Hilary Clinton White House Papers

Parent Cafe
1

<p>Well First Lady Hilary Clinton’s papers have been released today and from initial reviews, here’s some of the revelations pertinent to her experience that makes her and her alone ready on Day One:</p>

<p>On the day that dozens of US cruise missiles rained down on Serbia, first lady Hillary Clinton was not in the White House but instead she was touring ancient Egyptian ruins, including King Tut’s tomb and the temple of Hatshepsut. She dined at the Temple of Luxor, and stayed overnight at the Sofitel Winter Palace Hotel there. </p>

<p>Clinton has said she helped negotiate the April 1998 Good Friday agreement between warring factions in Northern Ireland (which two Nobel Prize winners involved in the accord say her involvment was that of a “cheerleader” at best). But while Catholic and Protestant figures hashed out last-minute details of a power-sharing agreement in Belfast, per the papers now released, Clinton was at the National Press Club in Washington at a party honoring Bella Abzug.</p>

<p>The papers further indicate that While President Clinton phoned major participants in the N. Ireland peace talks, Hilary met with Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel and joined a farewell party for Democratic operative Karen Finney. On the day the agreement was actually signed, she was visiting with Philippine first lady Amelita Ramos. </p>

<p>On August 20, 1998, Bill Clinton ordered US missile strikes on suspected terrorist sites in Sudan and Afghanistan. The president and Hillary Clinton were on holiday on Martha’s Vineyard. After announcing the attack, Clinton cut short his break and returned to Washington to confer with his national security team; Hillary Clinton remained on the Vineyard until August 30, her records show. </p>

<p>There are other key foreign policy dates when the record is not so clear: on the day the presidents of three Balkan states signed a peace agreement in Dayton, Ohio, in November 1995, ending years of ethnic violence in the former Yugoslavia, Clinton’s file lists no public schedule for that day, but indicates she was in Washington.</p>

<p>Nearly a third of the pages have redactions, most of which the archives said were made to protect the privacy of Clinton’s associates. The redacted material includes home addresses, telephone numbers and social security numbers, the archives said. </p>

<p>Well, sure there will be more to come from the papers evidencing her vast experience; and, as an aside, if it hits your city, look for the movie Demons For Hilary. Apparently enough revelations of her experience to make Eliot Spitzer blush.</p>

2

<p>so far, this is the most news worthy finding related to her experience. ;)</p>

<p>[ABC</a> News: Hillary Was in White House on ‘Stained Blue Dress’ Day](<a href=“Hillary at White House on 'Stained Blue Dress' Day - ABC News”>Hillary at White House on 'Stained Blue Dress' Day - ABC News)</p>

3

<p>The OP’s title is misleading. Hilary’s “White House Papers” have NOT been released yet – and by her own admission, they will not be for at least a few more years. </p>

<p>All that was released today was her “schedule of events” for the time she was First Lady. And even that had some info missing or blacked out, supposedly for privacy reasons.</p>

4

<p>bullwinkle - did you cross-reference all those dates yourself, or is there a reference point? If you did all the research - Bravo!</p>

<p>worried_mom - much can be determined regarding experience just from the schedule, as bullwinkle has shown. </p>

<p>(If I were a Hillary supporter, I’d be worried too!)</p>

5

<p>Wasn’t intending to mislead anyone by the title. The National Archives and the Clinton presidential library released more than 11,000 pages of records today from Hillary Clinton’s time as first lady. I guess if not “THE” White house papers, they are White house papers and official records that include schedules from nearly 3,000 days Bill Clinton was in the White House and she was First Lady and detail meetings, trips, speaking engagements and social activities.</p>

<p>As far as cross-referencing, I have checked about 1/2 dozen sites that all report this same info, such as the Washington Post and other “mainstream” sources. Other matters such as her feigned claims re: N. Ireland and her (USO) trip to Bosnia I have checked independently and have lost track of the number of statments of reporters and others involved that repeatedly take the same position that First Lady Clinton’s involvement were mostly “tea and cookie” trips. I think her inflated view of her involvement in the SChip legislation is well documented i.e. she had little involvement.</p>

<p>My memory of the Clinton years is that her only task of any weight was on healthcare and that her approach and style (her leadership qualities) lead to the dismal failure of the project.</p>

<p>It anything, anyone is misleading here, I think it is Ms. “I’m ready on Day One”. I’m still waiting for anyone to tell me what all her experience is. I would love to hear it. I’m not being coy about that. I have no idea what it is other than she just keeps saying it is so.</p>

6

<p>I posted a similar comment on another thread about exposure & experience.</p>

<p>I have no idea what experience she has that makes her a better contender for the Presidency than her opponent.</p>

<p>Neither she nor her supporters can answer it either. When asked the question, they divert an answer by attacking Obama. Then the question goes away.</p>

<p>Ready for what on Day One?</p>

7

<p>****, I want to marry a president. I’d get to travel to every cool place on the entire planet and meet all sorts of famous people, every day. Damn. What a gig.</p>

8

<p>I find that ABC story so distasteful, very lurid. Nothing against you sokkermom. :)</p>

9

<p>“First Lady Clinton’s involvement were mostly “tea and cookie” trips.”</p>

<p>Indeed, on overseas trips in 1996, Mrs. Clinton held “private” or “closed” meetings with foreign heads of state in Greece, Turkey, and Bosnia–without the president’s attendance. And on dozens of times throughout her White House years, she attended White House meetings with Cabinet secretaries, was briefed by senior National Security Council officials and met with foreign dignitaries from around the world.</p>

<p>[Clinton</a> calendars full of unexplained private meetings - Deep Background - msnbc.com](<a href=“http://deepbackground.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/19/786127.aspx]Clinton”>http://deepbackground.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/19/786127.aspx)</p>

10

<p>Perhaps this is incorrect, but I have read she didn’t have a security clearance. Which means those NSC meetings and other such events had to be exceptionally benign to happen.</p>

11

<p>That does not sound plausible. It is not hard at all to get security clearance. Even non-citizen (immigrants) can get security clearance.</p>

12

<p>“Mrs. Clinton did not hold a security clearance. She did not attend National Security Council meetings. She was not given a copy of the president’s daily intelligence briefing. She did not assert herself on the crises in Somalia, Haiti and Rwanda.
And during one of President Bill Clinton’s major tests on terrorism, whether to bomb Afghanistan and Sudan in 1998, Mrs. Clinton was barely speaking to her husband, let alone advising him, as the Lewinsky scandal sizzled”</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/26/us/politics/26clinton.html[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/26/us/politics/26clinton.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

13

<p>Look - either she was involved in the mass killing of children and is responsible for genocide like her husband under United Nations Resolution 260, Article 3, Section 3. In which, she should by all rights share his prison cell for the rest of their natural lives.</p>

<p>Or she wasn’t, in which case she had no role in the most important foreign policy misadventure of our time (unless she was in on the Clinton/Tenet Big Lie of 1998) until she voted for war and hostile, aggressive occupation without even reading the classified intelligence briefing in her possession, and then, three years later, in 2005, went to Iraq and PRAISED the progress of the occupation.</p>

<p>Can’t have it both ways.</p>

14

<p>" Even non-citizen (immigrants) can get security clearance."</p>

<p>Non-citizens can only obtain a LAA (limited access authorization)</p>

<p>“LAAs are granted in those rare circumstances where the non-US citizen possesses unique or unusual skill or expertise that is urgently needed to support a specific US Government contract involving access to specified classified information (no higher than Secret), and a cleared or clearable US citizen is not readily available.”</p>

<p>[Security</a> Clearance Frequently Asked Questions](<a href=“http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:tvbyv5tyC44J:www.clearancejobs.com/security_clearance_faq.pdf+security+clearance&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us]Security”>http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:tvbyv5tyC44J:www.clearancejobs.com/security_clearance_faq.pdf+security+clearance&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us)</p>

15

<p>I believe Hillary Clinton has two Ls in her first name. It is not clear to me why so many people on this forum keep misspelling her first name. (Not that I am a great speller.)</p>

16

<p>Hers is a deeply padded resume to be sure. But, she has somehow managed to delude a huge chunk of the voting electorate into believing that she has “35 years experience” relevant to holding the office of President. Obama doesn’t have much in the realm of relevant experience either. But he’s not so shamelessly spinning “experience” out of whole cloth. Neither of these candidates would stand a chance against McCain if they tried to claim “readiness via experience” in the general election campaign cycle. Their resumes are equally thin, give or take a couple of tick-marks. So if you plan on voting for Hillary Clinton in the fall (should she become the nominee for the Democratic Party), don’t delude yourself into thinking that its her “experience” that justifies your vote. Say she’s intelligent and capable. Say she’s got Bill to act as her “training wheels”, and to be her Co-President. But don’t be so disingenuous as to say that she’s more “qualified” than John McCain, because her experience compared to McCain’s, is as the hair of a Chinese Crested compared to that of an Old English Sheepdog’s.</p>

17

<p>Obama may not be shamelessly spinning his experience, but he is spinning his judgment. And that we saw was not correct. Also, 4 years ago on national TV he shouted, “There is no black America or White America but a United States of America”. Unless I am wrong, he spoke very different on Tuesday. I also had heard him say that he will not run for President. He will finish his term as a senator. Few months later he announced his candidacy.</p>

18

<p>I’ll take 14 years in the Illinois and United States Legislature over 8 years as a White House Hostess. That’s just me of course. I am sure others have different opinions.</p>

<p>I don’t really think experience is anything more than a buzzword. I care about votes on issues. My issue, personally is the war. Do I really care if McCain and Clinton had the experience if that experience had the end product of voting for a war that was not neccesary. Or her experience to vote for NCLB and the Bankruptcy Bill that hurt poor Americans?</p>

<p>Simba, I also had a question if you could answer for me. Hillary and Bill both hammered the point that he doesn’t have the experience to be President. However, then she and Slick Willie went around proposing a joint ticket with her as President of course. But isn’t the most important qualification of a Vice President to be someone ready to be President if the President dies (God forbid). Sounds hypocritical to me, does it sound hypocritical to you?</p>

19

<p>Hillary was more than just a “Hostess” for 8 years. She was Bill’s sounding board, as a First Lady she did make an impact on foreign policy. She did try to push for health care for everyone. </p>

<p>She has never been a “tea and cookies” kind of wife. She deserves more credit than she is getting.</p>

20

<p>I don’t think she is “tea and cookies.” I think she has a certain operational familiarity with WH procedures, as well as having been an intellectual partner with a sitting president while in office. I think that does count for something; I just don’t think it goes nearly as far as her claims suggest.</p>

<p>But again, my larger concern has always been her level of acceptance both with the American people as a whole, & with Congress specifically.</p>