Correct The Record Friday September 5, 2014 Morning Roundup

From:burns.strider@americanbridge.org To: CTRFriendsFamily@americanbridge.org Date: 2014-09-05 11:25 Subject: Correct The Record Friday September 5, 2014 Morning Roundup

*[image: Inline image 1]* *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/>)