Hillary Clinton Emails: Secret Negotiations With New York Times, Trade Bill Lobbying Revealed

[TubbersUK]

cross posted from GD

Hillary Clinton Emails: Secret Negotiations With New York Times, Trade Bill Lobbying Revealed In Latest State Department Release

The latest batch of emails dating back to Hillary Clinton’s tenure as U.S. secretary of state shows her appearing to lobby members of the Senate on controversial trade bills and her office communicating with the New York Times about holding a sensitive article. The State Department release of documents on her private email server Friday came the day before the Democratic presidential candidate heads into the Nevada caucuses.

Other emails show Clinton seeming to personally lobby her former Democratic colleagues in the Senate to support free trade agreements (FTAs) with Colombia, Panama and South Korea. She had previously told voters she would work to block the Colombian and South Korean pacts.

An email Oct. 8, 2011, to Clinton from her aide Huma Abedin gave notes about the state of play in Congress on the proposed trade pacts. The notes provided Clinton “some background before you make the calls” to legislators.

Two days later in an email titled “FTA calls,” Clinton wrote to aides indicating she had spoken to Sens. Jack Reed of Rhode Island and Jim Webb of Virginia, both Democrats. She told the aides she had talked with “Webb who is strong in favor of all 3” trade agreements, and then asked, “So why did I call him?” — indicating she was otherwise phoning to try to convince wavering lawmakers to support the deals.

Only three years earlier, Clinton wooed organized labor during her presidential campaign with promises to oppose those same deals. She called the South Korea agreement “inherently unfair.” She also said, “I will do everything I can to urge the Congress to reject the Colombia Free Trade Agreement.” Clinton has lately courted organized labor’s support for her current presidential bid by pledging to oppose the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement, a deal she repeatedly touted while secretary of state.

http://www.ibtimes.com/hillary-clinton-emails-secret-negotiations-new-york-times-trade-bill-lobbying-2315809?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

[yourout]

1. I bet this won't show up in the MSM. And I bet Maddow will not touch it either.

This stuff is toxic to Hillary and Rachael's back must be getting sore from all the water she has been carrying for her.

Maybe she should go to Flint and carry some water for them.

[leftofcool]

7. Rachel has been to Flint and has carried water.

[SusanCalvin]

27. That is great, but

As a Rachel fan, even I can see that something fishy is going on with her show. At least I think so.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

49. How? No fish can survive in Flint River.

Then again, neither can humans.

This hole steaming mess is just so . Hillarian.

[silvershadow]

57. Rachel has had a certain an obvious change of some kind. Separate and apart from

her hard work on Flint, which I applaud. Flint isn't the reason. I would say that is kind of a red herring.

PS: Flint River should be renamed as a Hazardous Waste dump. And should have Danger placards posted every 50 feet, on both sides of the river, for a fair stretch on feet or miles.

[tiredtoo]

61. keep in mind Rachel works for MSNBC

Another corporate giant. Another foe of Bernie. Not necessarily Rachel but she does have to keep her employer pleased.

[raindaddy]

98. Exactly.. The reason Cenk chose to leave is he wouldn't play along with the establishment Dems......

[frylock]

130. Yeah, well, principles don't pay the bills, do they?

[raindaddy]

140. Actually in Cenk's case they do.....

He chose to retain his journalistic integrity and move to the net...

http://digiday.com/publishers/the-young-turks-interview/

[libdem4life]

147. And Big Ed is over at RT now. Shout out for Cenk and Anna !!!

[raindaddy]

148. Big Ed and TYT !!!

[Plucketeer]

162. I'd be willing to be Cenk isn't behind

on any payments or missed any meals since he left MSNBC.

[Unknown Beatle]

170. Are you insinuating that he should have sold his integrity

to pay the bills?

There's people that would rather starve than to compromise their ideals and integrity.

[frylock]

175. I was being facetious.

Cenk is one of the good ones.

[Unknown Beatle]

177. In that case, my bad.

[frylock]

178. Nah, I shoulda left a sarcasm tag.

peace!

[truedelphi]

172. I finally just transferred my allegiance to Rachel over to Abby Martin, of

The Ring of Fire radio station. Carried over the internets at any point in time I care to lsiten.

Someone of Maddow's stature, with a steady job, good pay and ability to have continual media coverage doesn't understand and probably cannot understand what it means to be working class.

[SusanCalvin]

179. Thanks for the tip - I'll check it out. nt

[YOHABLO]

180. MSNBC won't let her touch it. Guarantee you or she'll get the ax like Ed Shultz.

[boomer55]

2. Yuck

[SHRED]

3. Team Weathervane

Whatever group she's speaking to and polling.
No core.
Changes position like wind. Head snapping changes.

This is why we support Bernie.
He has a core vision we understand.

[FreakinDJ]

11. The "I'll say anything to get elected" candidate

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

117. Yes, but at least Hillary is TRYING to tell the truth!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2016!!!

[merrily]

119. Search youtube for videos of

Hillary lying trying" to be straight with the American people. Let me know if you find anything.

[berniepdx420]

132. +420

[tk2kewl]

15. the wack-a-mole platform

[Lorien]

85. And this why they absolutely WILL NOT tell us just why they support her

she has no message except "No we can't", and no solid position on any issue. I swear, sometimes it seems like some sort of mind control technique is being used on her followers. I even know a union rep who loves her, and when I asked him to explain why (he's usually a wordy fellow, has written several massive books) all he could come up with was "my wife and I met her once and we liked her." That's it. Nothing else. Just bizarre!

[Ferd Berfel]

163. a core vision we understand.

and will stick with

[Lorien]

4. How can her fans defend this???

Truly, are her supporters truly IN FAVOR of the TPP, massive outsourcing and environmental destruction? And what about her boldfaced lies? Are those OK too?

[MisterP]

5. they "ask" why lefties believe that free trade agrements cost jobs, because it brings in

cheaper goods and everybody benefits! whee!

[Recursion]

58. The jobs go with or without free trade agreements

Hell, most jobs "went" to China, and we don't have an FTA with them.

NAFTA is a convenient punching bag, and not much else.

[Lorien]

74. You have to be kidding

NAFTA fucked us over royally, or maybe you're too young to remember America before NAFTA?

[Recursion]

83. I'm 40, and I remember the late 90s being much better than the 80s and early 90s

You've been sold a bill of goods; NAFTA was a fairly decent trade agreement (though small potatoes; trade with Mexico is about 3% of our GDP) that slightly slowed the loss of manufacturing jobs that had started in the 1960s. Unemployment went down, wages went up, and real incomes went up. Probably a small fraction of that was NAFTA (again, 3% of the GDP), but the economy was certainly better after it than before it, so I have trouble taking the dystopian arguments about it seriously.

Also keep in mind I'm from the south, which did better in the 1990s than the midwest and northeast.

[Lorien]

88. I'm a hell of a lot older than you, and we lost a shit ton of jobs thanks to NAFTA

you are confusing the dot com bubble with "a decent trade agreement". I made a great six figure income in the 90s, no doubt. But NAFTA's effects were just beginning. The full effect of it came after 2000. Look at Flint, MI; it's the poster child for the effects of NAFTA.

[Recursion]

99. And so is Houston, which is doing pretty well.

I definitely agree the midwest got screwed and the sunbelt got all the benefits. But if you're just going to magically assign a 6 year delay to its effect (and ignore the disastrous Bush tax cuts that intervened), well, sure: you can persuade yourself of anything.

[JDPriestly]

115. The facts as of November 2003

Although U.S. domestic exports to its NAFTA partners have increased dramatically—with real growth of 95.2% to Mexico and 41% to Canada—growth in imports of 195.3% from Mexico and 61.1% from Canada overwhelmingly surpass export growth, as shown in Table 1. The resulting $30 billion U.S. net export deficit with these countries in 1993 increased by 281% to $85 billion in 2002 (all figures in inflation-adjusted 2002 dollars). As a result, NAFTA has led to job losses in all 50 states and the District of Columbia, as shown in Figure 1. Through September 2003, the U.S. goods trade deficit with Mexico and Canada has increased 12% over the same period last year (U.S. Census Bureau 2003a). Job losses for the remainder of 2003 are likely to grow at a similar rate.

. . . .

Net job loss figures range from a low of 719 in Alaska to a high of 115,723 in California. Other hard-hit states include New York, Michigan, Texas, Ohio, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Florida, Indiana, North Carolina, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Wisconsin, Georgia, and Tennessee, each with more than 20,000 jobs lost. These states all have high concentrations of industries where a large number of plants have moved to Mexico (such as motor vehicles, textiles and apparel, computers, and electrical appliances). Manufacturing industries were responsible for 78% of the net jobs lost under NAFTA, a total of 686,700 manufacturing jobs.

While job losses in most states are modest relative to the size of the economy, it is important to remember that the promise of new jobs was the principal justification for NAFTA. According to NAFTA’s promoters, the new jobs would compensate for the increased environmental degradation, economic instability, and public health dangers that NAFTA brings (Lee 1995, 10-11). If NAFTA does not deliver an increase in net jobs, it can’t provide enough benefits to offset the costs it imposes.
Long-term stagnation and growing inequality

NAFTA has also contributed to growing income inequality and to the declining relative wages of U.S. workers without college degree, who made up 72.1% of the workforce in 2001 (Mishel et al. 2003, 163). NAFTA, however, is but one contributor to a larger process of globalization and growing structural trade deficits that has shaped the U.S. economy and society over the last few decades.6 Rapid growth in U.S. trade and foreign investment as a share of U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) has played a large role in the growth of inequality in income distribution in the last 20 years. NAFTA has continued and accelerated international economic integration, and thus contributed to the growing tradeoffs that have accompanied this integration process.

Lots more at . . . .

http://www.epi.org/publication/briefingpapers_bp147/

It has only gotten worse.

For information on the epi:

http://www.epi.org/

[Recursion]

116. And if manufacturing were the only sector of the economy, the late 90s would have been awful

But it isn't and they weren't. 23 million net jobs were created in that period; 500K manufacturing job losses are barely a rounding error there. And they were higher paying jobs, too, as witnessed by the fact that median wages and incomes saw their only real rise in the past 40 years in the period immediately after the implementation of NAFTA. Again, NAFTA didn't do that (we don't actually trade very much with Mexico, and China is the big powerhouse in that question), but it clearly couldn't have caused an employment loss that ended up not actually happening.

[JDPriestly]

125. Read the article. It caused a loss in jobs, especially in jobs that require no college degree.

Here is the problem, statistically, median wages and incomes have not risen in the long run.

NAFTA has cost the US its industry and its economic independence. I am 72 years old. I remember the industry we had before NAFTA. I watched C-Span in 1985 when the Congress was discussing whether to change laws that would permit us to negotiate the kinds of trade agreements we have today. A Democratic senator forecast that if we allowed this kind of trade, we would end up handing each other hamburgers for a living. We are nearly at that point.

Lots of nail studios, hair salons and other kinds of low-level service jobs -- hard on your feet for relatively low pay -- on the business street in my area.

We used to have a lot of industry, lots of it, in America.

My favorite example is the loss of the company, Maytag. Used to make the wonderful, solid, well-built, durable washing machines in Newton, Iowa. That factory was lost.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-town-maytag-left-behind?

Maytag was purchased by Whirlpool which moved production of the washers to its plants.

The production was then moved to Monterrey, Mexico.

http://inthesetimes.com/article/1790/maytag_moves_to_mexico

And in 2013, at least some of the production was moved back to the US but not to Newton, Iowa.

I have a good Maytag that was produced in Newton, Iowa. It still works and is excellent.

It's so sad that we have had this movement of our industry, sales of good manufacturers, moving the production to other countries. It has brought with it economic disruption, insecurity and serious social problems.

Very sad. And when you think of all the moving of plants and disruption of life that the changes in location for Maytag washers and similar products have meant, you have to ask whether it was worth and if so, for whom. Because it certainly has not been worth it for ordinary Americans.

Hence the great enthusiasm for Bernie Sanders.

Had it not been for the trade agreements and the excessive greed of a few at the top of the financial heap in America, Bernie would probably remain a quietly independent senator. But mark my words, he will be president. And he will push for laws that require companies that want to outsource and import but don't want to invest in good jobs for ordinary people in the US to pay high taxes for the privilege of selling products in the US.

We cannot survive as a country if we continue our current trade policies. Our trade deficit is too high. We will not survive with that kind of imbalance of trade.

[JDPriestly]

111. I strongly object to the trade courts, the arbitration courts, otherwise known as the kangaroo

courts that NAFTA, the WTO and other trade agreements entail. I especially object to the idea of a trade court to enforce the TPP.

They will deal the final blow to what remains of our democracy.

They are regrettable and will be used to prevent efforts to save our environment.

If people knew more about the cases that have been brought to the NAFTA court, they would not support any trade agreements.

We need to preserve enough sovereignty to safeguard our environment at the very least. These trade agreements do not do that.

[Recursion]

112. Fair enough, and I'm glad you at least recognize they long predate the TPP

I think they're fairly good (we do keep winning in them) and much better than tariff wars as a way of resolving trade disputes.

[JDPriestly]

126. And what is your experience with the trade courts?

Have you had anything at all to do with any case in a trade arbitration court?

[Recursion]

131. Peripherally; I worked for a fisheries lobby during that damned catfish case with Vietnam

Though I was just maintaining their servers, not doing anything with policy. I guess that ended up being more of a draw than a win.

[Ilsa]

174. Isn't that Canadian energy company suing

the US for not agreeing to build the Keystone pipeline, using NAFTA terms? Or did I hear that wrong?

[JDPriestly]

183. I'm not sure, but that is my understanding.

[greiner3]

166. Who would have thunk it at the time

That Ross Perot was right about trade deals and his famous line "and all you'll hear is the sucking sound from all the jobs leaving the country". And this was before NAFTA

[Recursion]

182. And he was obviously wrong: 23 million net jobs were created after NAFTA (nt)

[thesquanderer]

97. No FTA with China, but there is this...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_normal_trade_relations

[Recursion]

101. Which is precisely *normal* trade relations; they aren't specifically sanctioned

We've been bleeding jobs to Asia since the 1970s, and people look at one tiny attempt to exert some control over that (FTAs) and convince themselves that they're the cause rather than the symptom.

[berniepdx420]

133. No but bill clinton negotiated the u.s china trade agreement

[sulphurdunn]

165. NAFTA cost 1 million American jobs,

ballooned our trade deficit with Canada and Mexico and cut our exports to those countries by nearly half. NAFTA is indeed a convenient punching back, it deserves every punch it takes and then some, and so do the Clintons for peddling it.

[whathehell]

144. Cheap stuff is all you can afford after you've lost your job..

I guess they're missing the connection.

[Avalux]

6. As unpleasant as it is to us, I think they are.

Otherwise, how could they defend Hillary and vote for her? Hillary believes that the ends justify the means, her fans must believe the same thing.

[Lorien]

71. So it's just about "winning"? Consequences be damned?

It really is just the Superbowl to them. SMH

[jfern]

8. Hillary's hardcore supporters were pro TPP until she pretended to be against it

[hifiguy]

20. She could co-host a kitten barbecue

and puppy shoot with Cheney and they'd tie themselves into five-dimensional knots trying to spin/justify/excuse it. Guaranteed.

[SamKnause]

60. I agree.

It boggles the mind.

[Lorien]

76. No different than Dubya's followers

He could have wrapped a white male Christian baby in the flag, doused him with gasoline and lit him on fire in the middle of Times Square, and he still would have been golden to them.

[SamKnause]

79. I agree.

Some of our fellow citizens are mighty strange.

Some are even frightening.

I didn't expect to see as much of it as I do on this site.

I know these people are well informed.

I just don't understand it.

[DUbeornot2be]

96. It's like...

...the Rachel thing... They may be well informed but many are probably paid or promised reward so all of a sudden a whole bunch of people start saying the same, elitist, smug lies about a good man...

[ebayfool]

86. Disciples - operating on faith rather than fact. n/t

[hifiguy]

94. "There is nothing so frightful

as ignorance in action." Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

[VulgarPoet]

77. More mental gymnastics than evangelical talibangelists some days.

[Populist_Prole]

89. Some are corporatists, and there are some very strident ones here

They're just liberal socially, or pretend it's worth having ( what's left of ) the working class thrown under the bus so that they can play global do-gooder and/or advance their pet social issue(s).

[Juicy_Bellows]

105. + 1000

Pinpoint accuracy.

[bvar22]

136. Also massive in-sourcing through expanding H1B Programs.

Thought your job couldn't be sent overseas? They will get someone to come here and work for 1/2 of what you are now making.

[in_cog_ni_to]

9. SO...she DOES lie.

Other emails show Clinton seeming to personally lobby her former Democratic colleagues in the Senate to support free trade agreements (FTAs) with Colombia, Panama and South Korea. She had previously told voters she would work to block the Colombian and South Korean pacts.

She cannot and will not be president.

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

[hifiguy]

21. Like a Turkish rug. bt

[in_cog_ni_to]

26. LOL!

I don't think she knows how to tell the truth anymore! Lying is the norm for her. It really is pathological.

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

[hifiguy]

39. When it gets to this stage there's a

technical term for it: Nixonitis.

[in_cog_ni_to]

51. She does have Nixonitis! Her Goldman Sachs speeches = 18 minutes of missing tape recording!

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

[Kelvin Mace]

64. Oh be fair,

Nixon was to her left...

[in_cog_ni_to]

66. Okay

If you insist!

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

[Kelvin Mace]

67. I meant be fair to Nixon

He did give us the EPA, OSHA, and an expanded food stamp program.

[in_cog_ni_to]

73. Yes he did. He also gave us HMOs and was a Crook.

✌

But I get your point and on many issues he was left of her.

PEACE
LOVE
BERNIE

[hifiguy]

87. I say old bean, well played!

[VulgarPoet]

43. Like I've said, if she told me the sky were blue

I'd need a second opinion.

[hifiguy]

45. Yep. If she ever shook my hand

I would count my fingers very carefully afterwards.

[VulgarPoet]

48. You'd count your fingers? I'd need hand sanitizer for whatever stumps are left.

It's not worth corrupting myself to get that finger back; 'specially when she tells me I've got a special place in hell for being a left-wing tea partier who refuses to get with the program.

[Divernan]

63. Every time I see Bill pointing his long, skinny index finger . . . .

I think "hand sanitizer".

[ChairmanAgnostic]

52. Years ago, I did. I had to beg her to return it.

[VulgarPoet]

78. Did she tell you to cut it out and quit expecting handouts?

[cherokeeprogressive]

72. Like a sleeping dog. nt

[Kall]

68. I think ever her devout followers

must have internalized that, at this point.

[merrily]

128. .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1280205

[ebayfool]

10. Pants on fire stuff!

And this shows why she needs to release her transcripts. Proof from herself that she lies to union, labor and voters!

Only three years earlier, Clinton wooed organized labor during her presidential campaign with promises to oppose those same deals. She called the South Korea agreement “inherently unfair.” She also said, “I will do everything I can to urge the Congress to reject the Colombia Free Trade Agreement.” Clinton has lately courted organized labor’s support for her current presidential bid by pledging to oppose the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement, a deal she repeatedly touted while secretary of state.

[Kittycat]

25. Puts money in back pocket, and lies spew out of mouth

Nice system she has going there.

[farleftlib]

31. Very nice ain't it? She gets obscenely rich

and we go to "that special place in hell" for not getting with her program.

[Kittycat]

44. +1

[JDPriestly]

82. True.

[2banon]

12. Searching for the most appropriate adjective to describe

the brazen audacity to deceive her supporters with pledges on specific and important policy matters.

[ebayfool]

13. TY TubbersUK - rec'd and bookmarked! n/t

[jillan]

14. Thanks for posting this and letting us see what's really going on

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

118. I second that!

[Live and Learn]

16. Now you see how stupid it was to have her own server. All her secrets are getting exposed.

It was a stupid thing to do.

[merrily]

123. Maybe, but now you see why she wanted her own server in the first place.

You know, I don't like Dr. Phil, yet I keep quoting him. Those who have nothing to hide hide nothing.

[farleftlib]

145. Replied to wrong post

Deleting.

[PoliticAverse]

17. Anybody here think she actually is against the TPP? n/t

[SusanCalvin]

29. No. nt

[JDPriestly]

84. No.

[reformist2]

137. Not me.

[kgnu_fan]

18. this is so bad.... this back dealing... when is it going to stop?

[merrily]

127. As soon as she's in the Oval Office, of course.

[farleftlib]

19. Well, well isn't this something?

K & R. Bookmarking too. This is a big deal.

Thanks for sharing.

[Armstead]

22. Sigh....Business as usual -- unfortunately

[Duval]

23. What else are we going to find out? And why is the DNC so strongly supporting her?

I don't understand. With the FBI investigations, with her constant lying, the Dem Establishment must Really be Afraid of Sanders?

[Fumesucker]

46. I think they're afraid of both candidates in different ways

Bernie coming in would shake the system to its core and with any luck a lot of sinecures will disappear or shift, of course people doing well in the current system are afraid of major changes.

The Clintons are well known to harshly punish those they feel have been personally disloyal, if Clinton does happen to win the election and you were a Democratic Sanders supporter you are in a heap of trouble.

[Kittycat]

24. Every Union member

That is potentially impacted by these deals, should be contacting their leadership for a public statement. Further, if their union endorsed HRC, they should request a retraction.

[ebayfool]

36. ^^^^^That! Right there!^^^^^ n/t

[salib]

142. All it would take is one large Union endorsement to be retracted

Citing these emails as a reason and it would be 24/7 in the news.

But, really, what are the odds of that?

If nothing else, this election is hinting at just how far down the rabbit hole goes.

[IdaBriggs]

28. Um, Bernie Supporter Here BUT...if her BOSS (President Obama) supported

those deals, and told HIS Secretary of State to support it, I would expect her to do as she was told because that was her job: to carry out HIS WISHES and not her own.

If President Obama supported these agreements, this is a non-issue for me.

That isn't lying; that is chain-of-command.

[SusanCalvin]

32. If a person opposes something like the TPP, strongly,

I believe one possible course is to resign.

[IdaBriggs]

37. Or shut up and do your job because the other guy won. nt

[antigop]

42. oh, yes, she needed a job because they were "dead broke". Oh, PLEASE! nt

[IdaBriggs]

122. Secretary of State is a job that isn't supposed to be just money -

RELATIONSHIPS, REPUTATION and PRESTIGE are involved.

I think she did a good job in that role and was pleased when Obama tapped her for it.

If she didn't or he was unhappy, he would have fired her. He didn't. She left after a good tenure.

And for me, if her boss told her to do something, she should have done it.

Sometimes you can convince your boss to do things your way. Sometimes you can't.

President Obama won the election. That makes him the boss.

I do not support this line of attack as to policy making. I believe chain of command is important and expect government officials reporting directly to the President to offer their best opinions, then do what they are ordered.

I don't see having a different opinion as lying.

[antigop]

124. "just following orders" is NOT an excuse. nt

[IdaBriggs]

151. No, it is A JOB and people unwillingness to do their job quit.

Hillary's position on these issues in 2008 became irrelevant when SHE LOST THE ELECTION.

The person whose opinion became important was President Obama. All good employees are expected to advocate and offer their best advice/opinion, but at the end of the day, you do what your boss orders. Or you quit if you aren't willing to follow orders.

I will not criticize Secretary Clinton for supporting President Obama's directives, even when she disagreed with them, because that is something only people who have never had a job with a boss would think is acceptable.

I still prefer Senator Sanders for President, but this is just as stupid as Photogate.

I am moving on.

[antigop]

156. and she didn't quit. That says it all. "Just following orders" is NOT an excuse. nt

[SusanCalvin]

50. Depends on how strongly she opposed the TPP.

Or wants to convince us she did.

[IdaBriggs]

153. The guy who supported it won the election. She worked for him.

I disagree with this line of attack. It negates context.

I still prefer Sanders.

[ebayfool]

95. Umm - she bucked the other guy when it suited her "stature & long-term impact" (ie running again).

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/hillary-clinton-emails-nevada-219516

https://foia.state.gov/searchapp/DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_Feb19thWeb/08622FEB19/DOC_0C05762597/C05762597.pdf

snip/

Another Slaughter email reflects early frustration on the Clinton team with perceptions (and perhaps reality) that the Obama White House was driving the train on foreign policy.

"More and more I am hearing things about how the White House is setting the agenda and [Clinton] is just the implementer. For her stature and and longer-term impact she has to seize this moment to flesh out a real foreign policy strategy rather than just a set of proposals, as important as they are. The president has given her the opening," Slaughter wrote in a June 10, 2009 email.

The message, sent to Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills and forwarded to Clinton, called it "critical" that she make such a speech following a major address Clinton gave in Cairo earlier that month.

Clinton delivered the speech outlining her foreign policy vision on July 15. This is the same speech that has drawn attention in recent days over deals the Clinton team appeared to cut with one or more journalists to describe the address as "muscular."

[IdaBriggs]

154. Sometimes you can convince your boss to see it your way.

Sometimes you can't.

I think she was a good Secretary of State. I also think Obama is an excellent President.

[antigop]

158. ah, yes, someone who is friends with Kissinger. Good lord. nt

[Glamrock]

34. Fair point...

[snagglepuss]

59. imo it would be a fair point only if she put up a real fight with Obama. If however she

simply acquiesced than she deserves to be dissed.

[TubbersUK]

80. Agreed, as per the same batch of e-mails she pushed back hard & successfully on Foreign Policy

for example, Libya.


http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/hillary-clinton-emails-nevada-219516

[ebayfool]

91. Yup. "Celebrating Clinton "turning [Obama] around," apparently on Libya"

snips/

The emails reflect the near-jubilation of Clinton's allies over what appears to be her success at persuading President Barack Obama to join a military intervention in Libya. The operation was billed as humanitarian, but ultimately led to the toppling of Libyan leader Muammar Qadhafi.

"I cannot imagine how exhausted you must be after this week, but I have NEVER been prouder of having worked for you," former State policy planning director Anne-Marie Slaughter wrote to Clinton in a March 19, 2011 message bearing the subject line "bravo!" and sent two days after passage of a key U.N. Security Council resolution on the crisis. "Turning POTUS around on this is a major win for everything we have worked for."

[snagglepuss]

134. Well there you go, very persuasive when she cares to be. Should we hold our breath

to see if any emails appear showing she pushed back against the trade agreements she promised she would oppose?

[antigop]

30. and this is why she is not considered to be trustworthy. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

33. I was just reading that article

[Oilwellian]

35. Let us bark

[farleftlib]

38. Oh snap

Good one. hoisted on her own petard!

[AzDar]

40. OMFG... I'm beginning to believe she IS a compulsive liar. She's so SLIMY. Wow!

Mentirosa!!

[FailureToCommunicate]

41. Wish these had come out sooner, but, better now then never.

[iemitsu]

47. But she can't remember ever lying.

[markpkessinger]

53. This video says it all!

[Lorien]

81. Yep

Lies and the lying liars who tell them!

[KoKo]

143. The Video is a Must Watch! Having all the "Flip Flops" Documented

in one place is helpful as we move forward in the Campaign and the "Kitchen Sink" is thrown at Bernie as the Clinton Campaign gets even more vicious.

[Old Codger]

54. BAU

More of the sleeze floating to the surface of the septic tank..

[grasswire]

55. why don't we send this article to Scott Pelley, to whom she lied yesterday. nt

[nashville_brook]

62. [phone]

[Ford_Prefect]

56. Oh Snap! There she goes again!

[pa28]

65. Say one thing to insiders and another thing to the public.

No wonder her major donors are so comfortable when she veers into populist rhetoric during her campaign speeches.

They know Hillary has two very different messages depending on the room and they seem very confident the real Hillary is the one speaking to them.

[ebayfool]

70. Yup! They've been dealing with her long enough to know she's lying during those speeches.

Prolly have a good laugh thinking about all the little people lapping it up and believing it.

[Recursion]

69. I'm pretty sure that was her job description at that point in time?

I mean, breaking, SoS lobbies for US policy?

[Lorien]

92. You really are grasping to justify this nastiness

she's talking out of both sides of her mouth.

[Armstead]

93. It's the duplicity. Saying one thing to one crowd, but having a different face as a politician

[ebayfool]

100. They show her setting herself up as setting policy - not Obama.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/hillary-clinton-emails-nevada-219516

snip/

Asserting Clinton's role as a foreign policy strategist

Another Slaughter email reflects early frustration on the Clinton team with perceptions (and perhaps reality) that the Obama White House was driving the train on foreign policy.

"More and more I am hearing things about how the White House is setting the agenda and [Clinton] is just the implementer. For her stature and and longer-term impact she has to seize this moment to flesh out a real foreign policy strategy rather than just a set of proposals, as important as they are. The president has given her the opening," Slaughter wrote in a June 10, 2009 email.

The message, sent to Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills and forwarded to Clinton, called it "critical" that she make such a speech following a major address Clinton gave in Cairo earlier that month.

[Recursion]

102. I would add, "breaking: Clinton overstates own role in policy decisionmaking" (nt)

[xocet]

106. A position that she did not have to accept if the position went against her core principles...

This seems quite similar to her Iraq War vote. For her, it appears that expediency rules over principle and judgment.

[Recursion]

109. IDK. TPP strikes me as marginally better than our current bilateral agreements

I don't think we pushed Vietnam hard enough, personally, but there's nothing in there that strikes me as radically different to begin with. I do think she'd do better if she made that case rather than buckling under to the trade know-nothings, but that's probably an impossible bridge for a Democrat this cycle.

[Cheese Sandwich]

75. OMG what. I sometimes forget this is not just politics, the opponent here is

completely unacceptable.

[turbinetree]

90. What can you say.............................

Honk-----------------for a political revolution Bernie 2016

[PoliticalMalcontent]

103. Clinton! She's for herself and she wants us to be for her too! #Imwithher

But really, she doesn't give a damn who she sells out.

Contrast that with our other choices and it seems pretty clear, right? Educate the electorate. Elect someone who is for the people instead of someone who is in it for the power.

[scscholar]

171. But considering it is her time...

doesn't that justify that?

[PatrickforO]

104. And yet she does not believe she has ever lied.

And will do her best to 'level' with the American people.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

107. What's the word for when you promise something but then secretly do something else? Evolving?

No, that wasn't it. Still thinking...

[xocet]

108. Here is the link to the FTA email that is mentioned in the article...

https://foia.state.gov/searchapp/DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_Feb19thWeb/08633FEB19/DOC_0C05782826/C05782826.pdf

[Juicy_Bellows]

110. Some of the posts in this thread should be studied for further evidence of the God Particle.

Their spin is amazing.

[xocet]

150. The Higgs boson has spin 0.

Last edited Sat Feb 20, 2016, 04:12 PM - Edit history (1)

...

Whether or not it is a Higgs boson is demonstrated by how it interacts with other particles, and its quantum properties. For example, a Higgs boson is postulated to have no spin, and in the Standard Model its parity – a measure of how its mirror image behaves – should be positive. CMS and ATLAS have compared a number of options for the spin-parity of this particle, and these all prefer no spin and positive parity. This, coupled with the measured interactions of the new particle with other particles, strongly indicates that it is a Higgs boson.

...

http://home.cern/about/updates/2013/03/new-results-indicate-new-particle-higgs-boson

[Juicy_Bellows]

157. Your post didn't get my post.

I appreciate the extra knowledge but pardon my ignorance if they don't use particle accelerators that basically accelerate particles in a big circle to help discover it, aka a big spin machine?

[xocet]

164. I withdraw my unprovoked criticism (my apologies) and replace it with your civility.

What you say is approximately correct, but spin takes on a very particular meaning in physics, a meaning which does not apply to a description of a collider. Spin instead is a property of particles. Particles are related to fields. And on it goes...

The particle data group publishes detailed listings of the properties of the known particles - here is the listing for the Higgs boson:

http://pdg.lbl.gov/2014/listings/rpp2014-list-higgs-boson.pdf

If you look around on their website, there is a lot of technical information - spin will be frequently mentioned:

http://pdg.lbl.gov/2014/listings/contents_listings.html

In the case that you find this sort of thing very fascinating, here is a link to a set of lectures on colliders:

http://cds.cern.ch/record/426234/

[Juicy_Bellows]

167. Interesting stuff.

I do find it fascinating - thanks for the links and additional information.

[burrowowl]

114. K&R

[closeupready]

120. Disgusting, but you know, this is who she is. Accept it.

[ChiciB1]

121. SO MANY JUST DON'T KNOW... AND SO

MANY SEEM NOT TO CARE!

[CharlotteVale]

129. K&R

[AzDar]

135. Kick...

[FreakinDJ]

138. How many times does she have to be caught lieing

before people stop believing her

[Got it]

139. Another day...

...another slop pile with HRC serving herself and her masters.

We really deserve better.

[amborin]

141. she's totally compromised

[AzDar]

146. Kickety...

[Arizona Roadrunner]

149. She is "currently" against TPP

She is currently against TPP but the US Chamber of Commerce has informed it's membership not to worry because after the election, she will be "currently" in favor of TPP.

[cantbeserious]

152. Nary A Word That HRC Says Can Be Trusted - HRC Is Owned By The Oligarchs, Corporations And Banks

eom

[LiberalLovinLug]

155. It must be so emotionally and spiritually taxing

to constantly lie to the public on where you stand, and then secretly be pushing for the opposite.

[BigBearJohn]

159. we should all send an email to Rachel about this

[e-mail]

Let's see if she responds

[BigBearJohn]

160. I TWEETED & EMAILED EVERYONE AT MSNBC

Now let's see if they cover the story.

[kgnu_fan]

161. need more eyeballs... so kick! nt

[Enthusiast]

168. K&R! This post has hundreds of recommendations!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

169. Clinton is not 'out of woods' yet

[Arugula Latte]

173. She is so sleazy, there's just no end to it.

Amazing.

This is our supposed best candidate? (Nonexistent) God help us.

[Jarqui]

176. Get those emails and that deception out to Illinois, Indiana,

Michigan, and Ohio, as well as Pennsylvania.

They should also hear what Bernie was talking about on the 2007 Immigration bill that Hillary voted for.

Those will piss off a lot of blue collar workers. She threw them under the bus supporting NAFTA (and then flip-flopping) and she's doing it again.

[YOHABLO]

181. Trust me the TPP will be re-addressed if she becomes Pres. Wake up H supporters.