Subject: Correct The Record Tuesday August 5, 2014 Morning Roundup
From: Burns Strider <[email-masked]>
To: CTRFriendsFamily <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2014 09:44:01 -0400
List-Id: <CTRFriendsFamily.americanbridge.org>

**

*Correct The Record Tuesday August 5, 2014 Morning Roundup:*

*Headlines:*

*Politico blog: Dylan Byers on Media: “A shocking new Benghazi report”
<http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/08/a-shocking-new-benghazi-report-193395.html#.U9_UWYxj9y0.twitter>*

“Further evidence — as if any was needed — that the media devote far more
attention to accusations of scandal than to subsequent reports
demonstrating that there wasn't actually a scandal.”

*Washington Post blog: Post Partisan: “New report won’t ‘stand down’
Benghazi conspiracy theories”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2014/08/04/new-report-wont-stand-down-benghazi-conspiracy-theories/>*

“In short, all of the things that were alleged to have happened didn’t
happen.”

*Media Matters for America: “How The Newest House Benghazi Report Should
Change Media's Approach To Gowdy's Select Committee”
<http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/08/04/how-the-newest-house-benghazi-report-should-cha/200316>*

“As the House Intelligence Committee's Benghazi report further dismantles
the right-wing's Benghazi hoax, will media keep legitimizing House
Republicans' repetitious select committee on the attacks?”

*The Week: “House intel report on Benghazi finds no secret Obama scandal”
<http://theweek.com/article/index/265778/house-intel-report-on-benghazi-finds-no-secret-obama-scandal>*

“A House investigation into the Benghazi embassy attack concluded that the
Obama administration was not guilty of any deliberate, negligent
wrongdoing, according to Rep. Mike Thompson (D-Calif.).”

*Mediaite: “Shocker: MSNBC Only Network Reporting Good News for Obama on
Benghazi”
<http://www.mediaite.com/tv/shocker-msnbc-only-network-reporting-good-news-for-obama-on-benghazi/>*

“A report from the Republican-led House Intelligence Committee has
reportedly found there was ‘no deliberate wrongdoing by the Obama
administration’ in the 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. But,
perhaps unsurprisingly, that development has not been major news across the
cable networks since it first broke on Friday.”

*Los Angeles Times: “The summer of the anti-Hillary Clinton books rolls on”
<http://www.latimes.com/books/jacketcopy/la-et-jc-the-summer-of-the-antihillary-clinton-books-rolls-on-20140804-story.html>*

“Conservatives don’t buy books the way other people do,” David Brock, the
founder of progressive watchdog group Media Matters, told Politico in an
interview. “I think they buy them as political statements or to see their
own prejudices and fantasies in black and white … [Hillary Clinton] called
it a cottage industry on ‘The Daily Show’ and that’s right, it’s a
business.”

*Wall Street Journal blog: Washington Wire: “Former Obama Campaigner
Plouffe Handicaps 2016 Field”
<http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/08/04/former-obama-campaigner-plouffe-handicaps-2016-field/>*

“Hillary Clinton: Mr. Plouffe said the former secretary of state is in a
much stronger position now than she was heading into the 2008 presidential
campaign. ‘She is such a dominant frontrunner,’ he said. ‘I think most
people will decide to stand down.’”

*Des Moines Register: “Rand Paul: Possible campaign makes Hillary Clinton
'fair game'”
<http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/elections/2014/08/04/rand-paul-iowa-hillary-clinton-benghazi/13605707/>*

“After a day of criticism for the president, Republican U.S. Sen. Rand Paul
tonight turned his sights on Democrat Hillary Clinton.”

*Wall Street Journal blog: Political Diary: “Obama, Clinton and Ohio”
<http://online.wsj.com/articles/political-diary-obama-clinton-and-ohio-1407183676>*

“Mr. Obama's negative rating is close to his all-time low in the state of
61 percent last November, but the good news for Democrats is that the
president's job-approval problems don't seem to be affecting the person
they hope will replace him: Hillary Clinton.”

*Financial Times letter: Paul Bledsoe: “Clinton’s success was no accident”
<http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/655a3228-1748-11e4-87c0-00144feabdc0.html#axzz39Vu8NvGV>*

“Mr Clinton also faced down many members of his own party in 1993 by
vigorously pushing through Congress approval of free trade measures
including the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta) and General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). These were difficult but correct
policy and political actions, in no way accidental or the result of good
fortune.”

*Mediaite: “Ralph Nader Would Prefer This Republican over ‘Generalissima’
Hillary Clinton”
<http://www.mediaite.com/tv/ralph-nader-would-prefer-this-republican-over-generalissima-hillary-clinton/>*

“Asked if he prefers Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) to former secretary of state
Hillary Clinton, Nader, widely known for his political independence,
replied, ‘You mean Generalissima Hillary Clinton?’”

*Baltimore Sun: “O’Malley ‘always writing’ but is coy on book plans”
<http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/politics/blog/bal-omalley-always-writing-but-is-coy-on-book-plans-20140804,0,4947299.story>*

“Gov. Martin O'Malley sidestepped a question Monday about whether he was
writing a book -- a frequent prelude to to a candidacy for president --
while keeping the door open to a run for the Democratic nomination in 2016.”

*Washington Free Beacon blog: The Editor’s Blog: “Privatizing Combat
Journalism” <http://freebeacon.com/blog/privatizing-combat-journalism/>*

“Happy news: The Washington Free Beacon is taking its talents to the free
market.”

*Articles:*

*Politico blog: Dylan Byers on Media: “A shocking new Benghazi report”
<http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/08/a-shocking-new-benghazi-report-193395.html#.U9_UWYxj9y0.twitter>*

By Dylan Byers

August 4, 2014, 2:41 p.m. EDT

Made you look:

“The House Intelligence Committee, led by Republicans, has concluded that
there was no deliberate wrongdoing by the Obama administration in the 2012
attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador
Chris Stevens and three other Americans ... The panel voted Thursday to
declassify the report, the result of two years of investigation by the
committee. U.S. intelligence agencies will have to approve making the
report public.”

This isn't exactly blowing up on your television screen right now, is it?
Further evidence — as if any was needed — that the media devote far more
attention to accusations of scandal than to subsequent reports
demonstrating that there wasn't actually a scandal.

*Washington Post blog: Post Partisan: “New report won’t ‘stand down’
Benghazi conspiracy theories”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2014/08/04/new-report-wont-stand-down-benghazi-conspiracy-theories/>*

By Jonathan Capehart

August 4, 1:32 p.m. EDT

On July 31, when all eyes were focused on the Ted Cruz-stoked chaos
unfolding in the House chamber over the border bill, the Republican-led
House Intelligence Committee did something rather remarkable. It voted to
declassify its Benghazi report. After two years of investigation, it found
no evidence to buttress any of the conspiracy theories surrounding the
Sept. 11, 2012, attack that killed Chris Stevens, the U.S. ambassador to
Libya, and three other Americans.

We didn’t get this news from committee chairman Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.).
Nope. There was a story in the San Francisco Chronicle on Friday. A press
release from Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Md.), the ranking Democrat on the
committee, spelled out the details. The key information is below.

“This report shows that there was no intelligence failure surrounding the
Benghazi attacks that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other brave
Americans. Our investigation found the Intelligence Community warned about
an increased threat environment, but did not have specific tactical warning
of an attack before it happened, … which is consistent with testimony that
the attacks appeared to be opportunistic.  It also found that a mixed group
of individuals including those associated with Al-Qaeda, Qadafi loyalists
and other Libyan militias participated in the attack. Additionally, the
report shows there was no ‘stand down order’ given to American personnel
attempting to offer assistance that evening, and no American was left
behind.

“The report also shows that the process used to develop the talking points
was flawed, but that the talking points reflected the conflicting
intelligence assessments in the days immediately following the crisis.
Finally, the report demonstrates that there was no illegal activity or
illegal arms sales occurring at U.S. facilities in Benghazi. And there was
absolutely no evidence, in documents or testimony, that the Intelligence
Community’s assessments were politically motivated in any way.”

In short, all of the things that were alleged to have happened didn’t
happen. Ruppersberger called the report “a bipartisan, factual, definitive
report on what the Intelligence Community did and did not do.” And here’s
the kicker: It was “adopted unanimously and sent to the Intelligence
Community for a declassification review.” Unanimously, by a committee made
up of 12 Republicans and nine Democrats.

Of course, this will most likely have no bearing on that special Benghazi
committee authorized three months ago by the House and headed by Rep. Trey
Gowdy (R-S.C.). As Steve Benen at msnbc.com reports, there have been eight
separate investigations into the Libyan attacks. Not one has uncovered the
rumored (and hoped-for) cover-up. That’s because there isn’t one.

Please proceed, Rep. Gowdy.

*Media Matters for America: “How The Newest House Benghazi Report Should
Change Media's Approach To Gowdy's Select Committee”
<http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/08/04/how-the-newest-house-benghazi-report-should-cha/200316>*

By Olivia Marshal

August 4, 2014, 6:01 p.m. EDT

As the House Intelligence Committee's Benghazi report further dismantles
the right-wing's Benghazi hoax, will media keep legitimizing House
Republicans' repetitious select committee on the attacks?

Less than two months before Rep. Trey Gowdy's (R-SC) House Select Committee
is set to begin its Benghazi hearings, the Republican-led House
Intelligence Committee voted unanimously on July 31 to declassify its
report on the deadly 2012 attacks on American facilities. The committee
found no evidence of wrongdoing by the Obama administration, confirming
"that no one was deliberately misled, no military assets were withheld and
no stand-down order (to U.S. forces) was given," as committee member Rep.
Mike Thompson (D-CA) explained. Ranking member Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger
(D-MD) stressed that the "bipartisan, factual," and "definitive" report
found no evidence of a scandal involving the intelligence community's
talking points on the attacks:

“This report shows that there was no intelligence failure surrounding the
Benghazi attacks that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other brave
Americans. Our investigation found the Intelligence Community warned about
an increased threat environment, but did not have specific tactical warning
of an attack before it happened, Americans which is consistent with
testimony that the attacks appeared to be opportunistic.  It also found
that a mixed group of individuals including those associated with Al-Qaeda,
Qadafi loyalists and other Libyan militias participated in the attack.
Additionally, the report shows there was no ‘stand down order’ given to
American personnel attempting to offer assistance that evening, and no
American was left behind.

“The report also shows that the process used to develop the talking points
was flawed, but that the talking points reflected the conflicting
intelligence assessments in the days immediately following the crisis.
Finally, the report demonstrates that there was no illegal activity or
illegal arms sales occurring at U.S. facilities in Benghazi. And there was
absolutely no evidence, in documents or testimony, that the Intelligence
Community's assessments were politically motivated in any way.”

The House Intelligence Committee report joins previous Benghazi
investigations by the State Department's independent Accountability Review
Board (ARB), the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and the House
Armed Services Committee which have repeatedly debunked right-wing Benghazi
myths that have persisted since the attacks, including the falsehood that a
"stand down" order was given to troops stationed in Tripoli and the myth
that the administration lied about the attacks having been caused by an
anti-Islam YouTube video.

The findings present a new challenge for media outlets in the runup to
Gowdy's Benghazi select committee, explicitly formed to investigate
"unanswered questions" that previous Benghazi investigations have
long-since asked and answered. When House Republicans announced plans to
form the committee in May, many in the media presented Gowdy's premise of
"unanswered questions" as legitimate.

Fox News, which relentlessly campaigned for a select committee, has
dutifully continued to promote it, regardless of the investigation's $3.3
million price tag.

CNN's chief political analyst Gloria Borger told CNN Newsroom host Carol
Costello in a May 9 discussion on Gowdy's select committee that "there are
a lot of unanswered questions" on Benghazi, and on the May 21 edition of
the program, Wolf Blitzer conceded to Republican myths on the attacks
(emphasis added, via Nexis):

BLITZER: I think the major question that the Republicans want answered is,
people at the White House, what was their direct involvement from the
president, the vice president, the national security adviser and others on
down. They've gotten a lot of information from what was going on at the
State Department. They've gotten a lot of documents and information, what
was going on at the U.S. military, the Pentagon, the Africa command and
other U.S. military operations in the intelligence community, they've
gotten significant information. But the Republicans believe there's still a
lot of information out there that the administration has not made
available, specifically information as to what the White House was doing,
what the president of the United States specifically was doing. That's what
they say they want, and that's presumably what they're hoping to get in the
course of the select committee hearings.

Blitzer further legitimized the select committee on May 22, pressing Rep.
Adam Schiff (D-CA) on why Ambassador Chris Stevens was in Benghazi the day
of the attack and suggesting the committee could find an answer to this
already-answered question.

Now, the House Intelligence Committee's finding that there was no
intentional wrongdoing on the part of the administration in the Benghazi
attacks adds to a pile of overwhelming evidence against the right-wing's
Benghazi hoax. Will it finally be enough to convince the media to stop
taking Gowdy and his misguided Benghazi witch-hunt seriously?

*The Week: “House intel report on Benghazi finds no secret Obama scandal”
<http://theweek.com/article/index/265778/house-intel-report-on-benghazi-finds-no-secret-obama-scandal>*

By Jon Terbush

August 4, 2014

A House investigation into the Benghazi embassy attack concluded that the
Obama administration was not guilty of any deliberate, negligent
wrongdoing, according to Rep. Mike Thompson (D-Calif.). Thompson told
SFGate that the report, from a GOP-led panel, "confirms that no one was
deliberately misled, no military assets were withheld and no stand-down
order" was given to troops in the area.

The House Intelligence Committee voted last week to declassify the report,
pending approval from security agencies.

Certainly it's possible Thompson was sugar-coating the report ahead of its
formal release. Yet the broad conclusion he outlined — that while the
administration botched its initial talking points due to conflicting
intelligence, it was not hiding some big explosive scandal — further
undercuts the GOP's claims to the contrary. A bipartisan Senate report
released in January similarly found that there was no evidence of a
cover-up.

Nevertheless, House Republicans are still pressing ahead with a separate
investigation into the attack. And though House Democrats have agreed to
participate in it, they have branded the investigation a "political stunt"
timed, coincidentally, to align with the midterm elections.

*Mediaite: “Shocker: MSNBC Only Network Reporting Good News for Obama on
Benghazi”
<http://www.mediaite.com/tv/shocker-msnbc-only-network-reporting-good-news-for-obama-on-benghazi/>*

By Matt Wilstein

August 4, 2014, 7:42 p.m. EDT

A report from the Republican-led House Intelligence Committee has
reportedly found there was “no deliberate wrongdoing by the Obama
administration” in the 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. But,
perhaps unsurprisingly, that development has not been major news across the
cable networks since it first broke on Friday. In fact, it was not until
the end of the 4 p.m. ET hour today that any one of the three major cable
news networks even mentioned the content of the House report’s findings.

For the final segment of her MSNBC show Monday, Alex Wagner reported that
“the latest news on the Benghazi scandal is that there is no Benghazi
scandal.” She was referring to comments Rep. Mike Thompson (D-CA) gave to
the San Francisco Chronicle last week, in which he said the
unanimously-approved report “confirms that no one was deliberately misled,
no military assets were withheld and no stand-down order was given.”

“In finding nothing salacious or conspiratorial or maybe even kind of
dastardly,” Wagner said, “the House Intelligence Committee join the Senate
Intelligence Committee, the independent State Department Accountability
Review Board, the Senate Armed Services Committee, the Senate Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, the House Armed Services
Committee, the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the
House Committee on Foreign Affairs, all of which have investigated the 2012
attack and found nada.”

The host neglected to predict what these latest findings would mean for
“Benghazi bloodhounds” Reps. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and Trey Gowdy (R-SC), who
plan to continue using taxpayer money to investigate the Obama
administration’s culpability in the attack and its aftermath.

Watch video below, via MSNBC:

[VIDEO]

The report got its second cable news mention two hours later on MSNBC’s
PoliticsNation, during which Al Sharpton told his viewers that the new
House committee report is “demolishing once again the right’s favorite myth
about the terror attack in Benghazi.” After outlining the findings, as
described by Rep. Thompson, Sharpton said, “This follows a slew of
investigations over the past 18 months, all looking for smoking gun to
implicate the president and his administration in a scandal that doesn’t
exist.”

“You could look at this and say it just proves the conspiracy is broader
than anybody thought,” Sharpton’s guest Dana Milbank said, facetiously,
“because now even all of the House Republicans on the intelligence
committee are part of the cover-up trying to protect this administration.”
He predicted the report will “only fuel further the belief among
Republicans out there in the grassroots that they are getting a raw deal.”

Watch video below, via MSNBC:

[VIDEO]

While MSNBC waited until Monday afternoon to report this story, it has
received zero mentions on CNN, which has been wholly focused on the war in
Gaza and a potential ebola virus outbreak. More tellingly, it has also been
ignored by Fox News, which tends to lead the charge whenever there is a
Benghazi-related piece of news that is damaging to President Barack Obama.
The full report has not yet been declassified, so perhaps Fox is just
waiting until they can thoroughly review all of the details rather than
take the word of one Democratic congressman.

But that fact that no Republican members of the committee have gone on
record disputing Rep. Thompson’s assessment indicates that he is not
misrepresenting the content of the report. In that case, it appears that
Fox is conveniently deciding not to talk about Benghazi when the latest
developments on the story don’t fit their prevailing narrative that Obama
is to blame.

*Los Angeles Times: “The summer of the anti-Hillary Clinton books rolls on”
<http://www.latimes.com/books/jacketcopy/la-et-jc-the-summer-of-the-antihillary-clinton-books-rolls-on-20140804-story.html>*

By Hector Tobar

August 4, 2014, 2:58 p.m. EDT

In June, Hillary Clinton released a new book that served as the unofficial
kickoff to a presidential campaign set to hit the homestretch in the summer
of 2016. But for the moment she’s enduring what Politico called "the summer
of the anti-Clinton books," and what a left-leaning website called "The
Summer of Nonsense."

"There may be no clearer sign of Hillary Clinton’s political reemergence
than the flurry of new books critical of her — two in the past month alone,
with another pair coming soon," Politico reports. The books mark the
resurrection of a genre that had gone dormant in the years since President
Bill Clinton survived impeachment and left the White House in 2001.

“Blood Feud,” by Edward Klein, debuted at No. 1 on the New York Times
bestseller list on July 13, displacing Hillary Clinton’s “Hard Choices.”
Klein’s book is said to detail the feud between the Obama and Clinton
families and has received mixed reviews. Even Rush Limbaugh said the
dialogue seemed stilted, and Buzzfeed amused its readers with a list of
“the 9 Most Inane Passages” from the book, which include an alleged
physical altercation between Barack and Hillary.

"Blood Feud is the funniest book of 2014. Maybe ever,” Katherine Miller
wrote for BuzzFeed. “On nearly every page, you’ll feel like yelling 'BLOOD
FEUD!' over a guitar solo (think 'Panama' by Van Halen) while an eagle
flies out of an explosion."

And yet, as Politico points out, “Blood Feud” has already sold more than
100,000 copies.

“Conservatives don’t buy books the way other people do,” David Brock, the
founder of progressive watchdog group Media Matters, told Politico in an
interview. “I think they buy them as political statements or to see their
own prejudices and fantasies in black and white … [Hillary Clinton] called
it a cottage industry on ‘The Daily Show’ and that’s right, it’s a
business.”

Media Matters published a detailed retort last week to three of what it
called “The Summer of Nonsense” books: “Blood Feud,” Daniel Halper's
“Clinton Inc.: The Audacious Rebuilding of a Political Machine,” and Ronald
Kessler's “The First Family Detail: Secret Service Agents Reveal the Hidden
Lives of Presidents.”

Among many other allegations and negative characterizations, Halper’s
“Clinton Inc.” suggests that Hillary Clinton has a drinking problem. And
Halper claims drinking may have been behind her 2012 illness. In response,
Media Matters writes: “Halper baselessly posits that Clinton may have hit
her head after falling down drunk. Invoking a ‘rumor’ from ‘bloggers and
websites’ that Clinton drinks heavily, Halper points to ‘one well-known
Clinton hater’ for the claim the injury was the result of drinking --
citing no names."

Halper’s book has sold a mere 3,500 copies, according to Politico.

In response to the books, spokespersons for Hillary, Bill and Chelsea
Clinton issued a joint statement: “With Klein, Halper and Kessler, we now
have a Hat Trick of despicable actors concocting trashy nonsense for a
quick buck, at the expense of anything even remotely resembling the truth.”

A fourth anti-Clinton book, by conservative talk show host Aaron Klein, is
set for release next month: “The Real Benghazi Story: What the White House
and Hillary Don’t Want You to Know.”

Klein is the author of several books attacking President Obama, including
“The Manchurian President” and “Impeachable Offenses.” His website refers
to his latest work as “a ground-breaking investigative work that finally
exposes some of the most significant issues related to the murderous Sept.
11, 2012, attack” in Libya.

*Wall Street Journal blog: Washington Wire: “Former Obama Campaigner
Plouffe Handicaps 2016 Field”
<http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/08/04/former-obama-campaigner-plouffe-handicaps-2016-field/>*

By Colleen McCain Nelson

August 4, 2014, 4:36 p.m. EDT

Former White House senior adviser David Plouffe handicapped the 2016
presidential field Monday, deeming New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie
“thin-skinned,” Sen. Ted Cruz a leading conservative voice in the
Republican Party and Vice President Joe Biden “an amazing person.”

Mr. Plouffe, who also served as President Barack Obama’s campaign manager
in 2008 and maintains close ties with the president, offered his assessment
of would-be candidates from both parties while predicting that Democrats
could be poised to win a string of presidential elections. During
Politico’s “Playbook Lunch,” Mr. Plouffe said the race for the Republican
presidential nomination is a “complete jump ball” and said that on the
Democratic side, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is a dominant
frontrunner.

Mr. Plouffe’s take on the 2016 field:

Chris Christie: The New Jersey governor’s biggest problem isn’t the bridge
scandal – it’s his temperament, Mr. Plouffe said. “He’s very thin-skinned,”
the longtime Obama adviser said.

Still, Mr. Plouffe said Mr. Christie has “the rawest political skill” among
potential candidates. That can also be a liability, Mr. Plouffe said, but
the governor has great appeal.

Jeb Bush: The former Florida governor and Mr. Christie both have staked out
some positions that diverge from the tea party. They’re conservative, but
“compared to the tea party, they’re [Vermont senator] Bernie Sanders,” Mr.
Plouffe said.

He added that the only way Mr. Bush or Mr. Christie will win the presidency
is if they’re faithful to who they are. “If they abandon that to secure the
nomination, it is not a nomination worth having,” Mr. Plouffe said.

Rand Paul: The Republican senator from Kentucky has the potential to put
together an interesting bid, Mr. Plouffe said. “He’s got a little tea
party,” Mr. Plouffe said. “He’s got a little libertarian.”

Ted Cruz: Mr. Plouffe called the junior senator from Texas “the lead
strategerist for the Republican Party.”

“He is emblematic of where a lot of that hard-core primary voter base is
right now,” Mr. Plouffe said. He stopped short of calling Mr. Cruz a
frontrunner but added that for tea-party voters, Mr. Cruz “is probably most
in alignment, and that is not a small base in the Republican Party.”

Hillary Clinton: Mr. Plouffe said the former secretary of state is in a
much stronger position now than she was heading into the 2008 presidential
campaign.

“She is such a dominant frontrunner,” he said. “I think most people will
decide to stand down.”

Mr. Plouffe, who helped defeat Mrs. Clinton six years ago in the
hard-fought Democratic primary, said she now has a “huge, huge base in the
Democratic Party,” drawing strong support from both Obama and Clinton
backers.

Joe Biden: Despite speculation that Mrs. Clinton could clear the Democratic
field, Mr. Plouffe said perhaps the vice president will mount a bid in 2016.

“All of us in Obama world have such affection for him, a belief in him as a
public official,” Mr. Plouffe said. “He’s an amazing person.”

Mr. Plouffe said the vice president would have a tough decision to make,
adding that it would not necessarily hinge on Mrs. Clinton’s plans.

“He’s got great appeal. There’s an authenticity there,” Mr. Plouffe said of
Mr. Biden. “He connects with middle-class voters exceedingly well.”

*Des Moines Register: “Rand Paul: Possible campaign makes Hillary Clinton
'fair game'”
<http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/politics/elections/2014/08/04/rand-paul-iowa-hillary-clinton-benghazi/13605707/>*

By Jennifer Jacobs

August 4, 2014, 11:44 p.m. EDT

Okoboji, Ia. - After a day of criticism for the president, Republican U.S.
Sen. Rand Paul tonight turned his sights on Democrat Hillary Clinton.

"I think the (scandal) that bothers me the worst is Benghazi. The thing
about it is is that it was one bad decision after another," Paul told a
crowd of about 200 people at Barefoot Bar, an open-air bar on East Okoboji
Lake. "The media tries to say, 'Oh, you Republicans you're just making this
into a partisan issue.' Here's the thing: Hillary would like to be the
leader of the free world. I think her decisions are fair game for
discussing."

Paul said again today that he hasn't decided yet whether he'll run for the
White House in 2016, but he's on a three-day Iowa trip that very much
resembles a fall-before-the-Iowa-caucuses campaign swing.

It's a common theme in Paul's speeches around the country to criticize
Clinton for not doing more to provide security before the September 2012
attack in Benghazi, Libya that killed four Americans. She was U.S.
Secretary of State at the time, and now, like Paul, is weighing a
presidential bid.

"Three days later she approved $100,000 for an electrical charging station
in Vienna," Paul said at the event, which was a fundraiser for U.S. Rep.
Steve King, a northwest Iowa Republican. "During the summer, while she was
turning down requests for security, she spent $650,000 on Facebook ads,
trying to get more friends for the State Department. They spent $700,000 on
landscaping at the Brussells embassy. They spent $5 million on crystal
glassware for the embassies around the world."

Paul said after he quizzed Clinton at a U.S. Senate Foreign Relations
Committee meeting in January, his reaction was: "You know what, by not
reading the cables, by not providing security, I think you have precluded
yourself from ever being considered as commander in chief."

That elicited loud applause from the audience, who offered only scattered
claps during the other parts of his 18-minute speech, which centered on
what he called "outlandish" examples of government misspending.

Paul, who wore a collared Ralph Lauren shirt with vibrant stripes, joked at
the beginning of his speech that he was told the Barefoot Bar required
colorful attire. But his staff were skeptical when they saw what he had
picked out, he said.

"Live with it," he said to laughs. "This is the best party shirt I've got."

*Wall Street Journal blog: Political Diary: “Obama, Clinton and Ohio”
<http://online.wsj.com/articles/political-diary-obama-clinton-and-ohio-1407183676>*

By Jason L. Riley

August 4, 2014, 4:21 p.m. EDT

In a Quinnipiac University poll released late last week, just 36 percent of
Ohio voters give President Obama a positive approval rating, versus 59
percent who disapprove. Given Ohio's swing state status, this ultimately
may bode well for Republican prospects in 2016—to the extent we can gauge
such prospects this far out, of course—but other findings in the survey
show that the GOP still has its work cut out.

Mr. Obama's negative rating is close to his all-time low in the state of 61
percent last November, but the good news for Democrats is that the
president's job-approval problems don't seem to be affecting the person
they hope will replace him: Hillary Clinton.

"The new poll shows that if a one-to-one matchup were held in Ohio today,
Clinton would beat Republican U.S. Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky by 46 to 42;
Ohio Gov. John Kasich by 47 to 40; former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush by 48 to
37, and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie by 46 to 37," reported the Cleveland
Plain Dealer.

And if Republicans are thinking of nominating someone else from Ohio in
hopes of making sure they prevail in state they almost never win the
presidency without—well, they better get a move on. "A more perplexing
problem may exist for U.S. Sen. Rob Portman, an Ohioan on the state
ballot—and possibly the national one—in two years," said the paper.
"Portman is nearly four years into his term, yet a full third of Ohio
voters say they don't know enough about his job performance to rate it."

Obviously, there's quite a ways to go between now and 2016, but if you're a
fan of Mrs. Clinton who believes she'll run, you like where things stand in
the traditionally important Buckeye State. If you're a Republican, by
contrast, you're probably happy that there's quite a ways to go.

*Financial Times letter: Paul Bledsoe: “Clinton’s success was no accident”
<http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/655a3228-1748-11e4-87c0-00144feabdc0.html#axzz39Vu8NvGV>*

By Paul Bledsoe, former Senate Finance Committee staffer

August 4, 2014, 11:57 p.m. EDT

Sir, Gideon Rachman’s strange assertion that Bill Clinton’s presidency was
successful from mere good fortune entirely undervalues the critical
economic decisions Mr Clinton made, especially in his first year in office.
(“A Clinton in power will not bring back the good times”, Comment, July 29.)

In 1993, when I was a staff member of the Senate Finance Committee,
President Clinton pushed an enormous tax and budget bill through Congress
that cut the US structural budget deficit and lowered taxes on the working
class. The bill was politically difficult since it was opposed by every
Republican in Congress, who predicted economic ruin, despite the fact that
the measure was blessed by Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan.

Markets, however, signalled strong approval for the measure, which by
lowering debt and leading to lower interest rates sent the US economy into
a period of remarkable economic growth including the creation of tens of
millions of jobs and a budget surplus by the end of his presidency.

Mr Clinton also faced down many members of his own party in 1993 by
vigorously pushing through Congress approval of free trade measures
including the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta) and General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). These were difficult but correct
policy and political actions, in no way accidental or the result of good
fortune.

Indeed, perhaps the best reason to support Hillary Clinton’s possible
candidacy is the suspicion that Mrs Clinton will pursue similar economic
policies if elected.

‑- Paul Bledsoe, Laverton nr Broadway, Worcs, UK

*Mediaite: “Ralph Nader Would Prefer This Republican over ‘Generalissima’
Hillary Clinton”
<http://www.mediaite.com/tv/ralph-nader-would-prefer-this-republican-over-generalissima-hillary-clinton/>*

By Eddie Scarry

August 4, 2014, 2:59 p.m. EDT

On HBO’s Real Time Friday, former presidential candidate Ralph Nader had no
problem deciding between two potential 2016 candidates.

Asked if he prefers Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) to former secretary of state
Hillary Clinton, Nader, widely known for his political independence,
replied, “You mean Generalissima Hillary Clinton?”

“No,” he said, “I support Rand Paul on foreign, military policy, the
federal reserve and the bloated military budget. All of which she is on the
other side. Who’s liberal and who’s conservative anymore?”

Show host Bill Maher said he would like to “combine the half of Rand Paul
we like” with Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA).

“Like a centaur,” Nader said.

Watch via Real Time blog:

[VIDEO]

*Baltimore Sun: “O’Malley ‘always writing’ but is coy on book plans”
<http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/politics/blog/bal-omalley-always-writing-but-is-coy-on-book-plans-20140804,0,4947299.story>*

By Michael Dresser

August 4, 2014, 7:55 p.m. EDT

Gov. Martin O'Malley sidestepped a question Monday about whether he was
writing a book -- a frequent prelude to to a candidacy for president --
while keeping the door open to a run for the Democratic nomination in 2016.

In an interview on the Fusion cable and satellite network, O'Malley showed
a deft ability to dodge inconvenient questions, such as interviewer Jorge
Ramos attempt to lure him into saying whether the country would have been
better off if Hillary Clinton had won the presidency in 2008.

O'Malley wasn't going there, and stated that he was seriously considering a
2016 run. He eventually slid into a declaration of his wonderful working
relationship with Hillary Clinton, whom he backed in 2008, and with Bill
Clinton and Barack Obama.

Ramos pressed O'Malley on whether he was wring a book, observing that "it
seems like every candidate writes a book right before announcing."

"I'm always writing," O'Malley replies.

But are you writing a book? Ramos asked.

"I'm always writing, Jorge," O'Malley repeated before Ramos gave up.

The Fusion network, a joint venture of Disney-ABC and the Spanish-language
Univision, is pitched largely at an audience of young, English-speaking
Hispanic Americans -- likely a critical demographic group for Democratic
candidates in 2016.

Asked why he would want to be president, the governor said he believes the
country's best days are ahead of it.

"I believe we need to make better choices as a people," he said.

*Washington Free Beacon blog: The Editor’s Blog: “Privatizing Combat
Journalism” <http://freebeacon.com/blog/privatizing-combat-journalism/>*

By Michael Goldfarb and Matthew Continetti

August 4, 2014, 2:59 p.m. EDT

Happy news: The Washington Free Beacon is taking its talents to the free
market.

Since its launch in February 2012, the Free Beacon has been a project of
the Center for American Freedom, a nonprofit that has graciously supported
our reporters, editors, and contributors. But we have large ambitions. And
in order for the Free Beacon to grow, for it to take its rightful place
alongside the New York Times and the Washington Post, it must become a
newspaper like any other—online in our case, but making its way in the
private sector, funded by investors, sustained by advertisers, and seeking
out elusive Mexican oligarchs.

We’re therefore pleased to report that the Free Beacon is now a privately
owned, for-profit enterprise. We thank the Center for American Freedom for
sustaining us during our infancy. As we enter the private sector, we will
make sure that incorporating advertising into the website does not become a
nuisance to our readers. Indeed, we won’t do anything to distract from the
journalism our readers have come to expect, such as our exclusive reporting
on Hillary Clinton’s successful defense of a child rapist. This new model
should allow us to expand our reporting. It should allow us to better serve
the cause of freedom.

The Center for American Freedom is also starting a new adventure. We want
to thank Bill Kristol and Jaime Sneider, who along with Michael Goldfarb
have stepped down from the board, for their help with the Free Beacon.
Kristol and Sneider will also continue to be involved with our publication.

The Center for American Freedom has been renamed and reconfigured as the
Center for American Opportunity. Its mission of incubating journalism
startups continues with the launch of Opportunity Lives, a news platform
devoted to highlighting stories of success, entrepreneurship, and
problem-solving across the United States. You can read more about
OpportunityLives.com and its mission here and here.

The mission of the Free Beacon remains the same: to uncover the
hypocrisies, scandals, and insipid politics of the nation’s capital through
tough and original reporting. We call it combat journalism. And we’re
loaded for bear.

Michael Goldfarb

Chairman

Matthew Continetti

Editor in Chief

*Calendar:*

*Sec. Clinton's upcoming appearances as reported online. Not an official
schedule.*

·  August 6 – Huntington, NY: Sec. Clinton signs books at Book Revue (
HillaryClintonMemoir.com
<http://www.hillaryclintonmemoir.com/long_island_book_signing>)

·  August 9 – Water Mill, NY: Sec. Clinton fundraises for the Clinton
Foundation at the home of George and Joan Hornig (WSJ
<http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/06/17/for-50000-best-dinner-seats-with-the-clintons-in-the-hamptons/>
)

·  August 13 – Martha’s Vinyard, MA: Sec. Clinton signs books at Bunch of
Grapes (HillaryClintonMemoir.com
<http://www.hillaryclintonmemoir.com/martha_s_vineyard_book_signing>)

·  August 16 – East Hampton, New York: Sec. Clinton signs books at
Bookhampton East Hampton (HillaryClintonMemoir.com
<http://www.hillaryclintonmemoir.com/long_island_book_signing2>)

·  August 28 – San Francisco, CA: Sec. Clinton keynotes Nexenta’s OpenSDx
Summit (BusinessWire
<http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20140702005709/en/Secretary-State-Hillary-Rodham-Clinton-Deliver-Keynote#.U7QoafldV8E>
)

·  September 4 – Las Vegas, NV: Sec. Clinton speaks at the National Clean
Energy Summit (Solar Novis Today
<http://www.solarnovus.com/hillary-rodham-clinto-to-deliver-keynote-at-national-clean-energy-summit-7-0_N7646.html>
)

·  October 2 – Miami Beach, FL: Sec. Clinton keynotes the CREW Network
Convention & Marketplace (CREW Network
<http://events.crewnetwork.org/2014convention/>)

·  October 13 – Las Vegas, NV: Sec. Clinton keynotes the UNLV Foundation
Annual Dinner (UNLV
<http://www.unlv.edu/event/unlv-foundation-annual-dinner?delta=0>)

·  ~ October 13-16 – San Francisco, CA: Sec. Clinton keynotes
salesforce.com Dreamforce
conference (salesforce.com
<http://www.salesforce.com/dreamforce/DF14/keynotes.jsp>)

 ·  December 4 – Boston, MA: Sec. Clinton speaks at the Massachusetts
Conference for Women (MCFW <http://www.maconferenceforwomen.org/speakers/>)