The line drew laughter
and applause in the great state of New Hampshire, a flinty and skeptical
province. Anything that gums up the federal machine is a good thing, it
seems, even if it involves national security. “One of my colleagues asked,
‘What do we do if the authority to collect data lapses?'” he continued. “I
told him, ‘Well, we could rely on the Constitution for a few hours.'”

More applause–but weaker this time. This was relatively esoteric stuff, and
Paul had to explain himself: He’s in favor of using search warrants to
collect the phone data of suspected terrorists, just not bulk collection of
all the phone records of all the people, which he believes is
unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment of the Bill of Rights, which
prohibits unreasonable search and seizure. He goes all the way back to the
colonial lawyer James Otis, who fought unwarranted search procedures by the
British. His audiences stay with him as he explains all this. He speaks
plainly and well, without bombast or frills. He knows his stuff. But this
is not the sort of thing Republican audiences expect from their candidates.
It’s more educational than emotional. He doesn’t speak in any detail about
Obamacare, immigration, Iran, abortion or gay rights.

By the time his 15-minute stump speech is over, he has delivered a tutorial
about the First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Ninth and 10th amendments to
the Constitution. “We Republicans won’t be successful as a party,” he says,
“until we support the entire Bill of Rights as enthusiastically as we
support the Second Amendment”–that is, the right to bear arms.

Rand Paul has a following in the GOP, just as his father Ron Paul did. But
he’s a far more interesting candidate. Paul the Elder had cranky
tendencies, railing against the Federal Reserve and in favor of hard
currency. Paul the Younger has softer edges; he is an ideologue, but a
supple and eclectic one–he talks about things his father never did, and his
party doesn’t much, like the justice system in poor black neighborhoods
(Sixth Amendment: right to a trial by jury). He tells his Republican
audiences the outrageous story of Kalief Browder, a black teenager who was
arrested in New York City for allegedly stealing a backpack–he claimed he
was innocent, refused to plea-bargain–and spent 1,000 days in jail awaiting
trial. Browder committed suicide in early June. “No wonder people in those
neighborhoods are pretty angry,” he says.

Paul drives his fellow Republicans crazy with his foreign policy views,
which are the opposite of the frothing militarism of the John McCain wing
of the party. He’s not an isolationist, but not exactly a “realist” either.
“We should arm the Kurds,” he told me, sipping water at a diner in Derry.
“They’re about the only ones who are really fighting ISIS.” I pointed out
that the Egyptians were fighting ISIS too, in Libya and Sinai. He
considered this for a moment, then said, “Yeah, but they put thousands of
people in jail for dissent.” It was a purist answer: he wasn’t ready to
support an oppressive state, even if it was fighting on our side against a
mortal enemy.

The current conventional wisdom is that Paul doesn’t have much of a chance
to win the nomination–even though, according to a recent poll, he runs
stronger against Hillary Clinton than any other Republican does. But his
message is fresh and consequential. It throws a klieg light on the
deficiencies of the two major parties: the mindless Republican
war-silliness and the utter failure of the Democratic welfare state to
alleviate intergenerational poverty. “I was on the South Side of Chicago a
few weeks ago,” he said. “And the people there know the current system
isn’t working. They’re about ready to try something new.”

But what? His “solutions”–like lower taxes on businesses in poor
neighborhoods–are insufficient, and his libertarianism doesn’t begin to
address the deficit of individual responsibility that plagues our
communities, poor and rich alike. I’d love to hear what he has to say about
what democracy demands from its citizens. Still, he is attempting something
that few candidates will risk–an intelligent conversation, on issues that
really matter. I’m thrilled he’s in the race.

*Rand Paul Signs on to Amendment Barring Ground Troops Against ISIS
<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-11/rand-paul-signs-on-to-amendment-barring-ground-troops-against-isis>
// Bloomberg // David Weigel – June 11, 2015 *

Kentucky Senator Rand Paul has had a devil of a time with his amendments
related to foreign policy. This week, the Foreign Relations Committee
rejected Paul's amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act that
would have cut off U.S. aid to the Palestinians. The prospects look better,
but not much better, for Paul's co-sponsorship of an amendment to
strengthen the 1971 Non-Detention Act. On the campaign trail, Paul likes to
talk about his amendment that would have paid for higher military funding
with cuts to foreign aid. The story ends with most senators voting against
him.

Thursday, Paul took on another uphill and telling battle. He co-sponsored
an amendment from Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy, a Democrat, that would
bar funding for ground troops being sent to the Levant to fight ISIS. The
amendment's text:

No funds appropriated by this Act may be used to support the deployment of
the United States Armed Forces for the purpose of ground combat operations
in Iraq or Syria, except as necessary-

For the protection or rescue of members of the United States Armed Forces
or United States citizens from imminent danger posed by ISIL; or

To conduct missions not intended to result in ground combat operations by
United States forces, such as-

intelligence collection and sharing;

enabling kinetic strikes

limited operations against high value targets;

operational planning; or

other forms of advice and assistance to coalition forces fighting ISIL in
Iraq or Syria

Questions to Paul's office and presidential campaign went unanswered, but
he's left no confusion about his ISIS stance. Since last fall, he's favored
attacks on ISIS positions that threaten American interests. He's also
favored arming the Kurds as they fight ISIS, telling an audience this
weekend in Merrimack, N.H., that America should take the military equipment
that's unused and  "rusting" in Afghanistan and "airlift it" to any Kurds
who need them. At the same event, Paul spoke about giving the Kurdish
minority a state of its own after the defeat of the Islamic State.

All of this, according to Paul, would require a new Authorization of
Military Force, and new funding votes. That's Murphy's position, too, and
the position of several progressive co-sponsors. Paul, for now, appears to
be the only Republican (and only Republican presidential candidate) taking
this stance via the NDAA amendment.

*WALKER*

*Scott Walker Says Supporters Have Suggested Walker-Rubio 2016 Ticket
<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-11/scott-walker-says-supporters-have-suggested-walker-rubio-2016-ticket>
// Bloomberg // John McCormick – June 11, 2015 *

Some who have talked to the governor privately about a possible pairing say
they have been surprised by how seriously he seems to be taking the
prospect.

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker on Thursday talked positively about a
Republican presidential ticket—potentially announced even before the first
nomination balloting—that would include himself and Senator Marco Rubio of
Florida.

In a Bloomberg Politics interview, the likely candidate also expressed
agreement with President Barack Obama on the pressing issue of fast-track
trade legislation.

Walker, 47, isn't expected to formally enter the race until early July,
after his state has completed a two-year budget plan. Still, he's
apparently given some consideration and had discussions already about a
potential running mate, with the focus on Rubio.

“I've actually had quite a few people, grassroots supporters, donors, and
others who have made that suggestion,” he said when asked about a
Walker-Rubio ticket.

“For now, you know, Marco is a quality candidate,” Walker said. “He's going
to be formidable in this race as things progress. And if we were to get in,
we'd be as well, and we'll see where things take us.”

Walker was in Utah to meet with potential financial supporters and to speak
at a summit hosted by 2012 Republican nominee Mitt Romney that's attracted
six declared and likely presidential candidates. The full interview will
air Thursday at 5 p.m. ET on With All Due Respect on Bloomberg TV and
BloombergPolitics.com.

Walker said both he and Rubio often hear the suggestion that they should
combine forces, potentially even before the first nomination voting in Iowa
in February 2016, as a way to stand out amid a crowded field. “We'd just
probably have to arm-wrestle over who would be at the top of the ticket,”
he said.

Some who have talked privately to Walker about a possible pairing with
Rubio say they have been surprised by how seriously the Wisconsin governor
seems to be taking the prospect. At this phase of presidential campaign,
the norm would be for a White House hopeful to summarily dismiss such a
move, in public and in private.

Walker said he likes governors and their executive experience better than
senators as potential presidents and vice presidents, but that Rubio stands
out.

“I do like Marco Rubio,” he said. “I think he and I have similar thoughts
on national defense and foreign policy.”

Walker noted how he tweeted greetings to Rubio, 44, for his birthday last
month, a move that also underscored his own relative youthfulness amid a
mostly older Democratic and Republican field.

“Marco, happy birthday from one 40-something to another,” Walker said of
his greeting. “There’s certainly a generational issue there.”

In the most recent Bloomberg Politics/Des Moines Register Iowa Poll, Walker
led in the state that starts the nomination process, while Rubio was the
most popular second choice among likely Republican caucus participants.

Trade, tax policy

Walker said he supports giving Obama the authority to submit trade
agreements to Congress for an expedited, up-or-down vote without
amendments. “If we don't go down this path, we're going to be at a
competitive disadvantage, and so I think it just makes sense,” he said.

At the same time, like many Republicans who support granting the trade
authority recent past presidents have had, Walker said the deal would allow
the Republican-controlled Congress to review Obama's actions.

“If this president were to give them a bad deal, they should hold him
accountable and vote it down,” he said. “They have every right to do that
under the proposal.”

On taxes, Walker said he'd look for ways to lower them especially for those
in “the middle of the bracket” as well as for businesses. “I certainly
wouldn't be talking about anybody paying any more,” he said.

The popular home-mortgage deduction is not a place where Walker would look
for additional revenue to balance the cuts he'd like to see made, he said.
“We're going to look at the entire tax code and what the best way to reform
is, but I think homeownership is an important part of living the American
dream,” he said.

He expressed similar views about the popular deduction for charitable
contributions.

*CRUZ*

*Ted Cruz under fire for Tennessee campaign chairman
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/ted-cruz-kevin-kookogey-tennessee-118883.html#ixzz3coi0uZDQ>
// Politico // Adam Lerner – June 11, 2015 *

Ted Cruz’s presidential campaign is pushing back against criticism that the
Texas senator named an anti-Islamic politician as his state chairman in
Tennessee.

On Wednesday, Cruz spokesman Rick Tyler called the reaction to the
appointment “absurd.”

Tyler’s comments came in response to a prominent Muslim-American advocacy
group’s complaints about the Cruz campaign’s new state chairman, Kevin
Kookogey.

Announcing the move, Cruz hailed Kookogey’s “experience and knowledge of
both the landscape in Tennessee and the issues that matter to Tennesseans,”
such as “American sovereignty, defense, and religious liberty.”

As chairman of the Williamson County Republican Party in 2012, Kookogey
pushed a resolution condemning Republican Gov. Bill Haslam for hiring Samar
Ali, a practicing Muslim, and for appointing a council on Islamic affairs
in the state.

“RESOLVED that the Williamson County Republican Party hereby opposes
Tennessee Governor Bill Haslam’s recent appointment of a Shariah compliant
finance expert to the Tennessee Department of Economic and Community
Development,” the resolution said.

The Haslam administration swatted down the allegations at the time.

“Samar Ali was hired to be ECD’s international director. Her job duties are
to manage the TNTrade export program and to supervise our four
international offices in Germany, Japan, China and Canada,” Clint Brewer,
an official with the state’s Department of Economic and Community
Development, told Politifact. “There is no part of her job — or any
department operations — that involves Shariah compliant finance or Shariah
law,” Brewer said.

Ali stayed in office for 18 months, and is now a private attorney at a
Nashville law firm.

But the bruised feelings remain: On Tuesday, the Council on
American-Islamic Relations demanded that Cruz end its affiliation with
Kookogey for his “longstanding support for anti-Muslim and Islamaphobic
causes.”

Tyler, the Cruz spokesman, pushed back in a statement to the Tennessean on
Wednesday.

“It is absurd to suggest that being a defender of American law under the
United States Constitution is somehow anti-Muslim,” Tyler said.

Ali, a former White House fellow and Obama administration counterterrorism
adviser who was born in Nashville and grew up in Tennessee, told the
Tennessean last year that the sharia law flap was a “very painful
experience.”

“It also made me realize how fast one can be dehumanized,” Ali added, “and
I definitely felt dehumanized.”

*Ted Cruz fights GOP approach on Obamacare subsidies
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/ted-cruz-fight-obamacare-subsidies-supreme-court-118875.html#ixzz3coiOGULb>
// Politico // Manu Raju – June 11, 2015 *

Ted Cruz is planning to battle his party over Obamacare again — this time,
if Senate Republicans seek to extend subsidies that could be killed by the
Supreme Court as soon as this month.

In an interview with POLITICO, the 2016 presidential candidate weighed in
on the high-stakes Supreme Court case that could end subsidies for millions
of people who receive their health insurance through the federal exchange.
A majority of Republican senators have endorsed an approach to keep those
subsidies in place until September 2017, but Cruz flatly said “no” when
asked if he’d sign on as well.

“I think the best legislative option is to allow states to opt out,” Cruz
said in the Capitol. “I am cautiously optimistic that the Supreme Court
will conclude in King vs. Burwell that the Obama IRS disregarded the plain
language of the statute and acted lawlessly. And when that occurs, it will
be a real opportunity for Congress to lead.”

He added: “In a perfect world, we would take that opportunity to repeal
Obamacare. At a minimum, we should allow states to opt out.”

Cruz’s comments underscore the challenges for Republican leaders if they
win the Supreme Court case: They’ll have to find a way to help the millions
who could immediately see their health care costs skyrocket without
appearing to endorse a law they universally despise.

And it’s bound to grow more complicated with the injection of 2016
politics: Republican senators in blue-states facing reelection will be
eager to avoid a public revolt and find a way to keep federal dollars
flowing to people who rely on the subsides to defray their health care
costs; conservatives running for president will be eager to renew their
demands to kill the controversial law once and for all.

There are several proposals aimed at addressing this dilemma, with one
leading option proposed by Sen. Ron Johnson, a conservative up for
reelection next year in Wisconsin, which has a federal exchange. While
Johnson’s approach would extend the subsidies through the summer of 2017,
it would also kill the law’s individual and employer mandates and repeal
insurance industry reforms, a proposal backed by Senate Majority Leader
Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) with 31 co-sponsors.

Other Republicans have proposed their own version, including freshman Sen.
Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), who wants to allow financial assistance through tax
credits over 18 months but gradually reduce them over that timeframe. And
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), another freshman, has a plan that would not keep
the subsidies, though he’s signaled he’d be open to extending them
depending on how the court rules.

Cruz has been open to some transition period in the past. In February, Cruz
offered his own bill to repeal Obamacare. But his bill says the current law
would stay in place for six months after the measure’s enactment date.

It’s not unlike Cruz to battle his party over health care; he did it in
2013 after a 21-hour speech demanding that the GOP use a must-pass spending
bill to defund Obamacare. When the end result was a government shutdown, he
became a scourge of Republicans in Washington.

Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), a member of Republican leadership, said it’s
unfair to contend that Republicans are seeking to protect the law if they
were to temporarily extend the subsidies.

“Republicans will have a response to protect the people who have been hurt
by the president’s illegal action, but we are not going to protect the
law,” he said.

*Cruz ramps up attack on ObamaCare
<http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/244746-cruz-ramps-up-attack-on-obamacare>
// The Hill // Sarah Ferris – June 11, 2015 *

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) is ramping up his attacks on ObamaCare — but in a
way that will likely put him at odds with Republican leadership.

In two separate interviews on Thursday, Cruz said he would oppose a GOP
strategy to extend ObamaCare subsidies that could be struck down by the
Supreme Court later this month.

Instead, he said he wants a bill that would let states “opt-out of
Obamacare” altogether, he told The Washington Post.

“I think the best legislative option is to allow states to opt out,” the
presidential candidate told Politico.

The King v. Burwell case, which could result in an estimated 6.4 million
people losing their subsidies, is the Republican Party’s biggest healthcare
challenge before the next election. In Texas alone, 832,334 people stand to
lose their subsidies.

The majority of Senate Republicans — Cruz not included — have signed onto a
plan from Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) that would temporarily continue the
subsidies, while also repealing the individual and employer mandates.

Two other presidential candidates in the Senate, Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.)
and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), also declined to co-sponsor the bill, though it
did earn the backing from a fourth candidate, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).

If the court rules against ObamaCare, Republicans will need to act fast to
prevent millions of people from dropping out of their healthcare plans.

If no plan is enacted, Democrats are likely to cast the blame on
Republicans, who had widely backed the case initially.

But the prospect of a conservative win in King v. Burwell has caused
friction among congressional Republicans, who have sharply disagreed on how
to avert a healthcare meltdown.

Last month, House and Senate leaders disclosed that they will not be
releasing their contingency plans for the court case until after the
decision.

*CHRISTIE*

*Chris Christie Lays Out Education Plan
<http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/11/bernie-sanders-demands-hillary-clinton-take-trade-stance-right-now/>
// NYT // Nick Corasaniti – June 11, 2015 *

Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey leaned on the podium with his right
elbow, his standard let-me-give-it-to-you-straight stance, and gave one of
his classic blunt warnings, this time setting up a nearly hour long speech
laying out his educational platform.

“It’s time we had a conversation about education that isn’t defined by
ideological dogma or by narrow, personal, institutional interests,” Mr.
Christie told the packed room at Iowa State University in Ames, Iowa. “Lets
talk about what real educational reform for America looks like.”

But notably, Mr. Christie never touched on his recent abandonment of the
Common Core, the set of nationwide educational standards that many
conservatives abhor. He has previously denied that his new position against
the standards is related to his presidential aspirations.

Instead, Mr. Christie spoke at length on his educational record in New
Jersey and how that would inform his vision for the country. And, although
the speech was billed as focused on kindergarten through 12th grade, Mr.
Christie spent the majority of his time tackling the issue of student debt
in higher education, another frequent talking point on the campaign trail.

“Entire generations are being saddled with debt,” Mr. Christie said. “There
has not been a town hall meeting I’ve had, in New Jersey or outside of New
Jersey, since the beginning of the year, where someone hasn’t raised the
issue of student debt.”

He called for an expansion of Pell grants and other federal education
funding, saying Congress should expand student aid programs for people at
the bottom of the economic ladder. But he criticized President Obama’s plan
to make community college free, saying, “We know there is nothing free in
the world.”

He proposed “income share agreements” as an alternative to student loans.
His proposal would give students the option of paying a percentage of their
income for a set amount of time to whomever fronts the cost of college.

“With an income share agreement, there’s no lump sum to pay, so there’s no
downside,” he said, also arguing that investors in the program would have
more incentive to help the student succeed to recoup their money.

He also called for more transparency in college billing and spending,
joking that students and parents had a right to know if a tuition increase
was going toward building a new rock-climbing wall. And, like his speech
Tuesday in Washington where he argued for a less rigid school calendar, he
made the case for universities to offer both night and weekend classes, to
let students who need to work their way through college hold down a steady
job.

His proposals for reforming kindergarten through 12th-grade education
centered on a common theme for the New Jersey governor: confronting the
teachers’ union. He spoke early and often of how he restructured teacher
tenure in his home state and introduced merit pay for them. He lamented
that he was unable to convince the union to agree to change the “last in,
first out” layoff policy for teachers.

“The power of the teachers’ union has prevented us from using quality based
layoffs,” he said. “It’s the worst policy that money can buy.”

He also pointed to his expanded school choice in New Jersey as another
victory over the teachers’ union.

“This is a program driven by a simple principle — I think parents are
better suited to make decisions about their children’s education than union
leaders,” Mr. Christie said.

But as he based many of his recommendations on his education record in New
Jersey, reviews in his home state were mixed, most notably in the city of
Newark, which has the largest school district in the state.

In 2010, Mr. Christie helped secure, along with former Mayor Cory Booker, a
$100 million donation from Mark Zuckerberg, the chief executive of
Facebook, to help Newark’s floundering schools. Mr. Booker is now a United
States senator representing New Jersey.

The plan, executed in conjunction with Mr. Booker under the banner of “One
Newark,” contained some of the important elements of Mr. Christie’s
education platforms, like eliminating neighborhood public schools in favor
of a lottery to give parents more choice over which schools their children
attend.

But that had the unintended effect of leaving some families with children
attending multiple schools across the city, and led to an uprising in
Newark that helped elect Ras J. Baraka as mayor last year. He was a vocal
critic of the plan.

Despite these issues, Mr. Christie, the product of New Jersey public
schools himself, still seems to be sticking to school choice and other
reforms he has made in New Jersey. As he said in his closing remarks, “When
we dare to innovate and fight the status quo, we give our children a
fighting chance in this new world.”

*Top Chris Christie Aide Goes to His Political Action Committee
<http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/11/bernie-sanders-demands-hillary-clinton-take-trade-stance-right-now/>
// NYT // Maggie Haberman – June 11, 2015 *

Maria Comella, the long-serving communications director to Gov. Chris
Christie of New Jersey, will move over to the governor’s political action
committee in a senior role, the latest move that indicates he will run for
president.

Ms. Comella will become senior adviser to Leadership Matters for America
PAC, according to another spokeswoman for Mr. Christie, Samantha Smith.

Her move to Mr. Christie’s political arm is taking place as he appears on
the verge of announcing a presidential campaign for 2016, seeing a void in
the current Republican field that is as much stylistic as policy-driven.

Ms. Comella has been almost constantly by Mr. Christie’s side since he
became the governor of New Jersey after defeating the Democratic incumbent,
Jon Corzine, in 2009. She has advised him on a range of issues, but has
also been deeply involved in a social media strategy that helped make the
governor a mini-celebrity on YouTube through clips of his famously
combative town hall meetings.

“Maria understands messaging and the fast-moving and ever-changing media
landscape better than anyone in the country,” said Mike DuHaime, the top
political adviser to Mr. Christie, who hired Ms. Comella when both worked
on the Rudolph W. Giuliani’s presidential campaign in the 2008 election
cycle. “She is smart, fierce, respected and effective.”

On that campaign, Ms. Comella, a New York native and George Washington
University graduate who also worked on Capitol Hill, oversaw about 20 staff
members. Her most recent title was deputy chief of staff for communications
and planning for Mr. Christie.

*Christie: Debt-free college is 'wrong'
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/chris-christie-no-debt-free-college-118879.html>
// Politico // Allie Grasgreen – June 11, 2015 *

New Jersey Gov. and Republican presidential contender Chris Christie laid
out a multi-pronged higher education agenda Thursday, and a key part —
unsurprisingly — is college affordability.

The issue has shot into the spotlight in recent weeks, both in Congress and
on the campaign trail. Christie delivered his address at Iowa State
University, in Ames, Iowa.

Setting the stage with the story of his father — a top high school student
who enlisted in the Army because he couldn’t afford to accept an offer to
attend Columbia University, then returned to Rutgers University on the G.I.
Bill — Christie proposed “a system where we all need to take personal
responsibility to grasp the opportunities in higher education, but also one
where we can get a leg up when we need it.”

Debt-free college, Christie said, is not the answer.

“That is a typical liberal approach. It is wrong,” he said, according to
prepared remarks. “If college graduates are going to reap the greater
economic rewards and opportunities of earning a degree, then it seems fair
for them to support the cost of the education they’re receiving.”

Democratic candidates Hillary Clinton, Gov. Martin O’Malley and Sen. Bernie
Sanders have all expressed varying levels of interest in the increasingly
popular debt-free college concept.

However, Christie said Congress should “properly fund and expand” financial
aid programs for low-income students, noting that Pell grants have expanded
while Supplemental Education Opportunity Grants and Perkins Loans have
tapered off.

Christie also wants to consider approaches like tax credits for donors to
higher education grant organizations, and income-share agreements, where
students repay private financing received in college with some percentage
of their income in the future. (Sen. Marco Rubio has introduced legislation
for such plans).

*Christie slams rival for 'scaring' voters
<http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/caucus/2015/06/11/chris-christie-iowa-rand-paul-polk-county/71103698/>
// The Des Moines Register // Jennifer Jacobs – June 11, 2015 *

New Jersey governor Chris Christie was the keynote speaker at the Polk
County GOP's spring fundraiser Thursday night, where he stressed that the
world is "an unstable, dangerous, ugly place" when America pulls back from
its place as the dominant force.

He said that he, as a former U.S. attorney who prosecuted terrorists and
put them in jail in New Jersey, speaks from a position of knowledge.
"Something unique in politics," he said. "I actually know what I'm talking
about."

Without singling out presidential candidate Rand Paul by name, Christie
blasted the Kentucky U.S. senator for sending out fundraising solicitations
noting his opposition to U.S. surveillance programs.

"To raise money off those speeches and then brag how much money they raised
by scaring people about their civil liberties – it's disgraceful. And it's
dangerous," Christie said. "You need to decide as you pick a new national
leader: Do you want someone who wakes up every morning saying, 'My first
job is to make sure I protect the lives of the American people and I will
do everything that I can within the law to do that,' or another college
professor?"

The country doesn't need another inexperienced leader "with theories about
things they've never done and never experienced," Christie said.

Christie told personal stories about how his mother, Sondra, told him
before she died in 2004 that if he ever ran for president, he'd better be
direct with the American people.

"I'm one of the most psychoanalyzed national political figures in the
world. We now end the mystery. You now why I am the way I am," he said, to
laughter. "There will be some days where you like what I say and there will
be other days where you sink your head and you say, 'I cannot believe he
just said that.' But here's what you'll never have to say: You'll never
have to say, 'I wonder what he's thinking. I wonder what he feels and I
wonder what he's thinking and I wonder what he's willing to fight for.'"

Iowa will be a tough proving ground for Christie, who was in ninth place in
a field of 16 GOP presidential contenders in a recent Des Moines
Register/Bloomberg Politics poll of likely caucusgoers. When the Register
asked him Thursday if he could win the Iowa caucuses, he answered: "Listen,
the only reason to get in is to win. ... What I know is if I get into a
race, I'll compete."

He said he intends to "be who I am. And if my ideas are good enough and
people connect with me, I'll change minds."

Several Iowans at the Polk County dinner, including Liz Van Zomeren, a
Johnston Republican, said Christie exceeded their expectations by far.

*GRAHAM*

*Sen. Mark Kirk calls Lindsey Graham a 'bro with no ho'
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/mark-kirk-lindsey-graham-bro-118882.html#ixzz3cm7wmffB>
// Politico // Nick Gass – June 11, 2015 *

According to his Senate colleague Mark Kirk, Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) is a
“bro with no ho.”

Kirk made the remark about Graham during a Senate Appropriations Committee
markup session on Thursday. The Huffington Post, which first reported on
the comment, posted audio of the hot mic incident.

“I’ve been joking with Lindsey,” Kirk said, according to the audio. “Did
you see that? He’s going to have a rotating first lady. He’s a bro with no
ho.”

Kirk’s office told HuffPost that the Illinois Republican had been “joking
around with his colleagues.”

Graham has made light of his bachelorhood, joking this week that if he wins
the presidency, he would have a “rotating first lady.” The 59-year-0ld
South Carolina senator has never married and has no children.

*Lindsey Graham Introduces Abortion Bill
<http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/06/11/lindsey_graham_introduces_abortion_bill_126946.html>
// RealClearPolitics // Andrew Desiderio – June 11, 2015 *

In what some consider a play for votes on the right, Sen. Lindsey Graham
introduced an abortion bill Thursday on Capitol Hill, where the South
Carolina Republican was flanked at a news conference by leaders in the
pro-life movement.

The legislation, titled the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, would
ban abortions past 20 weeks, unless the life of the mother is in jeopardy
or the woman was the victim of rape or incest and received medical
treatment or counseling at least 48 hours before the abortion.

Additionally, the bill would allow women to file a lawsuit against an
abortion provider who violates provisions outlined in the act.

Graham, a 2016 presidential candidate, said it is the government’s duty to
“protect the most vulnerable” in America. Having a debate over when life
starts and ends is long overdue, he said, and the issue is something that
deserves to be discussed on the campaign trail.

“I don’t believe abortion, five months into pregnancy, makes us a better
nation,” he added. “I have no doubt the legislation will one day be passed
by Congress and signed into law.”

But the bill’s prospects of becoming law with President Obama’s signature
are slim. According to the latest Gallup polling, half of Americans
consider themselves pro-choice, while 44 percent say they are pro-life. But
Graham says his legislation should appeal to the former, calling it a
“reasonable position” to take.

Abortion-rights groups are casting Graham’s efforts as an assault on
women’s health and a campaign ploy. “Sen. Graham’s bill is not about
policy. It’s about politics,” NARAL Pro-Choice America President Ilyse
Hogue said in a statement. “He is choosing to use his position in the
Senate to advance an abortion ban to bolster his long-shot White House bid
in a shameless play to early state ultra-conservative voters.”

Graham dismissed that assertion. “Just look at my history in the pro-life
movement,” he told RealClearPolitics after the news conference. “I was here
long before I thought about running for president.”

But the 2016 presidential candidate may need to shore up his support among
social conservatives, as he has said he would not fight a Supreme Court
decision that upholds same-sex marriage, and argued the Republican Party
should welcome Caitlyn Jenner, formerly Bruce Jenner, and other transgender
Americans. “I’m into addition,” Graham argued Sunday on CNN. “I can only
imagine the torment that Bruce Jenner went through. I hope she has found
peace.”

Hogue also said the influence of anti-abortion groups is “dwindling.” But
leaders of those groups – the Family Research Council, National Right to
Life Committee, Americans United for Life, and Concerned Women for America
– disagree.

NRLC President Carol Tobias disputed assertions by the American Congress of
Obstetricians and Gynecologists that scientific evidence invalidates
arguments for a ban on abortions after 20 weeks. (“Legislative efforts to
limit abortions after 20 weeks represent an obvious attempt to restrict the
ability of American women to get the care they need, when they need it,”
ACOG President Mark S. DeFrancesco said in a statement.”) Tobias called
that argument “willful ignorance at its best.” She accused the media of
serving as “amplifiers of misinformation” brought forth by groups like ACOG
and Planned Parenthood.

“A baby at five months has developed organs and can feel pain,” CWA
President Penny Nance said. “They deserve our legal protection.”

Graham promised debate on the measure this year, and told reporters that
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell supports it.

*SANTORUM*

*Rick Santorum, moderate Republican?
<http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/11/politics/rick-santorum-caitlyn-jenner-support/>
// CNN // Alexandra Jaffe – June 11, 2015 *

He was conservatives' pick to take on Mitt Romney in the 2012 GOP
presidential primary, but in an exclusive interview with CNN's Erin Burnett
on Thursday night Santorum seemed ready to turn over a new leaf.

The former Pennsylvania senator once compared homosexuality to beastiality.
But he showed a more accepting tone on Thursday, saying he would accept an
endorsement from transgender icon Caitlyn Jenner. (Jenner said in an
interview she is a Republican).

"If that's the way she feels about my candidacy, sure," he said.

When Jenner went public with her decision, Santorum said he accepted her as
a woman and that his "responsibility as a human is to love and accept
everybody."

He struck a similar tone on Thursday night, but suggested he still doesn't
agree with her decision.

"My job as a human being is to treat everybody with dignity or respect --
period, stop, full stop, no qualification to that," he said. "Do I have to
agree with their positions on issues or how they see America? Of course
not."

Santorum also said he was open to the idea that humans are contributing to
climate change.

"Clearly the earth has warmed," he said. "I do have questions about what
role man plays in this warming. I think there are a lot of folks who do
question that."

He said, however, the scientific consensus is still out on that and that,
more importantly, the policies arising from the belief that humans are
contributing to climate change are "very damaging to the United States of
America."

Santorum's made strengthening the American family a centerpiece of his
second bid for the White House, but said Sen. Lindsey Graham's single-dom
shouldn't disqualify him from the presidency.

"I think you elect the person to be president," he said when asked whether
the fact Graham has never married should impact his bid. "We've had
bachelors before in the White House."

And though he's drawing piddling crowds to Iowa diners, compared to his
stunning first-place finish in the 2012 caucuses there, Santorum is totally
unfazed. One-on-one contact with as many Iowans as possible, Santorum says,
is all part of the plan.

"People can mock and say, 'Oh, you know, it's only four or five people.' In
small rural counties, four or five people make all the difference," he said
on CNN.

Santorum raised eyebrows when he encountered only two diners at a stop at a
restaurant in Iowa on Monday, but he said his team felt "really good" about
signing them both up as volunteers, and that one will advocate for him at
the caucuses next year.

And he said he was willing to go to "every county in Iowa to recruit three
or four people," which he called a "pretty good hit rate" for a campaign.

"We feel really good that if you go to a town with 350 people, if you get
four, five, that's actually not a bad percentage of the folks in town," he
said.

*Rick Santorum Says Economic 'Stagnation' Will Help Him Win in 2016
<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-11/rick-santorum-says-economic-stagnation-will-help-him-win-in-2016>
// Bloomberg News // Mark Niquette – June 11, 2015 *

To hear Rick Santorum tell it, the nation's tepid economic recovery may be
his key to winning the Republican presidential nomination.

Interviewed Thursday on Bloomberg's With All Due Respect, Santorum was
responding to comments from Iowa voters asking what's different in 2016
after the former Pennsylvania senator won that state's caucus but lost the
nomination to Mitt Romney in 2012.

"What's different is the country has been in stagnation four more years,''
Santorum said. "I recognize what the core of that problem is, and we have
an economic platform that's going to not only unite America but win this
election.''

“What's different is the country has been in stagnation four more years.”

Santorum said he has a "pro-worker immigration policy" and plans to release
an economic and tax plan soon that will focus on manufacturing,
construction and energy jobs. It will appeal to disaffected Democrats and
"folks in middle America who are seeing their wages flat-lined, income
falling, and neither political party addressing that,'' he said.

The former Pennsylvania senator had 6 percent support in a Bloomberg
Politics/Des Moines Register Iowa poll released May 30 with former Florida
Senator Marco Rubio, behind Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker at 17 percent,
Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky and retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson at 10
percent, with former Florida Governor Jeb Bush and former Arkansas Governor
Mike Huckabee next at 9 percent each.

*Rick Santorum signs ATR tax pledge
<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/11/rick-santorum-signs-atr-tax-pledge/>
// The Washington Times // David Sherfinski – June 11, 2015 *

Former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, a 2016 GOP presidential
candidate, has signed Americans for Tax Reform’s Taxpayer Protection Pledge
committing to oppose and veto any efforts to raise taxes, the group said
Thursday.

“By signing the Taxpayer Protection Pledge to the American people, Senator
Santorum continues his tradition of protecting American taxpayers against
higher taxes,” said ATR President Grover Norquist.

Mr. Santorum signed the pledge as a U.S. Senator and as a presidential
candidate in 2012. He joins Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas, Rand Paul of Kentucky
and Marco Rubio of Florida, as well as former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly
Fiorina and former Texas Gov. Rick Perry as 2016 presidential candidates
who have signed the pledge.

Mr. Norquist has also offered praise for former Arkansas Gov. Mike
Huckabee, another presidential candidate, who took his own pledge not to
raise taxes.

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who is announcing his 2016 plans Monday, has
indicated he does not plan on signing any such pledges, but his team has
said his record on taxes is clear.

With each announcement of the 2016 presidential contenders who have signed
the pledge, ATR has pointed out that the lone Republican presidential
candidate in 2012 who did not make such a pledge was former Utah Gov. Jon
Huntsman, who dropped out of the race shortly after a third-place finish in
New Hampshire.

*KASICH*

*Is John Kasich Too Cranky To Be President?
<http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/john-kasich-too-cranky-be-president-n373291>
// NBC News // Perry Bacon – June 11, 2015 *

He could be a top contender for the GOP nomination. But first, he might
want to get people to stop calling him a jerk.

Republican insiders say that Ohio Gov. John Kasich, who is planning to
officially enter the 2016 campaign next month, is an experienced swing
state governor who could ultimately emerge as one of the party's leading
candidates. But Republicans both privately and publicly say that Kasich's
style is grating, and they are skeptical of whether it can be effective in
a long presidential campaign.

In private settings and sometimes even in public ones, Kasich is known to
be brusque, confrontational and dismissive of others' views, even fellow
conservatives.

Fred Barnes, the executive editor of the conservative Weekly Standard and
an influential voice in GOP politics, said this week Kasich could be the
party's nominee if "he stops acting somewhat like a jerk."

"He spends a lot of time criticizing other Republicans ....and that doesn't
make any sense," Barnes said in a radio interview this week with Hugh
Hewitt, a conservative radio host.

Mark Souder, a former Indiana congressman who served in the House with
Kasich, said his former colleague's "lack of patience" would be a "big
challenge."

"His mannerisms, his expressions, his sarcasm, etc. can be off-putting at
times," said Souder.

Souder added, "If he can survive the initial beating in the early states,
and keep his cool without lecturing people or implying they aren't smart
enough to understand, I think he has an excellent chance."

Jeb Bush's struggles have potentially created an opening for Kasich,
another Republican governor in his 60's. After flirting with a run for most
of the year, Kasich has now hired a senior team of advisers that includes
one of the men who helped John McCain nearly beat George W. Bush in 2000.

He's beginning to get the kind of exposure a potential candidate needs,
too. The Ohio governor, along with several other candidates, will speak on
Friday in Park City, Utah at Mitt Romney's annual gathering of influential
GOP donors and other figures.

Kasich could be an appealing alternative to Republicans who like Jeb Bush's
political approach but are wary that he could be derailed because of the
baggage attached to the Bush name. The Ohio governor, like Bush, was twice
elected in a key swing state that Republicans desperately need if they want
to win the White House.

Kasich is also a more moderate conservative in the Jeb Bush mold. He is a
supporter of the Common Core education standards and an occasional critic
of Tea Party conservatives. He also backs a path to legalization for
undocumented immigrants.

"I think he is smarter and has more knowledge of the issues than Walker and
Rubio," said John Feehery, who was a top aide on Capitol Hill when Kasich
ran the House Budget Committee.

Kasich is to the left of even Bush on some issues. He has set a goal that
at least 15 percent of the companies hired for contracts by the Ohio state
government be minority-owned. And his decision in 2013 to expand Medicaid
under the Affordable Care Act remains a deep concern on the right.

Conservatives are bitter that Kasich not only expanded Medicaid, as
President Obama has urged governors across the country to do, but has cast
those who opposed the move as being insufficiently Christian.

He told National Journal earlier this year, "the conservative movement—a
big chunk of which is faith-based—seems to have never read Matthew 25." (In
this chapter of the Bible, Jesus urges his followers to care for the poor.)

Erick Erickson, the conservative activist who runs the RedState blog,
argues Kasich's comments are akin to saying, "Jesus wants him to expand
government."

But other Republicans find Kasich's demeanor a welcome change from overly
cautious political rhetoric.

"John's a Baby Boomer and tends to a little irreverent in conversation. I
think it's kind of refreshing," said Tom Davis, a former Virginia
congressman who also served in the House when Kasich.

"Some people think it's not appropriate decorum. I don't look at that as
being a jerk. I like candid," Davis added.

Feehery agreed Kasich could overcome questions about his temperament. But
he argued that even with Bush's struggles, the ex-Florida governor and the
other candidates have spent months courting the GOP's major donors, making
it hard for Kasich to raise money.

"I would put him in the top tier, if he can get the money," said Feehery.

But Kasich's personality is already emerging as an issue. After the Ohio
governor met with journalists from the Concord Monitor last week, the New
Hampshire paper noted, "the prickly Republican began with a tone of
irritability."

Fifty minutes into the interview, Kasich suggested that he was bored, even
though a key part of his campaign strategy is winning in New Hampshire,
where voters are more moderate.

"I'm getting ready to be done with this," he told the reporters. "Are we
getting close?"

*CARSON*

*Ben Carson doesn’t want to talk about ‘the gay issue’
<http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/ben-carson-doesnt-want-talk-about-the-gay-issue>
// MSNBC // Adam Howard – June 11, 2015 *

Dr. Ben Carson, the retired neurosurgeon and conservative candidate for the
2016 Republican presidential nomination, is sick and tired of discussing
“the gay issue.”

During an appearance Wednesday on CNN, Carson brushed aside questions
regarding discrimination against the LGBT community, arguing that there are
“more important” subjects worth delving into.

“I don’t really want to talk about the gay issue,” Carson told CNN’s
Brianna Keilar. “Except maybe you can get the answer for this question:
‘What position can a person take who has no animosity toward gay people,
but believes in the traditional definition of marriage that would be
acceptable?’”

“I think the Constitution protects every single American,” he added.
“Everybody has equal rights, nobody has extra rights.”

Carson has a history of making incendiary remarks about the LGBT community.
Earlier on Wednesday, he told Fox News’ Bret Baier that he gets “irritated”
when people equate gay rights with equal rights. In March, he was widely
ridiculed for suggesting that men who enter prison straight can “come out”
gay, while insisting that homosexuality is a choice.

Although Carson eventually walked back those remarks, he has consistently
sparked controversy with his off-the-cuff musings about the sex lives of
LGBT people. Earlier this year, he even suggested that bakers might poison
wedding cakes if they were forced to make them for same-sex couples.

In 2013, after he publicly compared same-sex marriage to bestiality and
pedophilia, Carson was forced to withdraw from a planned commencement
speech at his alma mater, John Hopkins University.

“Someday in the future, it is my hope and prayer that the emphasis on
political correctness will decrease and we will start emphasizing rational
discussion of differences so we can actually resolve problems and chart a
course that is inclusive of everyone,” Carson said at the time.

On Wednesday on CNN, Carson said that “Every group faces some type of
discrimination,” adding, “Christians face a lot of discrimination. I wish
we would talk more about that.”

*Ben Carson’s hot mess of a campaign: A predictably dysfunctional mish-mash
of fire-breathing rhetoric and insane policy ideas
<http://www.salon.com/2015/06/11/ben_carsons_hot_mess_of_a_campaign_a_predictably_dysfunctional_mish_mash_of_fire_breathing_and_insane_policy_ideas/>
// Salon // Simon Maloy – June 11, 2015 *

Ben Carson’s presidential campaign continues to flawlessly meet
expectations, which is to say that it is a fiery catastrophe of failure,
greed, and embarrassment. There was really no other way this situation
could play out. Carson’s political celebrity was never rooted in anything
meaningful – conservatives fell in love with him because he insults
President Obama and refuses to be “politically correct.” The Wall Street
Journal editorial board encouraged Carson to run for the White House for no
other reason than his willingness to say things that are “un-PC.” And, not
surprisingly, Carson’s attempt to transform this crude, superficial appeal
into an actual political movement has been disastrous.

Carson has officially been in the 2016 race for just over a month, and
already his candidacy is falling apart. The Washington Post reported last
week that several top staffers have already resigned from the campaign,
which “has been marked by signs of dysfunction and amateurism.” A big part
of that dysfunction seems to be that Carson’s political orbit is populated
by opportunists who are at least as interested in cashing in on the Carson
boomlet as they are in electing him president. Instead of working in sync,
Carson’s aides and supporters fighting with each other with as they work to
grab as much cash as they can:

Two independent super PACs designed to help Carson are instead competing
directly with Carson’s campaign for donations and volunteers, while
campaign chairman Terry Giles resigned last month with the intention of
forming a third super PAC.

Giles said he intends to try to persuade the other two super PACs, called
Run Ben Run and One Vote, to cease operations so that all outside efforts
can be coordinated through the new group. But with Carson’s brand a
galvanizing force on the right, there are potentially millions of dollars
to be raised off his name, and the other super PACs are said to be
reluctant to shut down.

As for Carson himself, he’s apparently none too interested in the toxic
internal fights that are sabotaging his campaign apparatus. “Carson
occasionally drops by his Alexandria campaign headquarters,” the Post
noted, “but his main interaction with staffers is once a week, at 10 a.m.
on Sundays, when he participates in a conference call.” He’d rather be out
on the trail, talking to voters, and proposing bad, confusing policy ideas
that aren’t really tethered to any sort of ideology, or even to common
sense. Yesterday, according to MSNBC, Carson floated the idea of a “covert
division” of government employees that would “monitor what government
people do” and make sure they’re doing their jobs, or something.

It’s an idea that’s rooted in a conservative caricature of government
employees as parasitic loafers who just sit in their cubicles all day
laughing as they count the money they’re stealing from hardworking
taxpayers who have real jobs. If you’re a conservative who has a problem
with the size and complexity of the federal government, I’m not sure why
you’d support an expansion of the federal workforce (and an extra layer of
bureaucracy) as a means to fix it. A spokesman for Carson tried to clarify
what he meant: “Covert division? More like Secret Shopper, a quality
control strategy used worldwide to improve customer service and customer
care.” It’s not immediately apparent how a strategy used to improve
customer service would apply to people in white-collar jobs, but whatever.
It’s an idea.

But again, this idea isn’t meant to conform to ideology and it’s not
intended as a serious policy proposal – it’s just another of the crude
appeals to right-wing resentment that seems to be Carson’s sole political
talent.

The question that arises from all this dysfunction and nonsense is: how
long can he keep this up? Right now he’s pulling decent crowds at Iowa
events and his national poll numbers are, for the moment, inching upwards.
But that won’t last with a shambolic campaign apparatus and a platform
based entirely on generating outrage. Carson’s approach to campaigning
doesn’t seem to diverge too significantly to his life as a Fox News pundit:
just go out there and be “un-PC” and something something congratulations
President-Elect Carson.

*Ben Carson: ‘The people are frustrated — they’re waking up’
<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/11/ben-carson-people-are-frustrated-theyre-waking/>
// The Washington Times // David Sherfinski – June 11, 2015 *

Retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson appears to be heartened by recent polling
on the 2016 GOP field that’s put the political neophyte near the top of a
crowded set of contenders.

“The people are frustrated — they’re waking up, and they have a lot more
brains than people think they do,” Mr. Carson told Fox News’ Bret Baier. “I
can’t tell you how many times [I’ve] faced situations where people say, ‘He
can’t do that. No one’s ever done that.’ If I listened to that stuff, I
wouldn’t be talking to you right now.”

Mr. Carson is currently fourth in RealClearPolitics’ average of recent
public polling on the Republican field at 9 percent, behind former Florida
Gov. Jeb Bush at 11.3 percent, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker at 10.8 percent
and Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida at 10.3 percent.

“As you can see from the polling, the people are convinced to a large
degree, and 40 percent of ‘em still don’t even know who I am,” Mr. Carson
said.

*FIORINA*

*Fiorina's campaign-trail attacks leave out her own ties to Clinton
<http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-fiorina-clinton-ties-20150611-story.html>
// LA Times // Joseph Tanfani – June 11, 2015 *

In a crowd of Republican presidential contenders hammering away at Hillary
Rodham Clinton, no one has been more relentless than Carly Fiorina.

In speeches and media interviews, some of them while shadowing Clinton on
the campaign trail, the former Hewlett-Packard chief executive has attacked
the Clintons’ family foundation for a lack of transparency amid reports
that it accepted money from foreign governments. “She is not trustworthy,”
Fiorina says in a video on her website, itself named ReadytoBeatHillary.com.

In a Facebook post, Fiorina excoriated the Clintons for accepting donations
from foreign governments “while making promises about transparency that
they never intended to keep.”

What else don’t we know? What don’t we know about your donors?” she asked
Wednesday on Fox News about the Clintons’ charitable efforts. “What don’t
we know about the conflicts of interest that those donors represent?”

But in Fiorina’s own philanthropic ventures, one of the key points of her
resume as a White House hopeful, she has had a friendlier relationship with
the Clintons and their foundation than she highlights on the campaign
trail. And, in pressing for help for women around the globe, Fiorina is
more similar to Hillary Clinton than she admits.

The discrepancies show how personal and professional ties can complicate
life on the campaign trail for well-connected people like Fiorina, who also
unsuccessfully ran for Senate in California in 2010.

One Fiorina charitable effort, a campaign to fund women’s empowerment
projects around the globe, went forward with help from the State Department
when Clinton was secretary.

And Fiorina has roles in two charities that participated in projects that
became commitments with the Clinton Global Initiative, one of the
organizations in the Clintons’ worldwide philanthropic network in which
charities and companies announce partnerships to pledge action on social
projects.

She has also twice participated in Clinton Global Initiative events. In
2013, she spoke on a small panel that discussed how to boost female
entrepreneurship. Last year, she appeared with former President Clinton and
three other people on a televised panel discussion on how best to pull
people out of poverty.

Fiorina at times sparred with the former president and criticized
Democratic economic policies, saying that the Obama administration “made
the rich much richer.” But she also argued for the role of small business
and praised the organization's work. “Seed capital, support, tools, energy
-- all of the initiatives that the Clinton Global Initiative invests in to
try and build Main Street entrepreneurship -- it has always been the hope
of this country,” Fiorina said.

A spokeswoman for Fiorina said she was “delighted” to participate in a
session advocating for women who are entrepreneurs, and characterized the
second discussion as “a debate with Bill Clinton.” Fiorina has contrasted
her belief in transparency with Clinton’s, saying last month: “Unlike
Hillary Clinton, I am not afraid to answer questions about my track record
or beliefs.” She did not respond to follow-up questions about her
involvement with the foundation or her work with the State Department.

Bill Clinton, speaking at a Clinton Global Initiative conference on
Wednesday, said the foundation had always considered itself nonpolitical
and had hosted a number of Republican politicians, including Mitt Romney
and John McCain. He didn’t mention Fiorina.

Fiorina helped spark a charitable drive in 2008 called the One Woman
Initiative, targeting women’s empowerment groups, mostly in Muslim
countries. According to the organization, she set it up with help from the
State Department, the U.S. Agency for International Development and
then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.

It took about a year to raise the money. By the time the approximately
$500,000 in grants was released, in June 2009, President Obama was in the
White House and Clinton was secretary of State. The initiatives included a
microfinance program in Pakistan, a conflict-resolution program in the
Philippines and an economic development program in India.

The initiative aimed to distribute grants with the help of corporate
sponsors, and with support from the Department of State and USAID. The
agencies also declined to comment on the initiative.

The Clinton Global Initiative draws together corporate and charity leaders
for networking and to announce commitments to complete projects together.

Fiorina is connected to two groups that participated in such programs. She
is board chairman of Good360, a Virginia-based group that connects
companies who want to donate goods with charities that need them. Hilton
Worldwide made that program a Clinton Global Initiative commitment in 2013.

Fiorina also is on the advisory board of the National Center for
Entrepreneurship and Innovation, a group that wants to open a center
celebrating inventors and entrepreneurs on the National Mall in Washington.
That too was announced as a Clinton initiative commitment in 2013. But the
plans have stalled, in part because the Smithsonian decided it couldn’t
devote resources to the project, said Philip Auerswald, the group’s board
chairman.

The advisory board and Fiorina didn’t play a role in the decision to
announce the project as a Clinton initiative commitment, he said, adding:
“Carly has been nothing but supportive throughout this process.”

*Carly Fiorina blasts media focus on her Hillary Clinton trolling
<http://m.washingtonexaminer.com/carly-fiorina-blasts-media-focus-on-her-hillary-clinton-trolling/article/2566078>
// The Washington Examiner // Ashe Schow – June 11, 2015 *

GOP presidential candidate Carly Fiorina has been a tough critic of
Democratic presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton, but to those who think
she's spending too much time going after the former secretary of state, she
says it isn't where the "bulk" of her attention goes.

Fiorina noted during a press call Thursday that she has answered hundreds
of questions since she announced she was running for president and has
addressed any subject.

"So it's simply not accurate to say that all I do is attack Hillary
Clinton," Fiorina said in response to a Washington Examiner question. "That
may be what the media pays attention to, but that certainly isn't where the
bulk of my attention goes, either in my remarks with voters, or my
conversations with voters, or my speeches or my Q&A."

Fiorina also said that it didn't matter who the Democratic nominee for
president ends up being, she'll oppose them on their policies.

"And if, like Hillary Clinton, another nominee lacks a track record of
leadership — I will point that out. And if, like Hillary Clinton, another
nominee lacks a track record of transparency, I will point that out as
well," Fiorina said. "Every single one of those things is fair game and it
has nothing to do with her gender or my gender."

Fiorina has received some criticism in recent weeks for her continued
trolling of Clinton. Marc Ambinder of The Week said that Fiorina needs "to
move beyond Clinton." Two weeks ago, reporters in South Carolina — where
Fiorina gave a press conference outside of a Clinton event — wondered if
she had more to offer than just bashing Clinton.

Fiorina was defensive of the suggestion that she just attacks Clinton,
adding that she will continue to address any and every issue.

"The fact the media pays more attention to one thing than another is
nothing I can do about that," Fiorina said. "I will continue to talk about
all of the issues and continue to raise up a contrast between the policies
that I think work best for this nation and the policies that the leftwing
of the Democratic Party is pursuing."

*OTHER*

*Fox News Adds G.O.P. Candidate Forum Amid Criticism of Debate Plans
<http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/11/obama-makes-surprise-trip-to-nats-park-to-lobby-pelosi/>
// NYT // Maggie Haberman*

Fox News has decided to add a “candidate forum” before the first Republican
presidential debate on Aug. 6, after the network came under criticism for
its criteria to winnow down the number of people onstage.

The announcement from Fox News on Wednesday night came as The Union Leader,
a New Hampshire newspaper, said it would host its own forum with C-Span
amid concern over the debate rules.

“As we noted when we first announced the debate criteria, our intention has
always been to provide coverage to the wide field of Republican candidates
and we are glad to present these details today,” said Michael Clemente, the
executive vice president of Fox News.

The forum will be moderated by two of the network’s anchors, Bill Hemmer
and Martha MacCallum. The criteria for making it into the 90-minute forum
is scoring 1 percent “or higher in an average of the five most recent
national polls.” It will air in the afternoon, well ahead of prime time.

Fox News has been heavily criticized by lower-polling Republicans for
debate criteria for allowing only those among the top 10 in an average of
polling onto the prime-time stage. Candidates have also expressed concern
about the rules established by CNN, which is hosting the second debate in
September.

But CNN is planning a second debate as well, which will be shown in prime
time for the lower-polling candidates.

Joe McQuaid, publisher of The Union Leader, announced that the newspaper’s
forum with C-Span will be held the same night as the Fox News debate. He
indicated the new forum was in response to the limited debate rules planned
by Fox News, which has already prompted some Republicans to consider
maneuvers to try to maximize their polling numbers nationally but force
them to bypass time spent in Iowa and New Hampshire, the first two early
voting states in the nominating contest.

“What Fox is attempting to do, and is actually bragging about doing, is a
real threat to the first-in-the-nation primary,” Mr. McQuaid told The Union
Leader.

*The Koch brothers and the Republican Party go to war — with each other
<https://www.yahoo.com/politics/the-koch-brothers-and-the-republican-party-go-to-121193159491.html>
// Yahoo News // Jon Ward – June 11, 2015*

The Republican National Committee’s data arm last yearcalled it a
“historic” occasion when it struck a deal to share voter information with
the Koch brothers’ rapidly expanding political empire.

It was an uneasy détente between the party committee, which views itself as
the rightful standard-bearer for the GOP, and the behemoth funded by
Charles and David Koch, which is free of the campaign finance restrictions
that bind the RNCand plans to spend almost $900 million in the 2016
election cycle to elect a Republican to the White House.

Party leaders, including the current chief digital officer for the RNC,
hailed the deal as an important step forward in the GOP’s attempt to
modernize itself.

But after the fall midterm elections, the deal was allowed to expire
without being renewed. Since then, relations between the two sides have
soured, turning into what one Republican operative described as “all-out
war.” Interviews with more than three dozen people, including top
decision-makers in both camps, have revealed that the Kochs’ i360 platform
for managing voter contacts — which is viewed by many as a superior,
easier-to-use interface than what’s on offer from the RNC — is becoming
increasingly popular among Republican campaigns.

The RNC is now openly arguing, however, that the Kochs’ political operation
is trying to control the Republican Party’s master voter file, and to gain
influence over — some even say control of — the GOP.

“I think it’s very dangerous and wrong to allow a group of very strong,
well-financed individuals who have no accountability to anyone to have
control over who gets access to the data when, why and how,” said Katie
Walsh, the RNC’s chief of staff.

The Koch brothers and the Republican Party go to war — with each other

The fight between the RNC’s chairman and the political operatives
affiliated with Charles and David Koch over who controls the rich treasury
of data on likely Republican voters has raised fundamental questions about
what role the party’s central committee — even under the best management —
can hope to play in the age of super-PACs. And it raises an even more
fundamental question of how you define a political party.

Super-PACs emerged as a major new force in the wake of the Supreme Court’s
Citizens United ruling in 2010. They now populate a political landscape
that has been radically changed, leaving political parties weaker than they
have ever been.

Presiding over the RNC in this new era has been Reince Priebus, who by all
accounts has had a successful run as chairman since 2011. He brought the
committee out of debtand has been a prolific fundraiser. He has worked hard
toreform the party primary calendar to prevent a protracted fight similar
to the 2012 primary that exhausts the eventual nominee. He has exerted
control over the presidential primary debates, taking a hard line against
moderators from media outlets who are perceived to be biased against
Republicans, though he is experiencing pushback over his attempts to limit
the number of participants in debates. And he has infused the building with
young, digital-savvy staffers and elevated the importance of data,
analytics and new technologies inside the committee.

Priebus believes the RNC is the proper custodian of the Republican Party’s
master file on the nation’s electorate, which is used as a starting point
for campaigns, who then use that information to build lists — called voter
universes — of the people in a state or district that they want to target
for both turnout and persuasion. Volunteers and donors are also targeted
for recruitment using such lists.

The core issue, from Priebus’ point of view, is one of loyalty and
allegiance. The RNC is a permanent entity, committed to the Republican
Party without question. The Koch network is too independent from the party
to be trusted with possession of the GOP’s most valuable core assets. If
the Kochs — whose political history is steeped more in libertarianism than
it is in any loyalty to the Republican Party — decided next week to use
their database to benefit only their massive multinational corporation,
they could do so.

The RNC, Walsh said, “has one job: to elect Republicans.”

The Kochs’ political arm, Freedom Partners, which oversees i360, views the
issue as one of capability. Koch aides — several of whom used to work at
the RNC — want to win elections, and in their view the RNC has inherent
challenges to helping the party win. Party committee fundraising is
severely limited by federal election law, while building, maintaining and
enriching a database is expensive.

Michael Palmer, president of i360, emphasized in an email that his firm is
a “private company that provides data, technology and analytical services
to dozens of candidates, campaigns and other organizations that promote
free market principles.”

“Our clients own their own data and are free to share it as they see fit.
We believe that a robust marketplace of political technology and data is a
healthy way to advance past the single monopoly model that has failed the
Republican Party in recent presidential elections,” Palmer said.

Some in the Republican Party agree with Priebus’ point of view, believing
the issue of allegiance to be fundamental. Others in the GOP, even some in
highly consequential positions, think Priebus and the RNC are crying wolf.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and House Speaker John
Boehner (R-Ohio) have been reluctant to conclude that i360 represents a
threat to the party.

And the problem for the RNC is that while it has political data going back
roughly two decades, you need more than just data in order to be the data
hub for a political party. And that is where the RNC has fallen short. Its
data is good, and it has continued to enrich it and even to help campaigns
and key battleground states build sophisticated voter universesthrough the
work last year of a company called TargetPoint. But campaigns need to use
data, not just have it on the shelf.

“You can have all the data in the world, but if you can’t use it to go
engage people, it’s not worth that much,” said Mike Moschella, vice
president at NationBuilder, a nonpartisan company that specializes in
building “communications systems” to talk to volunteers and voters through
email, social media and targeted advertising.

This is where companies like i360, as well as companies like NationBuilder,
have gained an edge. In 2013 the RNCpromised to build a next-level system
called Beacon. But so far Beacon is being used by only a small handful of
state parties, Walsh said. About 40 state parties are still using the RNC
dashboard that Beacon was built to replace, GOP Data Center, which was
designed a few years ago by a company called FLS Connect. The most common
complaint from those who do not like Data Center is that it is not easy for
the average volunteer or field staffer to use.

The RNC now acknowledges that it was slow to respond to the rise of i360.

“There was a time when the party itself had not made the investments it
needed to make and had rested on its laurels,” said one source who had
firsthand knowledge of the RNC’s data operation.

RNC chief strategist Sean Spicer and Walsh also said the RNC was not
competitive enough with i360 over the past few years in giving campaigns
and state parties tools to use the data. For as long as anyone could
remember, the RNC had dispensed voter information to campaigns and state
parties like a pharmacy, upon request. In modern campaigns, however,
operatives want to manipulate the data themselves.

“People were calling to get access to data and were being told just call us
and we’ll send you a CD-ROM,” Spicer said.

The source with firsthand knowledge of the RNC’s operations said that “the
Koch world groups saw an opportunity where they were filling a vacuum.”

After the 2012 election, i360 and others gained market share in Republican
politics because the RNC spent much of 2013 deliberating over what it
planned to do, and state parties and campaigns who wanted to start
recruiting volunteers and building a universe of target voters needed a
system to work with immediately. In addition, i360 was developed with user
experience in mind; it built up an enriched voter file as time went on and
its client list grew, providing more inputs. Like some of the most
successful tech companies, from Facebook to Snapchat, it built an audience
first and then expanded its offerings.

During the 2014 election, a number of Senate campaigns used i360; i360 said
it was 11 campaigns in all. This cycle the group says eight Senate
campaigns are using its programs, including those of two of the most
vulnerable Republican Senators up for reelection in 2016: Rob Portman
(Ohio) and Kelly Ayotte (N.H.). It’s not clear, however, how many of those
campaigns used i360 for most or all of their voter contact.

Among the GOP presidential primary candidates, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) are using i360 data services exclusively,
while former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) are
building their own voter files. Former RNC chief technology officer Andy
Barkett is a key player in the Bush operation, and his performance will be
closely watched, since he was charged with building Beacon at the RNC.
Barkett has told contemporaries that he was undermined at the RNC by FLS
Connect and other private companies who didn’t want to lose business from
the RNC.

The RNC has signed data-sharing agreements with most of the 2016 candidates
or likely candidates. And the RNC — as itdid in 2014 — is trying to
discourage campaigns and state parties from signing up with i360, according
to numerous conversations with people who have knowledge of such
conversations. This was a tactic that irritated many people in 2014. But
Walsh, the new chief of staff, appears to be setting a different tone that
admits past shortcomings and focuses on the philosophical argument that the
GOP’s data should be housed at a party committee, not at a private business
empire.

The RNC is now confronting the Kochs more openly than before, by having
Walsh speak on the record for this article and by making other key players
available for interviews. Their decision to take their dispute with i360
public shows the level of alarm inside the RNC at the growing clout of the
Koch political empire. They have concluded that the Koch political machine
wants to replace them and to essentially become a shadow party.

“It’s pretty clear that they don’t want to work with the party but want to
supplant it,” the source close to the RNC said.

Adding to the rivalry, in January i360 poached the RNC’s chief digital
officer, Chuck DeFeo, who had played a senior role within the party
committee’s digital operation in 2013 and 2014. DeFeo’s departure was a
surprise to the RNC, and his decision to work for a direct rival was not
well-received in the fifth-floor suite of offices that house the
committee’s top decision-makers. There was talk of having him escorted by
security from the building, though that did not materialize.

Palmer, the head of i360, said that his organization simply wants to be
helpful to the Republican Party at large. “We have repeatedly expressed a
willingness in working with the RNC, and we will continue to work with any
organizations interested in advancing free markets and a free society,” he
said.

But Spicer said that i360 is trying to marginalize DataTrust — the RNC’s
private sector arm — by offering to share information only with the RNC and
not DataTrust. Cutting DataTrust out of the picture would possibly cement
i360 as both the main platform provider to operatives in the field doing
voter contact.

As long as i360 and the RNC worked together, both entities would receive
the same data from operatives and volunteers in the field knocking on doors
and making calls. But if i360 achieved dominance as the user platform of
choice for Republican operatives, and if its relationship with the RNC ever
went south and data-sharing ended, the Kochs would continue to get the bulk
of ongoing fresh data collection, while the RNC would have to scramble and
might find itself well behind i360.

The fear at the RNC is that this would give a private business empire the
master voter file in Republican politics, and the party’s main committee
would be reduced to that of playing a bit role.

The RNC is currently telling state parties and campaigns that it is
updating GOP Data Center to make it more user-friendly. Walsh said this
would be ready in three to four weeks.

However, critics of DataTrust, the RNC’s data arm, say that it is in
serious financial trouble, and multiple sources — from Koch world to a
major party committee to a source intimate with Republican congressional
leadership — said that Priebus asked McConnell and Boehner to have their
campaign committees give $1 million each to DataTrust to help with paying
off debt. Both leaders were unreceptive, these sources said, believing a
soft-money committee should be able to raise that kind of money from a few
donors rather than having money from the committees — which is raised in
much smaller amounts and harder to come by — transferred.

A source close to the Republican congressional leadership said that
DataTrust “has barely existed for the last two cycles” because of its
inability to raise money.

In mid-April, the RNC transferred $1.5 million to DataTrust. RNC and
DataTrust officials characterized this transfer as routine business and
denied that DataTrust has had any fundraising or debt problems.

McConnell and Boehner, according to the congressional source, do not share
Priebus’ concern that the Koch brothers could own the GOP’s master voter
file in any way that held the party hostage.

It would not be “as difficult as it sounds” for the GOP to reassemble its
own file and its own voter contact apps if the partnership with i360
dissolved for some reason, the source said, adding, “Everybody needs to
take a deep breath on this thing.”

Walsh, the RNC chief of staff, had a different version of events. She said
there was a meeting held last year where DataTrust president John DeStefano
updated a room full of Republicans on the latest business plan for his
organization and that one idea discussed was to have the National
Republican Senatorial Committee and the National Republican Congressional
Committee contract directly with DataTrust as a show of support for the
organization.

“One of top bullet points was, ‘i360 is gaining market share and how do we
publicly show that the federal party committees are behind the DataTrust
model?’” Walsh said. “It was not, ‘We’re out of money.’”

Prior to 2010, the NRSC and NRCC had contributed $1 million each to the RNC
for data infrastructure costs, and Walsh said that prior model was
interpreted by some to be what DeStefano and others were proposing. But,
she said, “there was no dollar amount” mentioned.

“By no means did that imply a $1 million contribution,” Walsh said.

The result of all this infighting is that for the moment, Republican
campaigns and even state parties are Balkanized between different
approaches on which database to use and how to use it.

The Kochs’ i360 is the superior user platform with a rapidly growing
adoption rate among campaigns, while the RNC’s data is available to all who
want it and is the de facto database for RNC field personnel who are placed
in key states. DataTrust has an exclusive agreement to swap data with the
RNC and has a client relationship with outside groups such as American
Crossroads, the American Action Network and the National Rifle Association.

Even some state parties have chosen to use i360 instead of, or in addition
to, the RNC’s system in their elections.

“We used i360 a lot. We didn’t really get into the DataTrust issue,” said
Joe Cluster, executive director of the Maryland Republican Party, which
helped get Gov. Larry Hogan elected in a deep blue state last fall.
“Maryland wasn’t one of the states [the RNC was] prioritizing for getting
that data up to speed.”

“Every time I sent [the RNC] a voter file, it took them three weeks to
upload,” Cluster said. “They weren’t updating our data as quick as other
people.”

In Florida, another key battleground state, the state party is using
NationBuilder for some of its needs and is also getting some predictive
models from i360.

But Florida is one of the clearest examples that there is a belief among
some in Republican politics that the data they glean in the field should go
back to the Republican National Committee. They are going out of their way
to make sure that any information they collect using NationBuilder goes
back to DataTrust. And while they are using some of the i360 information,
they are intentionally not using the Koch brothers’ tools for voter
outreach, because they want to use the RNC’s Data Center.

Florida’s choices are driven in large part by a belief that the RNC is the
more appropriate repository for political data than the Kochs, according to
a source with knowledge of the state party’s thinking.

Other state parties are using the RNC’s voter file but have built their own
dashboards to use instead of FLS Connect’s Data Center, the clearest
indication that for those who have the money, time and expertise, the RNC’s
user interface of choice has not been as good as some would like it to be.

The Michigan Republican Party last cycle spent between $500,000 and $1
million to build its own dashboard. Ohio’s GOP hired a close friend of Gov.
John Kasich, venture capitalist Mark Kvamme, to build a system for them.
Both systems bypassed the FLS Connect product and accessed the RNC’s file
at DataTrust directly.

One Republican data operative who worked in Florida during the 2012
election said that because FLS Connect’s Data Center is “not a good user
interface, [the RNC doesn’t] get enough credit.”

“They have really good data. And they’re making it really easy for people
who know what to do with it to get at it,” he said.

The challenge for most state parties and campaigns is that they don’t have
the money or the expertise to build their own dashboard systems with which
to access the RNC’s data.

The relevance of these questions to who wins and loses elections is often
debated. In a wave midterm election like 2014, it may be insignificant. But
in a presidential election, when the presidency can be decided in one or
two swing states, or in a closely contested Senate or congressional race, a
superior data and technology operation can be an important advantage.

Many Republicans believe that having a presidential nominee will solve most
of the problems with infighting over data and bring coherence and cohesion.
In 2008, President Obama insisted that Democrats get onboard with a company
called NGP VAN and use their Votebuilder system — which is built on top of
the master voter file housed at the Democratic National Committee — to
interact with voters, building a more concerted system of inputs into one
voter file.

But it could be that the GOP may not get on the same page until there is an
incumbent Republican president who has the time and money before a
reelection campaign to insist that the party row in the same direction.

*'16 At 30 Thousand
<http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/lid-bush-staunch-conservative-n373941>
// NBC // Carrie Dann & Andrew Rafferty – June 11, *

*2015*

In a crowded Republican presidential field composed of candidates like Ted
Cruz, Ben Carson and Mike Huckabee, Jeb Bush often gets painted as a
moderate. After all, he's the (expected) candidate who supports Common Core
and has taken a softer stance on immigration than nearly any other
Republican running in 2016. But recent reporting on passages in his 1995
book "Profiles in Character" -- and his response to questions about it
today -- is a good reminder that the former Florida governor is very
conservative when it comes to social issues.

Bush wrote in 1995 that single mothers are on the rise because there is "no
longer a stigma attached to this behavior" and "parents and neighbors have
become ineffective at attaching some sense of ridicule to this behavior."
And in 2001, he declined to veto a bill that required unwed mothers who did
not know the paternity of a child to publish their sexual histories in the
newspaper before being able to put their child up for adoption.(He did sign
the bill with the understanding that the publication provision would be
changed, and he later signed a repeal of the law after it was challenged in
court.) Asked about the issue while in Warsaw today, Bush said, "My views
have evolved over time, but my views about the importance of dads being
involved in the lives of children hasn't changed at all." Remember, this is
the governor who intervened to keep Terri Schiavo alive on life support in
the early 2000s. From a GOP primary perspective, Bush may look like a
moderate for his views on education and support for a path to legal status
for undocumented workers. But from a general election perspective, if Bush
ever makes it that far, aspects of his record on social issues would put
him squarely on the right.

*With Clinton bound for Sioux City, GOP piles on
<http://siouxcityjournal.com/blogs/politically_speaking/article_cc58f953-86df-53bd-9d5b-ea0635e0fb1b.html#.VXnz4gC_Yrw.twitter>
// Sioux City Journal // Bret Hayworth – June 11, 2015 *

With Hillary Clinton bound for her third trip in Iowa, Republican Party
officials are working to offset the message of the former first lady many
presume will end up as the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee. Clinton on
Saturday will hold a house party at a Sioux City residence, then on Sunday
will hold her first traditional town hall meeting of the cycle in Des
Moines.

The Republican National Committee is ramping up with a 30-second ad, titled
"Wrong For America," that will hit Facebook and other digital options in
Sioux City and Des Moines.  The RNC says Hillary's latest swing, coined as
a campaign launch rally with a New York City event prior to coming to Iowa
(she first became a candidate on April 12), shows she has had a clunky
start to her campaign.

"Hillary Clinton’s latest campaign reset won’t change a thing. She still
refuses to answer the serious questions surrounding her finances, her
family foundation, and her secret email server," said RNC Chairman Reince
Priebus said.

Additionally, the Iowa Republican Party will hold a Saturday event in Sioux
City, where Central Committee Member Cody Hoefert, of Lyon County, will
describe why he thinks Clinton would be a poor president.

Clinton's Iowa Press Secretary Patrick Burgwinkle said Clinton is enthused
to see more Iowans, via her first stop in 2015 in Northwest Iowa. It may
not handle a huge crowd, but the house party will undoubtedly pack as many
local Democrats as possible. It also will be simulcast nationally.

"From Day 1 this campaign has said that we value Iowa and we want to get
out there and listen to Iowans," Burgwinkle said.

*Republicans release anti-Hillary Clinton ad ahead of her Charleston visit
next week <http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20150611/PC1603/150619883>
// The Post & Carrier // Schuyler Kropf – June 11, 2015*

The Republican National Committee is releasing a second digital ad
targeting Hillary Clinton in advance of her second campaign trip to South
Carolina. Clinton will be in Charleston on Wednesday.

The 30-second GOP ad targets Clinton for “her clunky rollout and how she’s
dishonest, out-of-touch, and untrustworthy.”

“The ad is part of a campaign by the RNC to target and recruit voters who
want to Stop Hillary Clinton,” promotional material says.

The ads are slated to run in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada
when Clinton travels to those states.

“Hillary Clinton’s latest campaign reset won’t change a thing. She still
refuses to answer the serious questions surrounding her finances, her
family foundation, and her secret email server,” said RNC Chairman Reince
Priebus.

Clinton’s South Carolina campaign, meanwhile, issued a status update that
included assembling 2,484 signed commit to vote cards, and 120 grassroots
campaign events, including 59 phone banks.

“What she said basically was put families first and if you do that and if
you do what’s right for families the rest of it will follow,” said Clinton
supporter Jane Pulling of Pinopolis.

The Clinton campaign has not confirmed where her Charleston appearance will
be but it is expected to have a college education theme.

*Romney Hosting GOP Hopefuls at Utah Retreat
<http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/06/11/romney_hosting_gop_hopefuls_at_utah_retreat_126945.html>
// RealClearPolitics // Courtney Such – June 11, 2015 *

The climbing trip is just one of the many activities planned for Romney’s
annual E2 Summit – a networking event being held Thursday-Saturday for
current and future candidates to mix and mingle with business executives,
possible campaign donors, and each other. (E2 stands for “experts and
enthusiasts.”)

Sens. Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio, Govs. Chris Christie, John Kasich,
and Scott Walker, and Carly Fiorina are either already there or will be
soon. Walker was among the first to arrive but did not look dressed for an
adventure.

The guest list also includes New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte, former Obama
adviser David Axelrod, newswoman Katie Couric, former Defense Secretary
Robert Gates, General Electric CEO Jeffrey Immelt, Walmart CEO Lee Scot;
former NBA Commissioner David Stern, and Hewlett-Packard CEO Meg Whitman,
according to an AP report.

“It’s a good chance for 2016 candidates. … We brought in a lot of our
donors; they can meet people, get to know them, and sell them on why they
think they’re the best candidate,” the Boston Globe reported Romney’s son
Tagg saying Wednesday night in preparation for the event.

Aside from networking, this year’s E2 agenda includes flag football, skeet
shooting, yoga, horseback riding, and a hot air balloon ride, according to
ABC News.

Romney also hopes to share a little bit of campaign wisdom on what not to
do during the presidential race.

“I think there’s a lot you can learn from talking with a candidate who has
run and won, but there’s also a lot you can learn from a candidate who has
run and lost,” Craig Robinson, former political director of the Republican
Party of Iowa, told The Hill.

“There were clearly problems with the Romney campaign, but if you get into
[an event like this] you can really expand your knowledge base,” he added.

Although Romney’s days as a candidate are behind him, his efforts to have
an influence on the nation’s leadership are not over.

“I have come away more optimistic about America. It is the failing of White
House leadership that concerns me, and that must change. I lost the
election, but I will continue to fight,” Romney said in his 2013 E2 Summit
address.

As for what the presidential hopefuls want to get out of the retreat,
they’ve largely been mum.

“The Governor is attending on behalf of Leadership Matters for America
PAC,” and the trip is “not a part of a campaign,” Samantha Smith wrote RCP
in an email on behalf of Gov. Christie.

Marco Rubio’s team did not wish to comment, either, due to the private
nature of the event.

A spokesman for Graham, however, told RCP in an email the South Carolina
senator “is looking forward to discussing the importance of American
leadership in the world and how a strong global presence keeps our nation
safe.”

*TOP NEWS*

*DOMESTIC*

*Trade Fight Goes to the Wire
<http://www.wsj.com/articles/left-and-right-line-up-against-fast-track-trade-legislation-1434015003>
// WSJ // Siobhan Hughes, Kristina Peterson & William Mauldin – June 11,
2015 *

Supporters and foes of President Barack Obama’s bid to craft a sweeping
Pacific trade deal waged furious, last-ditch campaigns hours before
decisive votes set for Friday in the House.

The vote over whether to grant the president the power to expedite trade
pacts looks set to be razor-thin, with serious consequences for all sides.
Victory would mark a triumph for the White House, Republican congressional
leaders and the business community, and a sharp blow to the unions who have
pulled out all stops to defeat the bill.

The chief opponents in the fight—labor unions and progressive groups on one
side and the Obama administration on the other—converged on Congress
Thursday to appeal to a Democratic caucus torn over the benefits of trade
and its impact on American jobs.

Capital Journal is WSJ.com’s home for politics, policy and national
security news.

After that, AFL-CIO Chief Richard Trumka, who represents millions of union
workers, urged Democrats to vote against both the fast-track bill and a
worker’s aid program that pays to retrain workers who lost their jobs to
trade—aid labor has favored for decades. “Nothing is off the table” in the
trade fight, Mr. Trumka said earlier this week.

Labor opposes the assistance as it appears in the current bill for a larger
aim: because ending it would likely scuttle the elaborate package designed
to grease passage of the fast-track legislation Mr. Obama needs to complete
the Pacific deal. Unions say that deal would promote inadequate labor
standards, threaten U.S. jobs and give companies incentives to move jobs
abroad.

The battle between the White House and the party’s progressive wing
overshadowed the first step in a multipart plan by House Republican leaders
aimed at getting to a Friday vote on the fast-track bill.

Approval of fast-track would give Mr. Obama the authority to submit trade
deals to Congress for an up-or-down vote without amendments, as previous
presidents have done. Such power would ease passage of the Trans-Pacific
Partnership, a deal among the U.S. and 11 other nations to liberalize trade
across nearly 40% of the world economy.

“I have talked to the president,” House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio)
said Thursday. “He’s working at this. And I hope his efforts are
successful.”

Supporters of the trade bill overcame an initial hurdle Thursday when the
House overwhelmingly passed a trade preferences bill that was designed to
accommodate new concerns among Democrats about how the workers’ aid
program—known as Trade Adjustment Assistance—was to be funded. But the
party’s progressive wing wasn’t assuaged, raising a fresh set of concerns
and setting up another obstacle for a fast-track bill that has already
faced many of them.

Democrats had earlier threatened to vote against the workers-aid program
because it was to be paid for with cuts to Medicare providers. Under a deal
negotiated over the course of the week by Mr. Boehner and Minority Leader
Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.), a new funding mechanism was included in the
package of trade preferences for sub-Saharan Africa. It set out that the
aid would be paid for by cracking down on tax fraud and boosting tax
compliance.

The new provision was aimed at allowing Democrats to vote for trade
legislation on Friday without worrying that they would be criticized for
voting for Medicare cuts.

Mr. Trumka, the labor leader, worked to undercut the strategy, at one point
likening Democrats who voted for the workers’ aid program to lost souls.
“He didn’t get into any hard-line threats,” said Rep. Peter DeFazio (D.,
Ore.) “He just thanked those who were with him…and he said he would pray
for the rest.”

The White House made its own tough case, arguing that unless Democrats
voted for the workers’ aid program, the program would expire at the end of
the fiscal year. “We need to treat this moment for what it is: a
life-or-death moment for TAA,” Mr. Lew told Democrats, according to an aide
in the room.

“If you’re a member of Congress, and you vote against Trade Adjustment
Assistance this week, you are adding your name to the death certificate of
Trade Adjustment Assistance because it will go away,” White House spokesman
Josh Earnest said later.

Thursday’s scuffles in the House are just one front in a much larger,
district-by-district fight that has targeted lawmakers across the country.
Fierce opponents of the trade bill on the left and right have sent notably
similar messages in a bid to thwart the legislation.

Unions and progressive groups are emphasizing arguments that also appeal to
conservative organizations, accusing the Obama administration of undue
secrecy, stretching the limits of executive power and undermining U.S.
sovereignty.

“The left is using the language I use,” said Richard Manning, president of
Americans for Limited Government, a conservative group that is working to
defeat fast-track legislation.

The Stop Fast Track coalition, backed by unions and groups such as the
Sierra Club and the American Civil Liberties Union, is asking the public to
call members of Congress and tell them the legislation is “undemocratic”—a
message that appeals to voters of both parties.

“There are some areas where the guys on the left—unions and others—get it
right, and this is one of those issues,” said Judson Phillips, head of Tea
Party Nation, one of the main tea party organizations.

Leaders of left-leaning and conservative groups aren’t working hand in
hand—an approach that would likely backfire in today’s polarized
capital—but their combined message is forcing Mr. Obama and Republican
leaders who back the fast-track bill to fight a two-front war as they seek
to corral the final votes.

Backed by Republican leadership, Mr. Obama says the Pacific pact, which
includes Japan and Vietnam, would increase U.S. influence in the
fast-growing region, promoting U.S.-favored commercial rules of the road as
an alternative to China’s economic system.

The plan is for the House to hold two fast-track votes Friday, one on the
portion of the Senate bill that deals with worker aid legislation—funded by
cuts to Medicare providers—followed by one on the part of the bill
providing fast-track powers to Mr. Obama. The two issues were split up in a
procedural maneuver known as “dividing the question” to allow conservatives
opposed to the workers aid to vote against it.

If the worker aid portion is defeated, the fast-track vote wouldn’t be held
and House leaders would have to regroup. That scenario loomed larger on
Thursday, alarming the White House and setting off a scramble to avoid that
defeat.

But if the House passes the aid portion, it would then move on to
fast-track, which promises to be one of the most suspenseful—and
consequential—votes of Mr. Obama’s second term. House passage of the two
parts of the Senate-passed measure would send it directly to Mr. Obama for
his signature.

*Democrats block cyber bill, leaving measure in limbo
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/democrats-cybersecurity-cyber-bill-block-limbo-gop-amendments-118890.html>
// Politico // Tal Kopan – June 11, 2015 *

Democrats made good on their threats to block a bipartisan cybersecurity
bill on Thursday, after they were infuriated by Republican procedural moves
to pass the bill with only limited amendments, something Democrats called a
“cynical ploy.”

The partisan blowup marked a stunning turn for legislation that’s enjoyed
broad support. The measure had gained new urgency after the Office of
Personnel Management announced 4 million federal employees’ records had
been breached — at the hands of Chinese hackers, according to anonymous
federal officials.

Privacy advocates in both parties had wanted to strengthen personal data
protections in the measure, but Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s
(R-Ky.) procedural gambit made it next to impossible to make those changes.

So Democrats and libertarian-leaning Republicans banded together to defeat
McConnell’s plan to attach the cyberthreat information sharing legislation
to the National Defense Authorization Act days. The procedural vote was
56-40, with McConnell needing 60 votes to advance the cyber bill.

The majority of Democrats were joined by several Republicans, including
Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Dean Heller (R-Nev.), to
block the bill from moving forward.

On the other side, a handful of Democrats, including Sens. Joe Manchin
(D-W.Va.), Mark Warner (D-Va.) and Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), voted with
McConnell to advance the cyber measure.

Senate Intelligence Committee ranking member Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)
was the bellwether for Democrats on the bill. Despite having co-authored
the measure, she opposed cloture and emerged from Thursday party lunches
confident Democrats were closely aligned against advancing the amendment.

“We don’t oppose the bill, we just want it to come separately,” Feinstein
said. “I think putting it on the defense bill doesn’t really make any
sense. The cyber bill will take time. You just can’t pretend it’s an
amendment that you can do in an hour. You can’t do it. It’s going to take
debate, members want to express themselves, concerns want to be raised, and
some of us want an opportunity to be able to say why certain things were
done so that everybody knows.”

What happens next for the bill is unclear. The information sharing bill was
expected to come to the floor as a standalone measure toward the end of the
month before the McConnell move this week to attach it to the NDAA.

Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas) told reporters he wasn’t sure
what would happen after Democrats sustained a filibuster: “We have a Plan A
and a Plan B, and Plan B is Plan A,” he said.

“I am astonished that just after, what, it’s 4 million Americans’ records
have been hacked at the Office of Personnel Management that they would not
recognize the cyberthreat as real and something we need to deal with,”
Cornyn added. “The president, as I recall, was just recently chastising
Congress for not dealing with this, so we are, we have and we are, and I
think it’s irresponsible to try to block it.”

Both sides accused the other of playing politics. Republicans said
Democrats were being hypocrites for opposing cybersecurity legislation and
Democrats threw the charge back at the GOP for attaching cybersecurity to a
bill that has earned a presidential veto threat — though the NDAA has
become law each year for decades.

Emotions ran high on the floor Thursday morning, as McConnell and Minority
Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) fired increasingly harsh criticisms at each
other.

“Most Americans would find it awfully cynical for Democrat leaders — in the
wake of the Administration’s inability — inability — to stop such a massive
cyberattack — to vote against the very same cybersecurity legislation their
own party vetted and overwhelmingly endorsed in committee,” McConnell said.

“This speech that my friend gave, I would suggest he walk into his office,
his little bathroom there, walk in and look in the mirror, because over
that mirror, he should be able to see the words hypocrisy and cynicism,”
Reid fired back.

Reid called the move to attach the amendment to the bill a “cynical” and
“deceitful ploy.”

In fact, the cyber bill isn’t as controversial as Thursday’s rhetoric would
suggest. The basic idea is to give companies protections from lawsuits so
they can share cyberthreat data with each other and with government. The
House overwhelmingly passed similar legislation in April.

But some Democrats and libertarian-leaning Republicans have opposed the
bill as written, calling it a surveillance measure masquerading as a
cybersecurity bill. While none have believed they have the votes to stop
the bill’s passage outright, even some of the Democrats who voted to
advance the bill in the Intelligence Committee believed there would be an
opportunity to offer amendments bolstering the privacy protections in the
bill when it came to the floor.

*Dennis Hastert pleads not guilty on all counts
<http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/09/politics/dennis-hastert-arraignment-appearing-in-court/index.html>
// CNN // Chris Frates, Bill Kirkos and Tom LoBianco – June 11, 2015 *

Former House Speaker Dennis Hastert has pleaded not guilty to all charges
related to lying to the FBI about $3.5 million he agreed to pay to an
undisclosed subject to "cover up past misconduct."

Hastert was arraigned in court in Chicago on Tuesday afternoon, amid
reports he allegedly sexually abused former students.

The former House speaker has hired high-profile white collar crime lawyer
Thomas Green to defend him in court. Green has defended clients involved in
Watergate, Iran Contra and Whitewater.

Judge Thomas Durkin is allowing Hastert to be released on a pretrial
release. Hastert had to sign and appearance bond of $4,500 which he
forfeits if he fails to appear.

He was also barred from carrying firearms, had to surrender his passport
and cooperate in giving a sample of DNA.

Hastert faces charges of lying to federal investigators and hiding bank
transactions as part of a plan to pay $3.5 million in hush money to one of
his victims, identified only as "Individual A". Law enforcement sources
confirmed a second alleged victim was interviewed by them and the sister of
a third alleged victim told ABC that her brother had been molested by
Hastert.

Hastert worked as a high school teacher and wrestling coach before starting
his career in politics. By the time he retired, in 2007, Hastert was the
third most powerful public official in the U.S. (behind the president and
vice president). During his time atop the House, Hastert oversaw an
internal investigation of then-U.S. Rep. Mark Foley, who had been accused
of sexually harassing male pages.

A few years after he left the House, according to the indictment against
Hastert, he was approached by "Individual A" and agreed to pay $3.5 million
to cover up "past misconduct". From 2010-2014, Hastert paid $1.7 million to
the person, avoiding bank reporting requirements in the process.

Hastert returned to his Plano, Ill. home Monday night. ABC News reported
that Hastert had been at his Wisconsin vacation home before returning to
Illinois.

*INTERNATIONAL*

*Obama Looks at Adding Bases and Troops in Iraq, to Fight ISIS*
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/12/world/middleeast/iraq-isis-us-military-bases-martin-e-dempsey.html>*
// NYT //Peter Baker, Helene Cooper & Michael r. Gordon – June 11, 2015*

President Obama is open to expanding the American military footprint in
Iraq with a network of bases and possibly hundreds of additional troops to
support Iraqi security forces in their fight against the Islamic State,
White House officials said on Thursday.

As Iraqi forces struggle on the battlefield, aides said Mr. Obama would
consider establishing a series of outposts where American advisers would
work with Iraqi troops and local tribesmen. The bases would be run by
Iraqis, and Americans would still not engage in ground combat, but they
would play a more active role closer to the front lines.

White House officials stressed that no proposal has been presented to Mr.
Obama and added that they anticipated no decision in the next few weeks.
But the prospect of further escalation came a day after the administration
announced the opening of a new base in Anbar Province, an Islamic State
stronghold, with an additional 450 American troops, bringing the total in
Iraq to 3,550 — the size of a typical Army brigade.

Administration officials said they would evaluate whether that new Anbar
base makes a difference in coordinating the war effort and, if it does,
would consider replicating the approach in other parts of the country.
Although officials said it was possible other bases could be opened without
again sending more American troops, they acknowledged that more bases could
require additional deployments.

For Mr. Obama, who has long resisted being drawn into another ground war
since pulling out all forces in 2011, the latest developments represented
another incremental step back into a sectarian conflict he had once hoped
to be done with by the time he left office. Supporters of a more robust
effort against the Islamic State called it a welcome if inadequate step to
make good on the White House’s vow to defeat the Islamic State, while
critics warned of sliding into a broader, bloodier and ultimately
ineffective campaign.

“The reason that we would consider expanding the training operation and the
advise-and-assist operation that’s underway will be because it’s been an
effective element of our strategy,” said Josh Earnest, the White House
press secretary. But Mr. Earnest emphasized that it was still “very
hypothetical” and that “there are no immediate or specific plans to do
that.”

Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, publicly
raised the idea of establishing a network of what he called “lily pads” in
Iraq while on a trip to Italy on Thursday. He said he did not envision
another military base in Anbar, but Pentagon planners were looking at more
northern areas for additional sites.

“You could see one in the corridor from Baghdad to Tikrit to Kirkuk to
Mosul,” General Dempsey told reporters aboard his plane.

The model would be the new base already being built at Al Taqqadum, an
Iraqi post near the town of Habbaniya in eastern Anbar. The American troops
being sent there are to set up the hub primarily to advise and assist Iraqi
forces and to engage and reach out to Sunni tribes in Anbar, officials
said. One focus for the Americans will be to try to accelerate the
integration of Sunni fighters into the Iraqi Army, which is dominated by
Shiites.

As the arrangements at Al Taqqadum show, even deploying small teams of
advisers at a new base can involve much greater troop commitments. The
number of Americans actually involved in advising the Iraqis at the base
would be just a small fraction of the 450 announced by the administration.

While American officials said earlier this week that 110 would be directly
involved in training and advising, on Thursday they said there would be
just 50 advisers. They will be split into two teams, Special Forces who
will work with Sunni tribes, and advisers who will work with the 8th Iraqi
Army Division. The rest are to provide support, logistics and force
protection.

Although the goal is to retake the city of Ramadi, which fell to the
Islamic State last month, General Dempsey indicated that an effort may be
months away. He said it would take several weeks for the initial command
and control center to be set up at Al Taqqadum.

“Timetables are fragile,” he said. “They are dependent on so many different
factors.”

For the Pentagon, the timing has been a difficult issue as the United
States Central Command and the Iraqi government have clashed over the pace
of efforts by Iraqi security forces to retake areas captured by the Islamic
State, also known as ISIS or ISIL. While the American military once
forecast recapturing Mosul this spring, the fall of Ramadi less than 70
miles from Baghdad put that city much higher on the priority list.

Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, at a
graduation and commissioning ceremony at the United States Military Academy
at West Point, N.Y., last month. Credit Mike Groll/Associated Press

General Dempsey said the United States was still hoping the Iraqi
government would find a way to engage Sunnis to beat back the Islamic
State, but he also talked of what he called a “Plan B” in case that never
happens.

“We have not given up on the possibility that the Iraqi government could
absolutely be whole,” he said, but added that “the game changers are going
to have to come from the Iraqi government itself.”

“If we reach a point where we don’t think those game changers are
successful,” he added, “then we will have to look for other avenues to
maintain pressure on ISIL, and we will have to look at other partners.”

Mr. Obama discussed the Taqqadum plan with Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi
of Iraq during a meeting in Germany earlier this month. But other Americans
and Iraqi officials said they have also talked about expanding the concept
beyond Al Taqqadum to other locations.

Some of President Obama’s statements about the American strategy to
confront ISIS and its effectiveness.

Both sides have been deliberate about the idea. Sensitive to their own
domestic politics, the Iraqis have said that any new American footholds in
Iraq should be determined on a case- by-case basis. As a general rule, the
Obama administration has conditioned American support on steps toward
political inclusiveness and reform in Iraq.

Benjamin J. Rhodes, a deputy national security adviser to Mr. Obama, noted
that with Al Taqqadum the president has already approved five hubs for
American troops in Iraq, but has no specific plans for others at this
point. “It’s more like notionally we may want to do more of that,” he said.

Mr. Rhodes acknowledged what he called the concern of “a steady drip, drip,
drip of personnel,” but added that it was possible new bases could be
established by moving troops around rather than sending more. Mr. Obama, he
said, was not especially concerned about specific numbers of troops.

“What he’s been more focused on is what they are doing,” Mr. Rhodes said.
“He’s been more focused on not getting drawn into a combat role for U.S.
forces.”

The so-called lily pad bases could provide the American military with a way
to advise and support Iraqi troops charged with protecting supply lines,
towns and infrastructure if they do try to reclaim Mosul. And they could
signal increased focus on supporting local tribes and fighters, as urged by
the State Department.

“The closer the U.S. military is to the action on the ground, the better
the chances of influencing positive outcomes, especially in building
trusted relationships with the Sunni again,” said Richard D. Welch, a
retired Special Forces colonel who spent more than six years in Iraq.

At the same time, it is not clear the approach can be effective if advisers
stay on bases. Many former American military officers argue the best way to
help the Iraqis retake Ramadi and other cities is to have small American
teams advise Iraqis on the battlefield and call in airstrikes.

Even keeping troops on base may have risks. In February, eight suicide
bombers tried to get into an air base west of Baghdad where hundreds of
American Marines were training Iraqi counterparts. Officials said the
bombers were killed almost immediately by Iraqi forces.

Anthony Cordesman, a military analyst at the Center for Strategic and
International Studies, said the latest moves may have some merit. “But
creeping incrementalism is rarely a way of correcting a failed or
inadequate strategy,” he said, “and this approach certainly is not a new
strategy or a way of addressing the problems that the existing strategy
does not address.”

*OPINIONS/EDITORIALS/BLOGS*

*Republicans must stop derailing the Benghazi committee
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/republicans-must-stop-derailing-the-benghazi-committee/2015/06/11/8c6e5486-0e26-11e5-9726-49d6fa26a8c6_story.html>
// WaPo // Elijah Cummings – June 11, 2015 *

Now that the State Department has released former secretary of state
Hillary Rodham Clinton’s e-mails relating to the attacks in Benghazi, the
American people can see for themselves that there is not a scrap of
evidence to back up claims that Clinton issued a “stand-down” order, or any
of the other baseless allegations that Republicans have been making about
her for years.

This is exactly what Reps. Adam Smith (Wash.), Adam Schiff (Calif.), Linda
Sanchez (Calif.), Tammy Duckworth (Ill.) and I — the Democratic members of
the Select Committee on Benghazi — have been saying since we obtained
Clinton’s e-mails in February. And it’s why all five of us believe the time
has come to voice the grave concerns we share over the extremely partisan
and misguided direction this committee has taken.

For those keeping track, the committee has spent more than a year and more
than $3 million trying to find evidence to damage Clinton and her
presidential campaign, even as it continues to come up empty-handed.

Already, the committee has lasted longer than the investigations of the
Iran-Contra affair, the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, the
attack on Pearl Harbor and Hurricane Katrina.

Yet the committee’s chairman, Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), may not release his
findings until just months before next year’s presidential election,
according to news reports.

At this glacial pace, the Benghazi investigation will last longer than the
Watergate investigation and the 9/11 Commission, and it will squander more
than $6 million in taxpayer funds.

But that has not stopped Republicans from dragging out the committee’s
work, offering new excuses at every turn, and — in an astonishing and
disgraceful display — seeking to raise campaign funds off the deaths of
four brave Americans.

Now, House Republicans want to withhold nearly $700 million from the State
Department’s operational budget in an Orwellian attempt to improve the
department’s document production processes.

That simply makes no sense. Withholding two-thirds of a billion dollars
from the department’s budget — more than all of the salaries of all of the
employees working on document production — would only grind the process to
a halt.

The committee should stop blaming others for its own delays. It waited more
than six months to send a request for new documents to the State Department
and nearly a year to send new document requests to the Pentagon and the
CIA. The committee has not held a single hearing in 19 weeks, despite the
chairman’s assertion that there would be public hearings on a monthly
basis. It refuses to set a date for Clinton’s testimony, although she has
been willing to appear since last year.

Pushing this taxpayer-funded political attack further into election season
sacrifices any chance that the American people will see it as serious or
legitimate. As Greta Van Susteren of Fox News has warned, the committee’s
findings “will forever be plagued by allegations of unfairness, and
politics.”

Recognizing this fact, Republicans are becoming more desperate to justify
the committee’s existence, and they are resorting to strong-arm tactics
straight out of the partisan playbook of discredited GOP investigations of
the past.

For example, the committee majority recently issued a completely
unnecessary subpoena without first contacting the witness. It clearly
leaked this news before the subpoena was served and sent armed marshals to
the witness’s home to confront his wife — all just to get a cheap headline.

These actions directly contradict the spirit of the chairman’s previous
statement that compelling the testimony of cooperative witnesses such as
Clinton “just seems a little heavy-handed,” as well as his claim that
“serious investigations do not leak information.”

After nine reports on the Benghazi attacks from seven congressional
committees and the independent Accountability Review Board, how many more
times will Republicans investigate Clinton — and how much more will we be
forced to spend — before they stop trying to prove that she engaged in some
sort of conspiracy?

This slow-walked and abusive political charade on the taxpayers’ dime is
exactly the opposite of what we promised the families of those who were
killed in Benghazi.

If there is any minuscule chance left to salvage the Benghazi committee’s
place in history, we need to return immediately to our core mission of
implementing concrete reforms designed to help protect our diplomatic corps
around the world.

*The Battle for the 2016 Middle Ground
<http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-battle-for-the-2016-middle-ground-1434064200>
// WSJ // Daniel Arbess – June 11, 2015 *

America is not as polarized as it might seem from the noise level that in
recent years has propelled into office candidates from both parties who
hold marginal views. Nonpartisan independents, including the majority of
Americans 18-30, are now by far the largest group of voters, representing
up to 45% of the total and rising, according to the Pew Research Center.
The question is how the presidential candidates in 2016 will engage and try
to persuade this critical block of moderates.

Institutional momentum favors the Republicans, whose party is about a
decade ahead of Democrats in the disintegration-reinvention cycle, having
hit the polarized bottom with the tea party around 2009. Republicans now
appear ready to come back toward the center, while Democrats seem to be
marching to the left.

Hillary Clinton is unlikely to cede the party’s liberal base to economic
redistributionists like Bernie Sanders, and the next generation’s version,
Martin O’Malley. Any remnants of the Clinton centrism that marked her
husband’s tenure in the White House may have vanished by the time Mrs.
Clinton becomes, as expected, the Democratic nominee.

The Clinton brand remains more popular than the Bush brand, however,
suggesting that moderate Republicans will need a fresh face and new ideas
that appeal to the party’s base. Jeb Bush has reportedly talked about how
to win the general without winning the primary—in other words, without
aggressively courting the tea party and evangelical wings. But returning to
the politics of compromise and collaboration has to start at home: The
Republicans will have to find a formula and ticket that makes space in the
big tent for the fired-up base and the more-moderate establishment.

A candidate like Ted Cruz could play a pivotal role. The senator from Texas
is assiduously cultivating what he calls the tea party and evangelical
“brackets,” yet despite his early filibustering antics, he has experience
as a Supreme Court litigator and seems to understand the importance of
engaging the other side. He shows Reagan-quality conviction and willingness
to state reality in foreign policy and, while his personal beliefs on
social issues are on the far side of the tent, he seems above all willing
to honor Supreme Court decisions and the legislative will of the states.
The 44-year-old Sen. Cruz is definitely young and fresh, yet he might come
to realize that, on the evidence of the past eight years, another
presidency for a newcomer to the national scene is unlikely.

Right-wired players like a Sen. Cruz or Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker might
still be kingmakers if they manage to get centrists to accept their tea
party and evangelical supporters as patriots dedicated to those
most-American values of liberty, entrepreneurial initiative and family;
moderate their own approach on domestic policy; and deliver their support
to a more centrist candidate for a place on the ticket or in the cabinet.
Ted Cruz might make an excellent partner for Jeb Bush.

Meanwhile, Marco Rubio, also 44, has more experience than Barack Obama did
before he entered the 2008 race, and he is more collaborative than
President Obama has ever been. The senator from Florida needs to do
something creative to offset his own relative inexperience and lack of
financial clout compared with the Bush family machine. An alliance of
40-somethings—Sen. Rubio and Sen. Cruz or the 47-year-old Gov. Walker—might
well offer enough experience, generational freshness, vision and broad
support to secure the Republican nomination.

There is also the chance for a true wild-card—a ticket led by the hugely
accomplished centrist independent Michael Bloomberg. But his candidacy,
even if he hasn’t ruled out a run, would probably, by his own estimation,
be a long shot. In any case a reunified Republican Party would be in the
best position to reach across the aisle and lead a return in Washington to
the bipartisan collaboration and compromise envisioned by the Constitution.

We saw it during the presidencies of Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton, two of
the most effective American leaders of the past 50 years, and it might come
to pass that the silent plurality will let us see it again, beginning in
2016

*How Bill Clinton and Teneo duped the State Dept. ethics dummies
<http://www.leaderandtimes.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=21516:how-bill-clinton-and-teneo-duped-the-state-dept-ethics-dummies&catid=29:opinion&Itemid=58>
// Leader & Times // Dick Morris – June 11, 2015 *

In 2011, Bill Clinton had a problem. He had already figured out how to
parlay his reputation into income by giving speeches. But, now, with his
wife serving as Secretary of State and a Democrat in the White House, he
wanted to take things to the next level and actually solicit relationships
with major companies and foreign governments.

He envisioned a network of corporate and foreign clients who would give him
speaking fees, generate consulting income in which he could share, and give
to his Foundation whose assets and income he could use as he wished.

But to realize this grand vision, he needed an intermediary that would get
clients and nurture the web he envisioned. So, working through his top aide
and protégée, Doug Band, he set up Teneo.

Band, for his part, realized this was the way to cash in on the
relationship with his boss.

But Doug and Bill faced a problem. They needed the approval of the State
Department Ethics Office that Obama had made Hillary set up to monitor the
business dealings of her peripatetic husband.

So they scrubbed the application. Band’s role as a principal of Teneo was
omitted and he was identified just as the Clinton aide who submitted the
application. The real purpose of the new company was hidden and the
application claimed it was only designed “to study geopolitical, economic
and social trends.”

In fact, it was a deal to hire Bill using his name and relationship with
Hillary to attract global corporate and government clients. In return,
Teneo paid him handsomely, solicited donations for the Clinton Foundation
and set up lucrative speaking engagements for Bill.

Win-win Teneo and Clinton. He’d get them clients; they’d get him speaking
gigs.

Team Teneo desperately wanted Bill Clinton to head its Advisory Board – so
it could hold out the former President and husband of the Secretary of
State as part of its team.

For its part, Teneo planned to tell corporations and governments about how
to fashion a positive relationship with the US government and the State
Department to get what they wanted.

Teneo itself described their company’s mission:

“In the US, we use our deep relationships to provide strategic counsel and
help clients navigate policy debates in Washington and state capitals as
they look to find support, amplification and clarity around the issues that
they care about.”

Who better to do so than the former president and current husband of the
Secretary? But Teneo couldn’t tell the Ethics Officers that this was the
real substance of the deal.

An earlier application by the Clinton Foundation requesting approval of a
business relationship between Bill Clinton and billionaire Clinton
supporter and donor Haim Saban had been rejected. The Ethics Officer turned
it down “based on the fact that Haim Saban, a founder of this entity, is
actively involved in foreign affairs issues, particularly with regards to
the Middle East, which is a priority area for the Secretary.” Since Teneo
and its clients intended to be involved in global affairs that were a
priority for the Secretary of State, there was a likelihood that the Teneo
request would be denied, too.

Clinton and Band did all they could to hide the real nature of Teneo and
make it seem like a routine application for State Department review.

But it was anything but routine.

The big red flag was out there in plain view for the Ethics Police to see:
For the first time in two years and hundreds of submissions to the Ethics
Board, this application came directly from Doug Band and not from the
normal channels at the Clinton Foundation. And, again, for the first time,
the request was not copied to the Clinton Foundation, but only to Cheryl
Mills. The inner circle was keeping things tight.

But the State Department missed that one completely.

And, according to documents released to Judicial Watch, the State dupes
never raised a question as to who was running Teneo and how Clinton would
function. Had they done so, they would have discovered that Band’s other
partner was Declan Kelly.

As a kind of pre-cursor to Teneo, Hillary had appointed Kelly to the newly
created job as the State Department’s Special Economic Envoy to Ireland. A
major donor, supporter, and financial bundler for Hillary the job put Kelly
in touch with corporations in and out of Ireland on behalf of the U.S.
State Department. Translation: he networked for future clients.

Now he was leaving the State Department to do the same thing for Teneo. But
that conflict of interest eluded the State Department ethics dummies too.

In fact, his role begs the question of why would the State Department
appoint an Irish citizen as its “economic envoy” to Ireland? Why would we
even have an economic envoy to Ireland? The answer is simple — because the
Clintons saw the future value — for them. And then they grabbed it.
According to Irish Central, (Kelly’s) “connection and bond to President
Clinton has opened up major avenues to him. In a business where power and
influence is everything he has the 800-pound gorilla in his corner.”

And Kelly made sure that gorilla was well fed.

The Ethics Police never asked exactly what Clinton would be doing for
Teneo. They just rubber-stamped the request.

But Bill made clear exactly what was going on when he announced that, the
next year, that he had “changed his relationship” with Teneo.

“Because of the invaluable help I continue to receive with my business
relationships and speaking engagements, as well as with CGI and other
philanthropic activities, like the Ireland investment conference, I felt
that I should be paying them, not the other way around.”

And that valuable help has been seen in his overseas and corporate speaking
engagements and the millions given to the Foundation.

Bill Clinton had the deepest of relationships in the U.S. and around the
globe and perfectly fit Teneo’s needs. A match made in heaven.

And no worries about the State Department.

*Alexandria Phillips*

*Press Assistant | Communications*

Hillary for America | www.hillaryclinton.com