Subject: Correct The Record Friday September 5, 2014 Morning Roundup
From: Burns Strider <[email-masked]>
To: CTRFriendsFamily <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2014 09:25:07 -0400
List-Id: <CTRFriendsFamily.americanbridge.org>

**

*Correct The Record Friday September 5, 2014 Morning Roundup:*

*Headlines:*

*Washington Post opinion: Sec. Hillary Rodham Clinton: “Hillary Clinton
reviews Henry Kissinger’s ‘World Order’”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hillary-clinton-reviews-henry-kissingers-world-order/2014/09/04/b280c654-31ea-11e4-8f02-03c644b2d7d0_story.html>*

“America, at its best, is a problem-solving nation.”

*MSNBC: “Hillary Clinton calls out climate change deniers”
<http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/hillary-clinton-calls-out-climate-deniers>*

“Hillary Clinton called out climate change ‘deniers’ at a clean energy
conference in Las Vegas Thursday evening, but revealed little new about
what her own energy policy platform might look like if she decides to run
for president.”

*Politico: “John Podesta eyed for Hillary Clinton campaign chair”
<http://www.politico.com/story/2014/09/john-podesta-hillary-clinton-campaign-chair-110616.html>*

“It’s also unclear what will happen to Correct the Record, which has
defended Clinton when Republicans attack her on the Benghazi attacks and
other issues. It is helmed by Burns Strider, another 2008 veteran and a
Hillary Clinton favorite.”

*Politico: “Clinton reviews Kissinger book”
<http://www.politico.com/story/2014/09/hillary-clinton-review-henry-kissinger-book-110615.html>*

“Clinton’s review of the book, which she calls ‘vintage Kissinger,’
discusses larger issues of U.S. foreign policy, including that of the Obama
administration and her own experience at the State Department.”

*The Hill: “Clinton: 'US can still do big things'”
<http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/216743-clinton-us-can-still-do-big-things>*

“Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Thursday said action on
climate change and renewable energy will send a signal that the ‘U.S. can
still do big things’.”

*CNN: “Clinton: Republicans are denying the United States clean energy
jobs” <http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/04/politics/clinton-gop-jobs/index.html>*

“Hillary Clinton used a softball climate change question on Thursday to
step up her political rhetoric and hit Republicans for ‘denying people jobs
and middle-class incomes.’”

*National Journal: “Clinton: America Can Be Clean-Energy 'Superpower'”
<http://www.nationaljournal.com/energy/clinton-america-can-be-clean-energy-superpower-20140904>*

“The U.S. can become the ‘clean energy superpower of the 21st Century,’
Hillary Clinton said Thursday, urging businesses and the government to
build up the renewable sector.”

*Washington Post blog: Post Politics: “Hillary Clinton’s vacation is
definitely over”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/09/05/a-busy-september-for-hillary-clinton/>*

“Post-Labor Day, Clinton is back at work with a jam-packed schedule -- an
itinerary heavy on potentially campaign-aiding stops, including policy
talks, foreign trips, outreach to key Democratic constituencies, and visits
to key early-voting states.”

*Politico: “Bill Clinton and Charlie Crist: The odd couple”
<http://www.politico.com/story/2014/09/bill-clinton-charlie-crist-florida-2014-election-110625.html>*

“While everyone’s focused on Hillary Clinton’s next potential campaign,
it’s Bill Clinton who’s been racking up frequent-flier miles, trying to get
Democrats elected in the midterms.”

*The New Republic: “President Clinton to Keynote The New Republic’s
Centennial Gala”
<http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119315/president-clinton-keynote-new-republics-centennial-gala>*

“The New Republic announced today that President Bill Clinton will deliver
the keynote address at the magazine’s centennial gala on Wednesday,
November 19 at the Andrew W. Mellon Auditorium in Washington, DC.”

*News and Observer blog: Under the Dome: “Bill Clinton coming to Chapel
Hill for Hagan”
<http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/09/04/4122084_bill-clinton-coming-to-chapel.html?rh=1>*

“Clinton is the special guest at a Sept. 30 luncheon for Hagan in Chapel
Hill.”

*Washington Post Magazine: “The Gillibrand mystique: Is memoir a step along
presidential pathway?”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/magazine/the-gillibrand-mystique-is-memoir-a-step-along-presidential-pathway/2014/09/04/c6ba6346-23c6-11e4-86ca-6f03cbd15c1a_story.html>*

“‘If Hillary Clinton doesn’t run in 2016, I wouldn’t be surprised to see
Kirsten Gillibrand jump in,’ says Larry Sabato, director of the Center for
Politics at the University of Virginia. ‘Gillibrand seems to have the
ambition to do it.’”

*Wall Street Journal: “Jeb Bush Sends Signals About 2016 Presidential Run”
<http://online.wsj.com/articles/former-florida-gov-jeb-bush-sends-signals-about-2016-presidential-run-1409876227>*

“Republican strategists and fundraisers say Jeb Bush's closest advisers
have been quietly spreading the word that they should avoid committing to
other possible presidential candidates until he decides on his own course
after the November election.”

*New York Times: “New Book Says C.I.A. Official in Benghazi Held Up Rescue”
<http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/09/05/world/africa/new-book-says-cia-official-in-benghazi-held-up-rescue.html?_r=1>*

“Five commandos guarding the C.I.A. base in Benghazi, Libya, in September
2012 say that the C.I.A. station chief stopped them from interceding in
time to save the lives of Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and an American
technician during the attack on the diplomatic mission there.”

*Articles:*

*Washington Post opinion: Sec. Hillary Rodham Clinton: “Hillary Clinton
reviews Henry Kissinger’s ‘World Order’”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hillary-clinton-reviews-henry-kissingers-world-order/2014/09/04/b280c654-31ea-11e4-8f02-03c644b2d7d0_story.html>*

By Sec. Hillary Rodham Clinton

September 4, 2014, 3:00 p.m. EDT

When Americans look around the world today, we see one crisis after
another. Russian aggression in Ukraine, extremism and chaos in Iraq and
Syria, a deadly epidemic in West Africa, escalating territorial tensions in
the East and South China seas, a global economy that still isn’t producing
enough growth or shared prosperity — the liberal international order that
the United States has worked for generations to build and defend seems to
be under pressure from every quarter. It’s no wonder so many Americans
express uncertainty and even fear about our role and our future in the
world.

In his new book, “World Order,” Henry Kissinger explains the historic scope
of this challenge. His analysis, despite some differences over specific
policies, largely fits with the broad strategy behind the Obama
administration’s effort over the past six years to build a global
architecture of security and cooperation for the 21st century.

During the Cold War, America’s bipartisan commitment to protecting and
expanding a community of nations devoted to freedom, market economies and
cooperation eventually proved successful for us and the world. Kissinger’s
summary of that vision sounds pertinent today: “an inexorably expanding
cooperative order of states observing common rules and norms, embracing
liberal economic systems, forswearing territorial conquest, respecting
national sovereignty, and adopting participatory and democratic systems of
governance.”

This system, advanced by U.S. military and diplomatic power and our
alliances with like-minded nations, helped us defeat fascism and communism
and brought enormous benefits to Americans and billions of others.
Nonetheless, many people around the world today — especially millions of
young people — don’t know these success stories, so it becomes our
responsibility to show as well as tell what American leadership looks like.

This is especially important at a time when many are wondering, as
Kissinger puts it, “Are we facing a period in which forces beyond the
restraints of any order determine the future?”

For me, this is a familiar question. When I walked into the State
Department in January 2009, everyone knew that it was a time of dizzying
changes, but no one could agree on what they all meant. Would the economic
crisis bring new forms of cooperation or a return to protectionism and
discord? Would new technologies do more to help citizens hold leaders
accountable or to help dictators keep tabs on dissidents? Would rising
powers such as China, India and Brazil become global problem-solvers or
global spoilers? Would the emerging influence of non-state actors be
defined more by the threats from terrorist networks and criminal cartels,
or by the contributions of courageous NGOs? Would growing global
interdependence bring a new sense of solidarity or new sources of strife?

President Obama explained the overarching challenge we faced in his Nobel
lecture in December 2009. After World War II, he said, “America led the
world in constructing an architecture to keep the peace. . . . And yet, a
decade into a new century, this old architecture is buckling under the
weight of new threats.”

I was proud to help the president begin reimagining and reinforcing the
global order to meet the demands of an increasingly interdependent age. In
the president’s first term, we laid the foundation, from repaired alliances
to updated international institutions to decisive action on challenges such
as Iran’s nuclear program and the threat from Osama bin Laden.

The crises of the second term underscore that this is a generational
project that will demand a commitment from the United States and its
partners for years to come. Kissinger writes that foreign policy is not “a
story with a beginning and an end,” but “a process of managing and
tempering ever-recurring challenges.” This calls to mind John F. Kennedy’s
observation that peace and progress are “based not on a sudden revolution
in human nature but on a gradual evolution in human institutions . . . a
process — a way of solving problems.”

America, at its best, is a problem-solving nation. And our continued
commitment to renovating and defending the global order will determine
whether we build a future of peace, progress and prosperity in which people
everywhere have the opportunity to live up to their God-given potential.

Much of “World Order” is devoted to exploring this challenge. It is vintage
Kissinger, with his singular combination of breadth and acuity along with
his knack for connecting headlines to trend lines — very long trend lines
in this case. He ranges from the Peace of Westphalia to the pace of
microprocessing, from Sun Tzu to Talleyrand to Twitter. He traces the
Indian view of order back to the Hindu epics; the Muslim view to the
campaigns of Muhammad; the European view to the carnage of the Thirty
Years’ War (which elicits a comparison to the Middle East today); the
Russian view to “the hard school of the steppe, where an array of nomadic
hordes contended for resources on an open terrain with few fixed borders.”
This long view can help us understand issues from Vladimir Putin’s
aggression to Iran’s negotiating strategy, even as it raises the difficult
question of “how divergent historic experiences and values can be shaped
into a common order.”

Given today’s challenges, Kissinger’s analyses of the Asia-Pacific and the
Middle East are particularly valuable.

When it comes to Asia, he notes that all of the region’s rising powers,
China included, have their own visions of regional and global order, shaped
by their own histories and present situations. How we contend with these
divergent visions — building a cooperative relationship with China while
preserving our other relationships, interests and values in a stable and
prosperous region — will go a long way toward determining whether we can
meet the broader global challenge.

In my book “Hard Choices,” I describe the strategy President Obama and I
developed for the Asia-Pacific, centered on strengthening our traditional
alliances; elevating and harmonizing the alphabet soup of regional
organizations, such as ASEAN (the Association of Southeast Asian Nations)
and APEC (the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation organization); and
engaging China more broadly — both bilaterally, through new venues such as
the Strategic and Economic Dialogue, and multilaterally, in settings where
regional pressure would encourage more constructive behavior and shared
decision-making on matters from freedom of navigation to climate change to
trade to human rights. Our “pivot to Asia,” as it came to be known, is all
about establishing a rules-based order in the region that can manage the
peaceful rise of new powers and promote universal norms and values.

This kind of methodical, multilateral diplomacy is often slow and
frustrating, rarely making headlines at home, but it can pay real dividends
that affect the lives of millions of people. And without an effective
regional order, the challenges multiply. Just look at the Middle East.
“Nowhere,” Kissinger observes, “is the challenge of international order
more complex — in terms of both organizing regional order and ensuring the
compatibility of that order with peace and stability in the rest of the
world.”

Kissinger is a friend, and I relied on his counsel when I served as
secretary of state. He checked in with me regularly, sharing astute
observations about foreign leaders and sending me written reports on his
travels. Though we have often seen the world and some of our challenges
quite differently, and advocated different responses now and in the past,
what comes through clearly in this new book is a conviction that we, and
President Obama, share: a belief in the indispensability of continued
American leadership in service of a just and liberal order.

There really is no viable alternative. No other nation can bring together
the necessary coalitions and provide the necessary capabilities to meet
today’s complex global threats. But this leadership is not a birthright; it
is a responsibility that must be assumed with determination and humility by
each generation.

Fortunately, the United States is uniquely positioned to lead in the 21st
century. It is not just because of the enduring strength of our military or
the resilience of our economy, although both are absolutely essential. It
goes deeper than that. The things that make us who we are as a nation — our
diverse and open society, our devotion to human rights and democratic
values — give us a singular advantage in building a future in which the
forces of freedom and cooperation prevail over those of division,
dictatorship and destruction.

This isn’t just idealism. For an international order to take hold and last,
Kissinger argues, it must relate “power to legitimacy.” To that end,
Kissinger, the famous realist, sounds surprisingly idealistic. Even when
there are tensions between our values and other objectives, America, he
reminds us, succeeds by standing up for our values, not shirking them, and
leads by engaging peoples and societies, the sources of legitimacy, not
governments alone. If our might helps secure the balance of power that
underpins the international order, our values and principles help make it
acceptable and attractive to others.

So our levers of leadership are not just about keeping our military strong
and our diplomacy agile; they are about standing up for human rights, about
advancing the rights and role of women and girls, about creating the space
for a flourishing civil society and the conditions for broad-based
development.

This strategic rationale guided my emphasis as secretary of state on using
all the tools of foreign policy, even those sometimes dismissed as “soft.”
I called it “smart power,” and I still believe it offers a blueprint for
sustained American leadership in the decades ahead. We have to play to our
strengths. And in an age when legitimacy is defined from the bottom up
rather than the top down, America is better positioned than our more
autocratic competitors.

Kissinger recognizes this as well. He understands how much the world has
changed since his time in office, especially the diffusion of power and the
growing influence of forces beyond national governments. International
problems and solutions are increasingly centered, in ways both good and
bad, on nongovernmental organizations, businesses and individual citizens.
As a result, foreign policy is now as much about people as it is about
states. Kissinger rightly notes that these shifts require a broader and
deeper order than sufficed in the past. “Any system of world order, to be
sustainable, must be accepted as just — not only by leaders, but also by
citizens,” he writes.

That is true abroad, and it is also true at home. Our country is at its
best, and our leadership in the world is strongest, when we are united
behind a common purpose and shared mission, and advancing shared prosperity
and social justice at home. Sustaining America’s leadership in the world
depends on renewing the American dream for all our people.

In the past, we’ve flirted with isolationism and retreat, but always heeded
the call to leadership when it was needed most. It’s time for another of
our great debates about what America means to the world and what the world
means to America. We need to have an honest conversation together — all of
us — about the costs and imperatives of global leadership, and what it
really takes to keep our country safe and strong.

We have a lot to talk about. Sometimes we’ll disagree. But that’s what
democracy is all about. A real national dialogue is the only way we’re
going to rebuild a political consensus to take on the perils and the
promise of the 21st century. Henry Kissinger’s book makes a compelling case
for why we have to do it and how we can succeed.

*MSNBC: “Hillary Clinton calls out climate change deniers”
<http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/hillary-clinton-calls-out-climate-deniers>*

By Alex Seitz-Wald

September 4, 2014, 9:01 p.m. EDT

Hillary Clinton called out climate change “deniers” at a clean energy
conference in Las Vegas Thursday evening, but revealed little new about
what her own energy policy platform might look like if she decides to run
for president.

Clinton began her remarks at the National Clean Energy Summit by laying out
the problems climate change is already causing today, including extreme
weather and droughts. “[These are] the most consequential, urgent, sweeping
collection of challenges we face,” she said. “No matter what deniers say.”

She went on to make an optimistic pitch for clean energy investment as a
means to simultaneously create jobs, grow the environment, compete with
China, and reduce greenhouse emissions.

“The threat is real, but so is the opportunity,” Clinton said. “America can
be the clean energy superpower for the 21st century.”

During a question and answer session with Obama White House counselor John
Podesta — who is a likely pick to lead Clinton’s potential presidential
campaign, should she pursue that avenue — the former secretary of state
took another swing at those who don’t see the benefits of green tech.

“Aside from the deniers and the special interests and all the other folks
who want to pretend we don’t have a crisis is the fact that we are leaving
money and jobs behind,” she said. “For those on the other side, they have
to answer to the reality they are denying peoples’ jobs and middle class
incomes and upward mobility by their refusal to look to the future.”

Clinton has several hard choices to make on what her energy policy will
look like if she decides to run for president, but — not surprisingly — she
left those decisions up in the air on Thursday.

With regards to natural gas, which has boomed in recent years, the former
secretary of state said new fracking technologies can be part of the
solution, even though they present their own problems. “We have to face
head-on the legitimate, pressing environmental concerns,” she said.

Whoever runs for the Democratic nomination can expect to face pressure from
environmentalists to crack down on fracking. But Clinton simply repeated
almost verbatim the position she lays out in her book, “Hard Choices,”
calling for “smart regulations” which may include “deciding not to drill
when the risks are too high.”

Also, as expected, she did not mention the controversial Keystone XL
pipeline.

In her remarks, Clinton noted that the clean energy future she envisions is
not “some kind of a dream,” pointing to Nevada as an exemplar. Just today,
the electric car manufacturer Telsa announced it had selected the state for
a massive new battery factory that will be powered by wind and solar
energy, she noted.

Clinton touted other states’ work as well, including Iowa, perhaps raising
a few eyebrows since that state hosts the first major primary events for
the presidential elections. “This is a reality that can be brought to
scale,” she said.

On climate regulations, Clinton praised Obamas’ use of executive authority
through the Environmental Protection Agency to reduce greenhouse gasses,
but said more needs to be done. “Now we have to step up and build on that
success,” she said.

Clinton was introduced by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who hosts the
conference and praised Clinton as someone who “understands climate change —
she was first to identify the fact that there is something called climate
change.” Reid noted that in addition to her public work, he appreciated
Clinton’s loyalty to his son, who volunteered on the then-senator’s 2008
presidential campaign.

“I have great affection for this woman,” he added. ”I watch her in action —
she’s the best.”

*Politico: “John Podesta eyed for Hillary Clinton campaign chair”
<http://www.politico.com/story/2014/09/john-podesta-hillary-clinton-campaign-chair-110616.html>*

By Maggie Haberman

September 4, 2014, 6:16 p.m. EDT

In late July, members of an informal group of people who’ve been meeting to
plan outside assistance to a potential Hillary Clinton campaign gathered at
the M Street offices of the Messina Group in Washington, D.C. At the table
was one new and very notable attendee — John Podesta, counselor to
President Barack Obama and a longtime Clinton confidant.

In more than 20 interviews, Podesta was mentioned repeatedly as the person
most likely to take on the role of campaign chairman — or chief executive
officer or another top role, depending on how a potential campaign would be
structured — if Clinton runs in 2016. The interest in Podesta is a
reflection of both Clintons’ comfort and familiarity with him, but also of
his standing among progressive voters with whom Clinton has had a
sometimes-strained relationship.

White House aides would not comment. One administration official said that
what staffers do in their private time is their own concern. And Podesta
declined through White House aides to address discussions about him and a
future campaign.

In late 2013, Podesta was in discussions to become a co-chair of Priorities
USA, someone who could help blend the worlds of Obama, represented by Jim
Messina as the super PAC’s co-chair, and Clinton. The super PAC backed
Obama in 2012 and has morphed into a pro-Clinton entity. Instead, he went
to the White House. Podesta said he would stay for a year, and he has
privately told people he plans to stick to that time frame.

Podesta’s presence at the July 28 meeting, confirmed by several sources,
underscores the likelihood that the veteran of the Clinton White House and
founder of the liberal think tank Center for American Progress appears
interested in playing a major role in a 2016 campaign if Clinton runs. And
it came as Priorities and the other outside groups are increasingly turning
attention to their plans for 2015. At a different working-group meeting
several weeks ago, for instance, attendees intimated that Priorities is
prepared to spend money to defend Clinton in a primary. At the moment,
Priorities is searching for a finance director, several sources said.

Podesta founded CAP years ago and has deep credibility with a group of
voters with which Clinton has at times had strained relations. He is not a
Washington outsider, but he is a highly respected figure in the party who
could draw clear lanes of authority in a campaign, something that was
lacking in Clinton’s last bid.

Several sources familiar with the 2008 campaign said Clinton had wanted
Podesta to play a role in that race, but he had little interest in getting
involved in the dysfunctional set-up.

Sources familiar with her advisers’ current discussions say there have been
conversations about Podesta in a top role.

The two names most discussed for campaign manager or some type of senior
role are Robby Mook, a respected operative who is currently advising
Clinton’s team for the 2014 midterms, according to people familiar with his
involvement; and Guy Cecil, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee
executive director who is well-liked by Bill Clinton and has ties to some
of Hillary Clinton’s advisers. Both are veterans of her 2008 campaign have
strong cheering sections among Clinton insiders.

Installing Podesta, who is not known as a warm and fuzzy figure, in a
chairman role would mark a departure from the way the position was cast in
2008. The chairman of that campaign was Terry McAuliffe, the current
Virginia governor who was a cheerleader and a prolific fundraiser.

With Podesta in the role, the campaign chair would involve a more
operational role, with someone who has run organizations and for whom many
people currently in Washington have worked at one point or another. He also
has the ability, as several sources put it, to be blunt with the candidate.

The other person frequently mentioned by political watchers outside of
Clinton’s orbit as a campaign chairman is Tom Nides, a top Clinton deputy
from her State Department days and current executive at Morgan Stanley.
He’s among the few people seen as having the right stature for a top job.
Yet while Nides is well respected within Clinton’s orbit and by big donors
— and would likely play a major role in a campaign — he was described by
several people as less of a fit for chairman. That’s partly because the job
would be deeply disruptive to his life in a way it wouldn’t be for Podesta.

The chatter about who will fill a second Clinton campaign has been one of
Washington’s and New York’s favorite political parlor games since shortly
after she left the State Department. Still, there has been little
discussion internally about how key jobs will be filled, and few new names
have emerged since Clinton departed Foggy Bottom. Her current, slender
staff would need to grow substantially, but those currently there are all
likely to play significant roles.

Process stories around 2016 staffing have irked Clinton loyalists for
months, in part because of the fantasy-baseball league nature of
speculation from corners of the political world that often don’t have
insight into her thinking for a campaign that doesn’t exist. Lots of input
has been offered about a future campaign, but not all of it is solicited.
Clinton allies also insist she has not yet made up her mind, and shouldn’t
be held captive to the impression that an organizational train is leaving
the station and she needs to get on board because it’s too far along to
stop it.

There are no clear candidates who are being discussed for polling, ads or
communications director, a critical job for a potential candidate whose
relationship with the media has long been a sore point.

Philippe Reines, her longtime adviser and spokesman, will have as much of a
role as he wants in a campaign, according to several sources. But he’s told
friends that he’s preferred moving into a larger strategic role in recent
years, in part because he no longer has interest in the daily media grind.

Minyon Moore, a longtime Clinton adviser, will likely continue to advise
Clinton in some way, as she has since Clinton left State, several people
said. Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin will be highly involved. Clinton’s
former State Department adviser Jake Sullivan is expected to play a key
part on policy. Dan Schwerin, another adviser, is also expected to have a
role.

Most of Clinton’s top advisers from 2008 have said they don’t have an
interest in returning. Neera Tanden, the current president of CAP and a
longtime Clinton adviser dating to her White House days and who worked on
the 2008 campaign, is seen as one of her party’s best policy minds, and an
asset who could play a key role as an informal outside adviser from where
she sits.

Kiki McLean, who has been close to the Clintons for decades and who
directed surrogate operations around the release of her latest book, “Hard
Choices,” would also likely be involved as a consultant.

Ace Smith, a veteran California operative who has been mentioned in reports
as a potential adviser, is also in good standing among Clinton advisers.

Finance chairs and directors have also been a focus of speculation.
Jonathan Mantz, who worked on her 2008 campaign and is a finance consultant
to Priorities, has been mentioned as a potential hire for her campaign. The
person seen as the likeliest to have a major finance role is Dennis Cheng,
who is currently the main fundraiser at her family’s foundation.

There have been two other names mentioned for finance jobs: Michael Pratt,
who was Elizabeth Warren’s finance director and is currently working with
Iowa Senate hopeful Bruce Braley, and Jordan Kaplan, the main fundraiser
for the Democratic National Committee who has won praise for his work there.

As for pollsters, Clinton will have her pick. Several people have suggested
Geoff Garin, who worked on her last campaign and is widely respected, as a
top prospect. So is Joel Benenson, Obama’s pollster and a veteran of two
successful national races. Another name that’s been mentioned has been Anna
Greenberg, who helped engineer Bill de Blasio’s successful mayoral run in
New York City last year.

It is unclear what will happen, meanwhile, with the outside groups that
have been working in support of her. Ready for Hillary, the low-dollar
super PAC that a handful of former Clinton insiders formed soon after the
2012 election, has had success generating positive media and has built a
millions-strong email list and voter-contact base. Some of its boosters
hope elements will be incorporated into a campaign, but that’s not a
forgone conclusion.

It’s also unclear what will happen to Correct the Record, which has
defended Clinton when Republicans attack her on the Benghazi attacks and
other issues. It is helmed by Burns Strider, another 2008 veteran and a
Hillary Clinton favorite.

The flurry of outside-group activity has long given the false impression of
a turn-key operation. Insiders insist there is no grand political plan or
need right now for a political master strategist. That’s not because her
team lacks competent members but because she’s not running for anything
yet, and her focus has primarily been on selling her book.

Many people have passed along suggestions about politics to Clinton’s team
or had conversations about the general lay of the land. Michael Whouley,
who has a relationship dating to 1992 with the Clintons and who, along with
Moore and two other Dewey Square officials, gave Hillary Clinton a
presentation at her Washington home last year about running for president,
has had informal discussions about politics related to 2016.

“He has not been asked for recommendations and he has not made any
recommendations for 2016 staffing,” said Dewey Square spokeswoman Ginny
Terzano. “Michael has over three decades worth of political experience and
regularly gets calls from campaigns asking for good staff recommendations
for this cycle (2014) that has nothing to do with 2016.”

While most observers and allies believe Clinton will ultimately run, people
close to her insist she has not yet made up her mind. Nothing has happened
externally that would make running more difficult for her — no one other
than Warren has caught fire among progressives, and she has repeatedly
insisted she is not running.

That gives Clinton wide running room to make decisions. But she’s made
clear she wants an expanded team and new blood if she runs, and she’ll face
the challenge of accommodating all the people who have long relationships
with her but who may not have an obvious role.

*Politico: “Clinton reviews Kissinger book”
<http://www.politico.com/story/2014/09/hillary-clinton-review-henry-kissinger-book-110615.html>*

By Lucy McCalmont

September 4, 2014, 6:12 p.m. EDT

First Lady. Senator. Secretary of State. Possible 2016 contender. Book
critic?

Hillary Clinton weighed in on Henry Kissinger’s latest book “World Order,”
for the Washington Post, in a review published by the paper Thursday.

“Though we have often seen the world and some of our challenges quite
differently, and advocated different responses now and in the past, what
comes through clearly in this new book is a conviction that we, and
President Obama, share: a belief in the indispensability of continued
American leadership in service of a just and liberal order,” Clinton writes.

However, Clinton’s review of the book, which she calls “vintage Kissinger,”
discusses larger issues of U.S. foreign policy, including that of the Obama
administration and her own experience at the State Department.

Clinton adds that Kissinger’s “long view” and analyses are “particularly
valuable” to determining America’s role on the international stage and its
diplomatic goals.

“For an international order to take hold and last, Kissinger argues, it
must relate ‘power to legitimacy.’ To that end, Kissinger, the famous
realist, sounds surprisingly idealistic,” Clinton writes. “Even when there
are tensions between our values and other objectives, America, he reminds
us, succeeds by standing up for our values, not shirking them, and leads by
engaging peoples and societies, the sources of legitimacy, not governments
alone.”

Clinton, whose memoir “Hard Choices” was released earlier this year, has
also written the foreword for New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand’s
forthcoming book “Off the Sidelines.”

*The Hill: “Clinton: 'US can still do big things'”
<http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/216743-clinton-us-can-still-do-big-things>*

By Laura Barron-Lopez

September 4, 2014, 7:52 p.m. EDT

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Thursday said action on
climate change and renewable energy will send a signal that the "U.S. can
still do big things".

The likely 2016 Democratic front-runner, drove a hard line on the need to
pursue clean energy sources to help mitigate climate change and spur
economic growth, asserting that the U.S. can become the "clean energy
superpower our world needs."

"[Climate change] is the most consequential, urgent, sweeping collection of
challenges we face as a nation and world," Clinton said at the National
Clean Energy Summit 7.0 in Nevada on Thursday. "The data is unforgiving no
matter what the deniers try to assert."

"Sea levels are rising, ice caps are melting, storms and wildfires are
wreaking havoc…but if we come together to make the hard choices America can
be the clean energy superpower of the 21st century," she added to applause.

Clinton fired back at arguments by climate skeptics, and Republicans who
say the U.S. should not put its neck out on climate change when other
nations do little.

If the U.S. doesn't lead, no one will, she said, adding that she of all
people knows what it takes to mobilize leaders internationally.

"This is about our strategic position in the world, this is about our
competitiveness our job creation, our economic growth as well as dealing
with a challenge that we ignore at our detriment and our peril," Clinton
said.

Focusing on wind, solar, and other renewables, Clinton called for
investments as a means to help raise U.S. families into the middle class
faster than traditional energy sources.

Clean energy jobs "tend to pay higher than average wages," Clinton
explained.

Flipping the GOP script that acting on climate is unsustainable, and will
kill jobs, Clinton said: "For those on the other side they have to answer
to the reality they are denying peoples' jobs, and middle class incomes,
and upward mobility by there refusal to look to the future."

The former first lady did touch on the natural gas boom, repeating excerpts
from her book, Hard Choices, when saying gas will be key as a "bridge" to
cleaner sources, but "smart regulations" and "not drilling when the risks
are too high" will be necessary.

Clinton made no mention of the Keystone XL pipeline, which green groups
have pressured her on in recent months.

*CNN: “Clinton: Republicans are denying the United States clean energy
jobs” <http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/04/politics/clinton-gop-jobs/index.html>*

By Dan Merica

September 4, 2014, 8:57 p.m. EDT

Hillary Clinton used a softball climate change question on Thursday to step
up her political rhetoric and hit Republicans for "denying people jobs and
middle-class incomes."

The answer was telling because Clinton turned a benign, nonpartisan
question into a political talking point, something that months ago she
would likely not have done.

"The hardest part for me of this whole false choice debate that has gone on
too long is that aside from the deniers and the folks who want to pretend
that we don't have a crisis is the fact that we are leaving money and jobs
behind," Clinton said at the Clean Energy Summit 7.0, describing the choice
between investing in clean energy and growing the American economy.

Clinton added: "For those on the other side, they have to answer to the
reality they are denying people jobs and middle-class incomes and upward
mobility by their refusal to look to the future."

For months, Clinton has crisscrossed the country as part of her time on the
speaking circuit and on her book tour. The former secretary of state is
widely seen as the front-runner to be the Democrat's presidential nominee
in 2016 and, although she has not announced she is running, she has
admitted she is thinking about it and will likely make a decision at the
start of 2015.

As that decision date moves closer, Clinton appears to be getting more
comfortable with giving political answers. She has also stepped up her
political schedule, with events with a cadre of Democratic groups in
September.

Clinton also weighed in on hydraulic fracturing, a controversial method of
extracting oil.

The former first lady called concerns over fracturing legitimate and
pressing. She added that in light of the practice, "it is crucial that we
put in place smart regulations and enforce them, including deciding not to
drill when the risks are too high."

The answer was similar to what Clinton writes in her memoir "Hard Choices."

Clinton was being interviewed by John Podesta on Thursday. Podesta, a
former chief of staff for Bill Clinton who now works for President Barack
Obama, attended a meeting of Democratic operatives in late July and,
according to Politico, is being eyed as Clinton's likely campaign chairman
in 2016.

His response to her political answer: "That is great. And I think we need
to keep repeating that argument."

*National Journal: “Clinton: America Can Be Clean-Energy 'Superpower'”
<http://www.nationaljournal.com/energy/clinton-america-can-be-clean-energy-superpower-20140904>*

By Jason Plautz

September 4, 2014

The U.S. can become the "clean energy superpower of the 21st Century,"
Hillary Clinton said Thursday, urging businesses and the government to
build up the renewable sector.

"Climate change is the most consequential, urgent, sweeping collection of
challenges we face," the former secretary of state and likely 2016
Democratic frontrunner said Thursday at Harry Reid's annual energy
conference in Las Vegas. "The threat is real and so is the opportunity … if
we make the hard choices."

As expected, Clinton's keynote address at the National Clean Energy Summit
didn't wade into much controversial territory. She offered support for
President Obama's climate action plan and EPA rules that will regulate
power plant emissions and didn't delve into too many specifics of what a
Clinton energy agenda might look like.

Instead, she talked up the opportunities for international climate
agreements and the growth of the clean energy economy at home. She
chastised the "false choice debate" between the environment and the
economy, saying that with the right tax incentives and policies to foster
growth, there was great potential for renewables. She specifically
mentioned energy efficiency retrofits for buildings -- a hallmark of the
Clinton Climate Initiative -- as "the most overlooked opportunity in our
country."

It wasn't all tried-and-true fodder for greens. Clinton did put her weight
behind the natural gas boom that has divided environmentalists, saying that
the fuel offered environmental and economic payoffs with the right
safeguards in place, a position she's taken in the past.

Specifically, she said, drillers needed to regulate leaks of methane, the
potent greenhouse gas that is more powerful than carbon dioxide. She called
for "smart regulations" to keep drilling safe, including "not to drill when
the risks are too high."

She also didn't mention the Keystone XL pipeline, nor did it come up in a
question-and-answer session with White House counselor John Podesta (who
Politico reported is rumored to be the top choice for Clinton's campaign
chairman), although greens have been clamoring to hear her position on the
controversial tar sands project.

A large part of Clinton's speech focused on foreign policy, including the
need to secure a strong international agreement to combat climate change.
Clinton dedicated a chapter of her State Department memoir Hard Choices to
her work at the U.N. climate conference in Copenhagen and again reiterated
her call for a "strong agreement, applicable to all."

The odds of such an agreement, she said, were boosted by Obama's climate
action plan, which she said would "show the world we are serious about
meeting our obligations and show ... the U.S. can still do big things,"
putting the government in a position of leadership.

Clinton also came down hard on Russian president Vladimir Putin, saying
again that she'd like to see European countries diversify their energy
supply to become less reliant on Russian oil. Clinton made a trip to
Ukraine as Secretary of State to discuss energy independence, but said
there seems to be less movement in that direction than she'd like.

"If there's a sea change, it's at low tide," she said. "It hasn't quite got
the momentum that I would like to see, but at least the conversation is
much more serious."

Overall, Clinton said, the work being done in the U.S. to combat climate
change needed to continue accelerating to ensure that the country would
continue to lead on the world's stage.

"We cannot afford to cede leadership in this area," she said. "Our economic
recovery, our efforts against climate change, our strategic position in the
world all will improve if we can build a safe bridge to a clean energy
economy."

*Washington Post blog: Post Politics: “Hillary Clinton’s vacation is
definitely over”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/09/05/a-busy-september-for-hillary-clinton/>*

By Sebastian Payne

September 5, 2014, 6:30 a.m. EDT

Summer vacation is over for Hillary Rodham Clinton. The former secretary of
state spent most of the past few weeks plugging her latest book and going
light on politically-inclined appearances. But post-Labor Day, Clinton is
back at work with a jam-packed schedule -- an itinerary heavy on
potentially campaign-aiding stops, including policy talks, foreign trips,
outreach to key Democratic constituencies, and visits to key early-voting
states.

Here's what she's up to:

Thinking globally. On Wednesday, Clinton made her first visit to the State
Department since leaving in 2013, gathering with five former and present
secretaries of state to break ground at the new United States Diplomacy
Center. "We all know that we will never do anything more challenging in our
lives than to serve these objectives," said Henry Kissinger. "I would say
all of us, except one."

On Thursday, Clinton herself weighed in on Kissinger, reviewing his new
book "World Order" for The Washington Post’s Book World. She got in a nod
to her own book "Hard Choices" in her laudatory assessment of his take on
the situation in the Middle East and Asia.

That wasn't her last internationally-minded trip of the week. On Friday,
Clinton was headed to Mexico to speak at an event for Carlos Slim’s Helu
Foundation. Notably, fellow 2016 candidate Chris Christie also went to
Mexico this week to build up his international cred.

Paying her respects locally. On Sept. 16, Clinton is slated to headline a
fundraiser for an organization that works to aid 9/11 victims, families,
and first responders -- no doubt a reminder to some of her record, as a New
York senator, of backing programs to aid those groups.

Spotlighting policy. On Thursday, Clinton sat down with progressive
favorite John Podesta at a clean-energy conference in Las Vegas. Later this
month, she'll be a heavy presence at the Clinton Global Initiative's 10th
anniversary summit, where world leaders and policy heavyweights are
expected to take the stage.

Building base cred. On Tuesday 9th, Clinton is hosting a fundraiser for the
Democratic Women’s Senate Network at her home in Washington, with tickets
starting at $10,000. A little more than a week later, she'll again make a
plug for the political fortunes of Democratic women, speaking at the DNC's
Women’s Leadership Forum in Washington, DC.

Putting in face time in major primary states. On Sept. 14, both Bill and
Hillary Clinton are slated to attend Sen. Tom Harkin's (D-Iowa) final
annual steak fry in Iowa — marking her first visit to that vital
early-voting state since her loss there in the 2008 caucuses.

*Politico: “Bill Clinton and Charlie Crist: The odd couple”
<http://www.politico.com/story/2014/09/bill-clinton-charlie-crist-florida-2014-election-110625.html>*

By Maggie Haberman

September 5, 2014, 5:04 a.m. EDT

While everyone’s focused on Hillary Clinton’s next potential campaign, it’s
Bill Clinton who’s been racking up frequent-flier miles, trying to get
Democrats elected in the midterms.

He’s crisscrossed the country in the past eight months, doing more than 20
events for Democratic hopefuls from Florida to Kentucky to Rhode Island as
the party’s most sought-after surrogate and rainmaker. In some cases, he’s
gone to bat for candidates who supported his wife six years ago; in others,
he’s gotten behind contenders who have long relationships with the former
first couple. And the former Arkansas chief has an obvious soft spot for
governors, a group that has received little attention from the current
president.

At a campaign rally in Miami Friday, Clinton will test the strength of a
relatively new relationship, with Charlie Crist, the
Republican-turned-Democrat who’s running for his old job as Florida’s
governor. Crist was once a harsh Clinton critic, denouncing him during the
impeachment scandal in the late 1990s — a fact state Republicans have been
quick to resurrect.

But now, as his wife is eyeing another national campaign, the perennial
battleground of Florida looms potentially large for the Clintons. And Bill
Clinton and Crist have developed a rapport, speaking a number of times
since Crist launched his candidacy, multiple sources familiar with the
conversations told POLITICO. Clinton, a famous dispenser of campaign advice
with an eye for the granular in a race, has occasionally chewed over
Crist’s own bid against GOP Gov. Rick Scott.

“Whoever wins Florida is the next president of the United States,” said
John Morgan, a major Democratic donor whose law firm employs Crist. “That’s
just math.”

The governor is “extremely important,” Morgan added. “They control the
secretary of state, voting days, voting hours.”

It wasn’t until Crist won his primary last week against Nan Rich that
Clinton was able to formally back him. Rich was a supporter of Hillary
Clinton, Morgan noted, and now that Crist is the nominee “I think
[Clinton’s] hands are untied.”

Clinton and Crist had their first real dealings in 2010, when Crist was
running for the U.S. Senate as an independent. His advisers sought help
from Bill Clinton to get the Democrat, Rep. Kendrick Meek, a longtime
Clinton ally, to drop out of the race and thwart then-state Sen. Marco
Rubio from winning. Clinton tried, but Meek stayed in and Rubio won. Still,
it established some level of political discussion between the Clinton and
Crist camps.

The appearance with Crist will cap a week of campaigning for Democratic
gubernatorial candidates by Clinton. Earlier, he attended events for
Connecticut Gov. Daniel Malloy and Maine candidate Mike Michaud. While in
Maine, he stopped by Kennebunkport to pay a visit to former President
George H.W. Bush, with whom he has forged a bond since working with him on
post-Hurricane Katrina relief.

Clinton will attend a fundraiser on Saturday for embattled Louisiana Sen.
Mary Landrieu and another one the following weekend for Georgia Democratic
Senate hopeful Michelle Nunn.

The former president did an ad for Rhode Island treasurer candidate Seth
Magaziner, the son of Clinton’s longtime adviser Ira Magaziner. He is doing
a direct mail piece for Nina Turner’s secretary of state race in Ohio,
another key presidential proving ground.

Clinton’s team prefers to let campaigns he helps announce the visits as
they see fit. That typically means as much local exposure as possible to
move voters but little attention in the national media, meaning some events
slip under the Beltway radar.

This month, Clinton will also host a fundraiser for the Democratic
Congressional Campaign Committee, before joining his wife in Iowa for the
final Sen. Tom Harkin Steak Fry in Indianola. Clinton’s appeal is global in
a way that few other surrogates’ is, a far cry from 2010, when the White
House asked him for surgical help in a brutal midterms cycle.

This time around, it’s President Barack Obama whom many campaigns are
steering clear of, and Bill Clinton who is in high demand.

“I’d like to think these are just previews to a robust schedule over the
next eight weeks,” said DCCC Chairman Steve Israel, saying there are 70
House districts in which either Clinton could be a huge help.

At the same time, Bill and Hillary Clinton are expecting a grandchild,
which will most likely affect their political schedule.

“I would imagine … that if the baby is born before the election, he or she
will also be in great demand in these districts,” Israel joked. “I do not
imagine that grandma and grandpa will allow that to happen, however.”

Bill Clinton’s focus has been both future-looking but also personal. He is
deeply invested in races in Arkansas, talking frequently with people there
about how Democratic Sen. Mark Pryor and gubernatorial hopeful Mike Ross
are faring.

Clinton is known for being difficult to control as a principal, with a deep
love for campaigning and a willingness to stop in front of a waiting
microphone even as aides try to shove him along. But despite that
free-wheeling aspect to his political approach, his allies believe the
perception that he is quick to go off-message is unfair.

“There are two politicians who are best at staying on-message and sticking
to the script, and that’s Bill Clinton and Jeanne Shaheen,” said Terry
Shumaker, a co-chair of Clinton’s 1992 and 1996 campaigns in New Hampshire.

“When he campaigns for other candidates, it comes across as very sincere
and also genuine — he’s also knowledgeable about issues in an election
which a lot of surrogates frankly aren’t,” he added. “He just connects with
people in a way that I’ve never seen any other politician do.”

*The New Republic: “President Clinton to Keynote The New Republic’s
Centennial Gala”
<http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119315/president-clinton-keynote-new-republics-centennial-gala>*

[No Writer Mentioned]

September 4, 2014

The New Republic announced today that President Bill Clinton will deliver
the keynote address at the magazine’s centennial gala on Wednesday,
November 19 at the Andrew W. Mellon Auditorium in Washington, DC. The
black-tie event will also include a performance by world-renowned jazz
musician, Wynton Marsalis. "The New Republic was created to shape the
course of American life—and in the course of one hundred years, we've
become an American institution,” said Franklin Foer, editor of The New
Republic. “Our history has made a meaningful difference in public life and
is worthy of tribute—and a big party!"

Madeleine Albright, Christiane Amanpour, Drew Faust, Richard Plepler, Peter
Sarsgaard, Joe Scarborough, Aaron Sorkin, George Stephanopoulos, and Fareed
Zakaria will join the celebration as co-hosts.

In addition to the gala, to commemorate its one hundredth year, The New
Republic will release an anthology on September 16 and an anniversary issue
on November 10. Insurrections of the Mind: 100-Years of Politics and
Culture in America, edited by Foer and published by HarperCollins, is a
collection of more than 50 of the magazine’s most seminal essays from the
past century. Foer, Chris Hughes, and other editors will give book talks
across the country throughout the fall.

The anniversary issue aims to be the best issue of The New Republic yet.
Double in size, it will feature pieces by Jonathan Chait, Hendrik
Hertzberg, Michael Lewis, Alec MacGillis, Martha Nussbaum, Hanna Rosin,
Noam Scheiber, Judith Shulevitz, Jason Zengerle, and others. The
anniversary issue will pay tribute to the magazine’s history, but the focus
will be on the next American century and topics that will drive the
conversation for the next 100 years.

Over the next three months, readers will notice digital features
highlighting the anniversary, including 100 Year 100 Stories, a selection
of 100 notable stories from the archives featured daily on newrepublic.com.
The New Republic kicks off the celebration today by unveiling its 100-year
logo.

“From the gala to the special issue, celebrating our centennial this fall
is just as much about envisioning the future of the institution as it is
about honoring its storied history,” said Chris Hughes, owner of The New
Republic. “The New Republic has had the privilege of contributing to the
national discourse for the past 100 years and we are eager to contribute to
the next 100 as well.”

The New Republic celebrates its one hundredth with the help of Credit
Suisse, a centennial sponsor, and Diageo, a gala sponsor.

*News and Observer blog: Under the Dome: “Bill Clinton coming to Chapel
Hill for Hagan”
<http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/09/04/4122084_bill-clinton-coming-to-chapel.html?rh=1>*

By Mary Cornatzer

September 4, 2014

Back in March, Dome asked whether former President Bill Clinton would help
Sen. Kay Hagan’s campaign. We’re about to find out.

Clinton is the special guest at a Sept. 30 luncheon for Hagan in Chapel
Hill.

Clinton has been much in demand on the campaign circuit, particularly in
red states. This month he’s also scheduled for Louisiana (Sen. Mary
Landrieu) and Georgia (Michelle Nunn).

Dome must point out that while Clinton is widely popular in the South –
throngs came out to see him in North Carolina when he campaigned for his
wife in 2008 – he did not carry the state during either of his two
presidential victories.

*Washington Post Magazine: “The Gillibrand mystique: Is memoir a step along
presidential pathway?”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/magazine/the-gillibrand-mystique-is-memoir-a-step-along-presidential-pathway/2014/09/04/c6ba6346-23c6-11e4-86ca-6f03cbd15c1a_story.html>*

By Luisita Lopez Torregrosa

September 4, 2014, 6:17 p.m. EDT

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand is sitting at a corner table in the Senate dining
room, eating a salad and ducking questions about her political ambitions,
when she spots fellow Democrat Elizabeth Warren walking in. Minutes later,
Gillibrand has ushered her interviewer to meet the Massachusetts senator.
The two women, who are frequently mentioned as possible backups to Hillary
Clinton for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination, cheerfully trade
pleasantries and compliments.

“She’s great,” Gillibrand says.

“She’s really amazing,” Warren says.

Though brief, the exchange captures Gillibrand’s political skill, as she
seizes on an opportunity to make a reporter feel like an insider and, at
the same time, showcases cordial relations with a colleague others are
casting as a potential rival.

Telegenic and brainy, the 47-year-old junior senator from New York and
mother of two has become a visible face in the Senate, a regular at women’s
forums and policy talk shows, and something of a political pinup (The Hill
named her one of its 50 most beautiful in 2010). An obscure second-term
House member when appointed to fill Clinton’s seat in 2009, she has won
election and reelection, both by landslides.

“If Hillary Clinton doesn’t run in 2016, I wouldn’t be surprised to see
Kirsten Gillibrand jump in,” says Larry Sabato, director of the Center for
Politics at the University of Virginia. “Gillibrand seems to have the
ambition to do it.”

In her sixth year in the Senate, working out of Clinton’s former quarters
in the Russell Senate Office Building, Gillibrand has carved out territory
including military and middle-class issues, and fashioned an image as a
tenacious fighter for women. Now, she has taken another step along the
modern-day passage to the presidency: writing a political memoir. With an
introduction by Clinton, “Off the Sidelines: Raise Your Voice, Change the
World” is due out Sept. 9. Like Gillibrand’s political action committee of
the same name, it exhorts women to take the lead in politics, in business
and at home. “I wrote the book to encourage women to use their voices,’’
she says.

Gillibrand says she’s “worried that the women’s movement is dead.”
Acknowledging that some feminist leaders might find that characterization
inflammatory, she says, “I think those of us who are in the trenches
recognize we’re in a tough place.” While citing achievements such as
keeping abortion-rights efforts alive and helping women advance in the
workforce, she contends that “there’s no functional movement where we’re
working together and making sure all women are heard on all these issues.”

With “Off the Sidelines,” she says, “I’m creating a call to … create the
women’s movement we need for this generation.”

The title is “perfect for her, since she is not on the sidelines one minute
of her life,” says Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), Gillibrand’s
close friend and softball team co-captain.

So, to continue the analogy, the question becomes this: If Gillibrand is
off the sidelines, where is she going? Is she headed for the quarterback
position? Is she running for president?

“I would say that I’m supporting Hillary in 2016,” the senator says, “and I
am going to fight very hard to see that she wins.”

And if Clinton doesn’t run?

Gillibrand shrugs.

Political books serve different purposes: campaign tools, ego boosters,
policy tracts, coming-of-age reminiscences. Gillibrand’s has a bit of each.
It tells the story of Kirsten Elizabeth Rutnik, a middle-class Roman
Catholic Albany schoolgirl who was driven to excel and influenced by a line
of strong-willed, iconoclastic women who cared little about public opinion.

Her maternal great-grandmother, Mimi, an Irish immigrant, worked at an
ammunition arsenal during World War II, kicked her husband out of the house
for drinking too much and chose to raise her children alone. Mimi’s
daughter, Kirsten’s grandmother, Dorothea “Polly” McLean Noonan became a
prominent figure in Albany and an intimate of longtime mayor Erastus
Corning. Salty-tongued and brazen, she was a leader of the Albany
Democratic Party machine, doling out patronage and favors, organizing
government secretaries known as “Polly’s Girls,” and heading the Albany
Democratic Women’s Club.

Kirsten (everyone called her Tina) learned campaign basics from her
grandmother, stuffing envelopes, sticking bumper stickers on cars, handing
out fliers and knocking on doors. “I really wanted to follow my grandmother
into politics,” she says, “and I liked how assured she was, and I liked
that she was passionate about what she did.”

Kirsten’s mother, also named Polly, founded a law firm in Albany with her
husband, Douglas P. Rutnik. Polly Rutnik ran the home as well as practicing
law. She cooked, did most of the housework, looked after her three
children, Douglas, Kirsten and Erin, and found time to earn a black belt in
karate and hunt turkeys for Thanksgiving. “She prioritized both work and
family; I never imagined I would do otherwise,” Gillibrand writes in the
book. (Kirsten’s parents divorced when she was 22.)

Kirsten learned to cope with stress and competition on the tennis court,
and learned to argue at home, with her father. “I fought about everything,”
she says. “Can I go to a party? Can I go to a concert?” He called her
Foghorn and Loudmouth.

Despite standing up to her father, “I was a massive kiss-[a--] and lived
for positive reinforcement,” she writes in her book. “As a child, I wrote
in perfect cursive penmanship, thanks to the nuns. I did all my homework as
soon as I got home, and I kept my room clean.” She was a goody-two-shoes,
except for her temper and her elbows-out determination to excel. “Whatever
I did — debating, playing the piano or tennis, selling Girl Scout cookies —
I had to earn a gold star. ”

She went to Catholic schools from kindergarten to middle school and
attended Emma Willard, an elite all-girls high school. At Dartmouth, she
ignored campus politics, joined a sorority, majored in Asian studies
(spending a semester in Beijing, where her roommate was Connie Britton of
TV’s “Nashville,” who remains a friend) and graduated magna cum laude.Only
after earning a degree at the UCLA School of Law and landing a job at the
international law firm Davis Polk & Wardwell in New York City did
Gillibrand get involved in politics.

“The voice that inspired me to take my life in a new direction came in a
pink suit,” she writes. On Sept. 5, 1995, first lady Hillary Clinton spoke
in Beijing at the Fourth World Conference on Women, forging the phrase that
became a mantra for women worldwide: Human rights are women’s rights and
women’s rights are human rights. Hearing about the speech made Gillibrand
wish she had been there and had been part of the conversation. And it
brought back her childhood dream of being in politics, like her grandmother.

Shortly afterward, Gillibrand heard Clinton speak at the Women’s Leadership
Forum in New York, which she joined. “That’s what got me into the nuts and
bolts of New York City politics,” Gillibrand says. In 1996, she was an
unpaid fundraiser in President Bill Clinton’s reelection campaign and, four
years later, volunteered to raise money for Vice President Al Gore. After
Gore’s defeat, she went to work at Boies, Schiller & Flexner — whose star
attorney, David Boies, had represented Gore in Bush v. Gore — and was made
partner, earning about $450,000 a year.

She kept her hand in politics, fundraising for Hillary Clinton’s senatorial
campaign and training to run for office herself, moving to her firm’s
Albany office so she could vie for a congressional seat close to her
Upstate roots. In 2006, she ran for the conservative 20th Congressional
District against a popular Republican.

She proved to be a tireless campaigner and prolific fundraiser, amassing
$4.6 million, a stunning sum for a congressional campaign. Her opponent,
Rep. John E. Sweeney, who portrayed her as an out-of-touch, rich
Manhattanite, was leading in the polls. But shortly before Election Day, a
police report was leaked to newspapers saying that Sweeney’s wife had
called 911 to say he was beating her. His camp said Gillibrand leaked the
report; she declined to say. She won by 6 points.

Despite that upset, Gillibrand was unknown in much of New York when Gov.
David A. Paterson appointed her to fill Clinton’s Senate term in a
controversial move seen as a nod to her gender and Upstate support. It
didn’t help that she had been the second choice, after Caroline Kennedy,
yet ahead of more experienced representatives. Gillibrand was sworn in on
Jan. 27, 2009, at 42 then the youngest member of the U.S. Senate.

From the start she ran into a wall. Some colleagues and newspaper
columnists called her Tracy Flick, referring to the blond, ambitious Reese
Witherspoon character in the film “Election.” Some older congressmen poked
at her weight. “Don’t lose too much weight now. I like my girls chubby,”
said one.

In New York City’s liberal circles, her 15 years as a highly paid corporate
lawyer and two years representing a conservative district didn’t sit well.
She was seen as a political lightweight and labeled pro-gun, pro-Wall
Street, anti-immigration and pro-tobacco. (During the tobacco wars of the
1990s, she had helped represent Altria, parent company of Philip Morris.)
Enlisting supporters like the Clintons, she countered with a campaign to
win over blacks, Hispanics and other liberals. She won election to a Senate
term in 2010, 63 to 35 percent, then reelection two years ago, 72to 26
percent.

Along with broadening her electoral base, Gillibrand has come to be
associated with several high-profile issues. She was a leader in the
successful struggle to repeal “don’t ask, don’t tell.” She was on the front
lines of the campaign to gain approval of marriage equality in the New York
legislature, and was among the first Democrats to call for bringing combat
troops home from Afghanistan. To address the plight of low- and
middle-income families, she has fashioned an ambitious agenda that includes
raising the minimum wage, affordable day care and universal pre-K
education. She established Off the Sidelines as a PAC in 2011 and raised $1
million for female candidates in the 2012 cycle. Her goal is to double that
for the midterms this year, and she says she is close to doing it.

Another issue she has focused on: sexual abuses in the armed forces. She
waged a yearlong battle for her bill to strip commanders of their authority
to prosecute those cases and give that responsibility to military lawyers
outside the chain of command. Military leaders opposed the measure, and in
March, her proposal came up five votes short of the 60 needed to advance to
the Senate floor. Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri, a Democrat, led the
fight to block it, offering bipartisan reforms that kept prosecution within
the chain of command.

“I was devastated,” Gillibrand says.

“She is formidable,” says McCaskill, who is now working with Gillibrand on
legislation to curb sexual assaults on university campuses. “She doesn’t
stop. She lobbies every senator over and over. I tell people, ‘If you are
going to oppose Kirsten Gillibrand, you need to pack your lunch, because
you won’t have time to go out.’ ”

Hill watchers often cite Gillibrand’s political appeal. “She has
impressively emerged from the paralyzed muck of the U.S. Senate because she
offers a progressive vision,” says Steve Clemons, a senior fellow at the
New America Foundation and an editor at large at the Atlantic. Gillibrand
“brings to her game a love of detail and dealmaking reminiscent of LBJ.”

And while Sabrina Schaeffer, executive director of the conservative
Independent Women’s Forum, opposes Gillibrand’s legislative agenda, she
also says Gillibrand has a “girl-next-door personality women and men can
identify with” and “has checked off all the right boxes on women’s issues.”

But Michael Barone, a political analyst and resident fellow at the American
Enterprise Institute and contributor to Fox News, dismisses Gillibrand,
saying: “I don’t think many conservatives have given much thought to her.
They see her as a conventional liberal in a safe seat with no national
career in the short term.”

Gillibrand’s memoir, which she will promote on a coast-to-coast tour this
month, will generate talk of a presidential run no matter how much she
fends off the question.

“It’s always a bit amusing when a relatively junior senator decides to
offer up an autobiography,” says U-Va.’s Sabato. “That means one thing:
She’s interested in higher office.”

In style, however, Gillibrand’s book differs significantly from previous
political memoirs. Hers is a quick read, chatty, candid, with self-help and
even diet advice. “It’s not a policy book,” she says.

Beltway commentators may find it frothy, but she says she wants to reach a
wider set of readers, especially women, people who may not want an
insider’s account of life in Washington. “Empowerment of all women is
important,” she says, not just those who are seeking to crack the ceiling,
or lean in or lean out.

She bristles at the debate about whether women can have it all. “It’s an
absurd argument.” The very phrase “have it all,” she says, implies that
women are greedy and demeans stay-at-home mothers. For many mothers, she
says, working is a financial necessity, not a choice, and she says she is
particularly concerned about low-and-middle-income women, especially single
moms. “I don’t have their tough choices, but I share the same experience
that they have,” she says. “We all want to be good moms. We all want to be
good at our jobs. We all want to provide for our children.”

Still, if the question isn’t about having it all, many who spend time
around Kirsten Gillibrand seem to wonder how she does it all. She and her
husband, Jonathan Gillibrand, a British-born financial manager, moved to
Washington in 2007, but for the past two years, he has spent workweeks in
New York City while their two boys stay with her.

“She is taking care of two small children and working her head off in the
Senate,” says Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, among the Republicans who backed
Gillibrand on the military bill. “It’s not like she has live-in help the
way a lot of people in the Senate do, and I just don’t know how she does
it.”

Gillibrand’s mornings begin between 6 and 6:30, when Henry, her 6-year-old,
a live wire who is starting first grade, wakes her. “Almost always, I feel
exhausted when I get up,” she says. She fixes breakfast for the boys, packs
their lunches, does laundry or dishes, checks their homework and drives
them to school. If she has time she stops at the gym for a workout and
arrives in her office by 9. She’s usually on Capitol Hill until late
afternoon when she gets away to pick up the boys at school.

A trim 5-foot-2, she gains weight easily — 50 pounds when she was pregnant
with Henry. When she got to the Senate, she went on a crash regimen,
dropped her size to a 4 or 6 from 16, and was featured in Vogue. “If I eat
more than 1,400 calories a day, I gain weight,” she says. She cooks almost
every weeknight, typically chicken, fish or lean beef, with salad and
vegetables. A master juggler, she can cook, sweep, pick up schoolbooks and
children’s shoes lying about, and carry on a conversation at the same time.

After dinner, she might take Theo, who is 10 and in fifth grade, to sports
practice or whatever is on his schedule. Like their mother, the boys lead
busy lives: baseball, soccer, squash, T-ball, piano, singing and taekwondo.
She tries to get to bed about 10. “If I don’t get enough sleep, I get
irritable and emotional.”

The Gillibrands live in a three-story brick rowhouse on Capitol Hill. They
have a sparsely furnished living room with an upright piano. The kitchen, a
comfortable open space with a dining table, has framed photographs of the
senator with the boys, Henry’s crayon drawings, and notes on the
refrigerator door. Parked out back is an old Porsche belonging to
Gillibrand’s husband, currently working with Formula One racing. “We use my
van to get around,” she says.

The couple met in 1999 when Jonathan, two years her junior, was getting an
MBA at Columbia and she was working at Davis Polk. They were married in
2001. “We’re opposites in many ways,” she says. “That’s probably why it
works.” Jonathan, who is private, methodical and thoughtful, has been
encouraging her political career, offering cautious advice and absorbing
criticism. But her first year in the House was difficult, as she recounts
in her book. They lived with Theo in a Virginia suburb. Jonathan hated
Washington and had no job. They argued. At one point he told her, “Your job
is the reason we don’t have more kids!” She realized he had a point. Soon
she was pregnant with Henry.

When the family is together on weekends “we do things the boys like to
do,’’ usually sports, she says. “Jonathan is really good about chores. I do
not nag him. I do not ask him to do things. I typically do the cooking
because it relaxes me. But Jonathan helps clean up. He’s is more supportive
than the average husband.”

For someone who is all about women forging ahead, it may seem ironic that
she takes on the majority of parenting duties. But, she says: “I think most
working moms do it all. They do a lot of caregiving. They do a lot of
housework. And they work full time.”

The next morning in her busy office, Henry is with her, slouching on the
sofa, playing with pieces on a chessboard and trying hard to obey his
mother and keep quiet.

Settling into a favorite wingback chair, Gillibrand says she wants to
recruit 6 million women to active service in politics, businesses and
communities. Six million is the number of women who entered the workforce
to replace the men who had gone to battle during World War II.

Looking up at a poster of Rosie the Riveter, the advertising character who
represented those women, Gillibrand echoes, “We can do it!”

*Wall Street Journal: “Jeb Bush Sends Signals About 2016 Presidential Run”
<http://online.wsj.com/articles/former-florida-gov-jeb-bush-sends-signals-about-2016-presidential-run-1409876227>*

By Brody Mullins and Beth Reinhard

September 4, 2014, 8:17 p.m. EDT

[Subtitle:] GOP Fundraisers Say Former Florida Governor's Aides Spread
Word: Wait Until He Makes Up Mind

WASHINGTON—Republican strategists and fundraisers say Jeb Bush's closest
advisers have been quietly spreading the word that they should avoid
committing to other possible presidential candidates until he decides on
his own course after the November election.

The message from Mr. Bush's inner circle during the past few months is in
part an effort to bat down speculation that the former Florida governor has
ruled out a 2016 run, say GOP donors and strategists who have spoken with
the Bush camp. The message, as one put it, is: "Before you do anything, let
us know."

Jim Nicholson, a Bush supporter who served in President George W. Bush's
cabinet, said: "I think the chances are better than 50-50 that he runs, and
that is based on some conversations I've had with members of the Bush
family."

Mr. Bush's aides aren't actively making calls but responding to supporters
who are fielding inquiries from other potential candidates, according to
those involved in the conversations.

Mr. Bush is a top choice of the establishment wing of the Republican Party.
His entry would help define the policy fights of the primary process, as
his support for overhauling immigration law and for the Common Core
national educational standards has drawn strong opposition from many
conservatives.

Mr. Bush, who is 61 years old, has said the impact of a presidential run on
his family would be a paramount concern. One of his three children, Jeb
Bush Jr., said the matter hasn't come up in family gatherings, though the
issue is "the 800-pound gorilla in the room.''

"A lot of people are waiting to see what Dad does,'' the junior Mr. Bush,
who works at his father's Miami-area business consulting firm, said in an
interview Thursday. "There's a lot of pressure to run."

Mr. Bush wasn't available for comment, a spokeswoman said. A top adviser,
Sally Bradshaw, said: "There is no organized effort to actively recruit
support for a presidential campaign. He is seriously considering the race
and will make a decision sometime after November."

Mike Feldman, an aide on Bill Clinton's 1992 campaign, said both Mr. Bush
and likely Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton would campaign with
tremendous advantages—and baggage—due to their families' long political
history.

"Both of them would have to wrestle with the trade-offs involved in
emphasizing their considerable experience and presenting a vision for the
future while having to defend their records and litigating the past," he
said.

Mr. Bush has built a life outside politics since leaving public office in
2007, serving on corporate boards, heading a business consulting firm and
leading two educational think tanks.

His mother, former first lady Barbara Bush, has said she hopes he doesn't
run, given that the nation has already been led by his father and brother.

The outreach from Mr. Bush's aides came amid speculation this summer that
he was leaning against a run, due in part to reports that he was raising
money for private-equity ventures when other potential candidates were
visiting early-primary states.

Attention among some in the GOP returned to Mitt Romney, the party's
nominee in 2012, who has said he is "not running,'' but has allowed that
"circumstances can change.'' Messrs. Bush and Romney would compete for a
similar set of fundraisers and political hands.

Many donors are both looking for a signal of intent from Mr. Bush but also
are happy to stay on the sidelines until after the midterm elections, when
the field will start to crystallize. For them, Mr. Bush's indecision is
helpful.

"It's frozen the field a bit, in that it's a convenient excuse for finance
people to stay neutral and wait to commit," said Republican strategist Dave
Carney, a top adviser to Rick Perry's 2012 campaign who worked in the White
House for George W. Bush.

"It's not like Jeb would walk into the race and clear the field, but his
gravitas and fundraising network makes him a first-class competitor," Mr.
Carney said.

In addition to keeping potential donors and supporters on deck, Mr. Bush is
taking other steps that typically precede a presidential campaign:
traveling the country, engaging in public policy debates and raising money
for his party.

A newly established fundraising committee allows him to funnel donations
from his financial backers to GOP candidates key to winning a majority in
the U.S. Senate.

Mr. Bush is slated to headline a Sept. 23 event in Tampa that organizers
hope will raise as much as $1 million for GOP Senate candidates Cory
Gardner in Colorado, Joni Ernst in Iowa, Monica Wehby in Oregon, Tom Cotton
in Arkansas and Dan Sullivan in Alaska. A Bush aide said the goal was
$500,000.

The host committee of more than three dozen people is expected to form the
backbone of a finance committee should Mr. Bush run for president. Chairmen
include John Rood, a real-estate developer and the former ambassador to the
Bahamas; Al Hoffman, a real-estate developer and former Republican National
Committee finance chairman; and John Kirtley, a school-choice proponent and
the co-founder of the KLH Capital investment firm.

"I think of it as a fan club and a team that would be ready to work on
behalf of his presidential campaign if he decides to run," said Jorge
Arrizurieta, a longtime supporter of Mr. Bush and his family. "If the event
is successful, that will be helpful to him as a potential presidential
candidate, but the objective is to make sure Republicans are successful in
the current election cycle."

Mr. Bush also is planning to attend fundraisers for Illinois gubernatorial
candidate Bruce Rauner on Sept. 18 in Chicago and Senate Minority Leader
Mitch McConnell in Coral Gables on Sept. 19.

He already has helped raise money for a number of GOP candidates, many of
them in states crucial to winning the 2016 nomination. They have included
Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad, South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, Nevada Gov.
Brian Sandoval and Florida Gov. Rick Scott.

"He's definitely got a lot of favors out there if he decides to pull the
trigger," said Florida-based consultant Mike Hanna, who worked on Mr.
Bush's gubernatorial campaigns.

*New York Times: “New Book Says C.I.A. Official in Benghazi Held Up Rescue”
<http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/09/05/world/africa/new-book-says-cia-official-in-benghazi-held-up-rescue.html?_r=1>*

By David D. Kirkpatrick

September 4, 2014

CAIRO — Five commandos guarding the C.I.A. base in Benghazi, Libya, in
September 2012 say that the C.I.A. station chief stopped them from
interceding in time to save the lives of Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens
and an American technician during the attack on the diplomatic mission
there.

In a new book scheduled for release next week and obtained by The New York
Times, the commandos say they protested repeatedly as the station chief
ordered them to wait in their vehicles, fully armed, for 20 minutes while
the attack on the diplomatic mission was unfolding less than a mile away.

“If you guys do not get here, we are going to die!” a diplomatic security
agent then shouted to them over the radio, the commandos say in the book,
and they left the base in defiance of the chief’s continuing order to
“stand down.”

The book, titled “13 Hours,” is the first public account of the night’s
events by any of the American security personnel involved in the attack.
The accusation that the station chief, referred to in the book only as
“Bob,” held back the rescue opens a new front in a fierce political battle
over who is at fault for the American deaths.

Republicans have blamed President Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton, then
the secretary of state, for the security failure.

American officials have previously acknowledged that the Central
Intelligence Agency security team paused to try to enlist support from
Libyan militia allies. But the book is the first detailed account of the
extent of the delay, its consequences for the rescue attempt, and who made
the decisions.

The commandos’ account — which fits with the publicly known facts and
chronology — suggests that the station chief issued the “stand down” orders
on his own authority. He hoped to enlist local Libyan militiamen, and the
commandos speculate that he hoped the Libyans could carry out the rescue
alone to avoid exposing the C.I.A. base.

No meaningful Libyan help ever materialized.

In an emailed statement on Thursday, a senior intelligence official said “a
prudent, fast attempt was made to rally local support for the rescue effort
and secure heavier weapons.” The official said “there was no
second-guessing those decisions being made on the ground” and “there were
no orders to anybody to stand down in providing support.”

The commandos were former members of American Special Forces teams hired by
the intelligence agency as private contractors. Two of the team, both
former Navy Seals, died fighting the attackers at the C.I.A. base later
that night. Five others are credited as co-authors of “13 Hours,” which was
written with their cooperation by Mitchell Zuckoff, a professor of
journalism at Boston University. Mark Geist, Kris Paronto and John Tiegen
are credited by name, and two of the authors use pseudonyms.

They say that they learned that the mission’s building had been set on fire
during the short drive there, from another plea for help over the radio.
The ambassador and the technician, Sean Smith, suffocated in the smoke.

No American fired a weapon of any kind in defense of the mission until the
C.I.A. commandos reached the compound, more than 40 minutes after the
attack began, the commandos say. The Libyan guards hired to protect the
mission quickly retreated. The handful of diplomatic security agents,
caught by surprise and outnumbered, withdrew to separate buildings without
firing a shot.

One of the commandos fired grenades to help disperse the attackers and
clear an entrance to the mission. They later exchanged fire when the
attackers returned for a second assault. And the commandos say that after
pulling back to the C.I.A. base they fought off-and-on gun battles with
fighters lurking in the shadows outside for much of the night.

Although the commandos write of several Libyans who risked their lives to
help the Americans, the difficulty of discerning friend from foe is a
recurring theme. They write that a supportive militia leader who appeared
to be helping them approach the mission also said he was talking on the
phone with the attackers, trying to negotiate.

“What’s the difference between how Libyans look when they’re coming to help
you versus when they’re coming to kill you?” the commandos joked with the
diplomatic security agents. “Not much.”

The contractors say they raced so quickly to arm themselves when they heard
the alarm that one failed to put on underwear. Another went into the battle
in cargo shorts.

Then, fully armed, they found themselves waiting inside their armored
vehicles, making small talk.

“Hey, we gotta go now! We’re losing the initiative!” Mr. Tiegen says he
complained to the station chief, who he says replied, “No, stand down, you
need to wait.”

“We are going to have the local militia handle it,” the chief added later,
according to the commandos.

*Calendar:*

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

·  September 5 – Mexico: Sec. Clinton speaks at Carlos Slim’s charity event
(Bloomberg
<http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-03/hillary-clinton-follows-christie-to-mexico-for-carlos-slim-event.html>
)

·  September 9 – Washington, DC: Sec. Clinton fundraises for the DSCC at
her Washington home (DSCC
<https://d1ly3598e1hx6r.cloudfront.net/sites/dscc/files/uploads/9.9.14%20HRC%20Dinner.pdf>
)

·  September 12 – New York, NY: Sec. Clinton headlines a DGA fundraiser (
Twitter <https://twitter.com/amychozick/status/507209428274143234>)

·  September 14 – Indianola, IA: Sec. Clinton headlines Sen. Harkin’s Steak
Fry (LA Times
<http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/politicsnow/la-pn-tom-harkin-clinton-steak-fry-20140818-story.html>
)

·  September 15 – Washington, DC: Sec. Clinton speaks at the Transcatheter
Cardiovascular Therapeutics Conference (CRF
<http://www.crf.org/tct/agenda/keynote-address>)

·  September 15 – Washington, DC: Sec. Clinton speaks at Legal Services
Corp. 40th Anniversary (Twitter
<https://twitter.com/AP_Ken_Thomas/status/507549332846178304>)

·  September 16 – New York, NY: Sec. Clinton headlines a 9/11 Health Watch
fundraiser (NY Daily News
<http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/hillary-clinton-mark-9-11-anniversary-nyc-fundraiser-responders-kin-blog-entry-1.1926372>
)

·  September 19 – Washington, DC: Sec. Clinton fundraises for the DNC with
Pres. Obama (CNN
<http://edition.cnn.com/2014/08/27/politics/obama-clinton-dnc/index.html>)

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

·  October 6 – Ottawa, Canada: Sec. Clinton speaks at Canada 2020 event (Ottawa
Citizen
<http://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/hillary-clinton-speaking-in-ottawa-oct-6>
)

·  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 14 – San Francisco, CA: Sec. Clinton keynotes
salesforce.com Dreamforce
conference (salesforce.com
<http://www.salesforce.com/dreamforce/DF14/highlights.jsp#tuesday>)

·  October 28 – San Francisco, CA: Sec. Clinton fundraises for House
Democratic women candidates with Nancy Pelosi (Politico
<http://www.politico.com/story/2014/08/hillary-clinton-nancy-pelosi-110387.html?hp=r7>
)

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