Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

He says he's 'pro-disclosure,' but Bill has kept Hillary's White House files under wraps

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-22-07 08:27 AM
Original message
He says he's 'pro-disclosure,' but Bill has kept Hillary's White House files under wraps
Edited on Mon Oct-22-07 08:29 AM by babylonsister
Papers? I Don’t See Any Papers.

He says he's 'pro-disclosure,' but Bill has kept Hillary's White House files under wraps.
Jonathan Torgovnik for Newsweek

Under Cover: It's not likely that Clinton's papers will be public before the election
By Michael Isikoff | NEWSWEEK
Oct 29, 2007 Issue


When author Sally Bedell Smith was researching her new book about Bill and Hillary Clinton's White House years, she flew to Little Rock to visit the one place she thought could be an invaluable resource: the new William J. Clinton Presidential Library. Smith was hoping to inspect records that could shed light on what role the First Lady played in her husband's administration. But Smith quickly discovered the frustrations of dealing with a library critics call "Little Rock's Fort Knox."

An archivist explained to Smith that the release of materials was tightly controlled by the former president's longtime confidant Bruce Lindsey. Could she look at memos detailing the advice Hillary gave Bill during debates over welfare reform? Smith asked. No, the archivist said, those memos were "closed" to the public because they dealt with "policy" matters. What about any records that show what advice Bill gave his wife about her 2000 U.S. Senate campaign? Those, too, were closed, the archivist said, because they dealt with "political" matters. "He essentially told me I had no chance of getting anything," says Smith, whose book, "For Love of Politics: Bill and Hillary Clinton, the White House Years," hits the bookstores this week.

The response Smith got isn't unusual. Nearly three years after the Clinton Library opened—and more than 21 months after its trove of records became subject to the Freedom of Information Act—barely one half of 1 percent of the 78 million pages of documents and 20 million e-mail messages at the federally funded facility are public, according to the National Archives. The lack of access is emerging as an issue in Hillary's presidential campaign: she cites her years of experience as First Lady as one of her prime qualifications to be president. Like other Democratic candidates, she has decried the "stunning record of secrecy" of the Bush administration; her campaign Web site vows to bring a "return to transparency" to government. But Clinton's appointment calendar as First Lady, her notes at strategy meetings, what advice she gave her husband and his advisers, what policy memos she wrote, even some key papers from her health-care task force—all of this, and much more documenting her years as First Lady, remains locked away, most likely through the entire campaign season. With nearly 300 FOIA requests pending for Clinton documents, and only six archivists at the library to process them, Archives spokeswoman Susan Cooper says it is "really hard to predict" if any of this material will be released before the election.

Bill Clinton has tried to cast blame for the backlog on the Bush White House. "Look, I'm pro-disclosure," Clinton said in a testy exchange with reporters during a recent press conference. "I want to open my presidential records more rapidly than the law requires and the current administration has slowed down the opening of my own records." But White House spokesman Scott Stanzel tells NEWSWEEK the Bush White House has not blocked the release of any Clinton-era records, nor is it reviewing any. (Under the 1978 Presidential Records Act, the former president and the current president get to review White House records before they are disclosed. Either one can veto a release.) Ben Yarrow, a spokesman for Bill Clinton, says the former president was referring "in general" to a controversial 2001 Bush executive order—recently overturned, in part, by a federal judge—that authorized more extensive layers of review from both current and former presidents before papers are released. (Hillary's campaign didn't respond to requests for comment.)

But documents NEWSWEEK obtained under a FOIA request (made to the Archives in Washington, not the Clinton library) suggest that, while publicly saying he wants to ease restrictions on his records, Clinton has given the Archives private instructions to tightly control the disclosure of chunks of his archive. Among the document categories Clinton asked the Archives to "consider for withholding" in a November 2002 letter: "confidential communications" involving foreign-policy issues, "sensitive policy, personal or political" matters and "legal issues and advice" including all matters involving investigations by Congress, the Justice Department and independent counsels (a category that would cover, among other matters, Whitewater, Monica Lewinsky and the pardons of Marc Rich and others). Another restriction: "communications directly between the President and First Lady, and their families, unless routine in nature."

more...

http://www.newsweek.com/id/57351
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-22-07 08:53 AM
Response to Original message
1. Newsweek dares to compare Bush lies and secrecy to delay in Clinton archive release - the usual RW
attempt to change the subject and to equate major GOP evil to more minor DEM transgressions.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hedgehog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-22-07 09:24 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Last night on All things Considered, there was a discussion of how
tightly press access to Senator Clinton is controlled. No one gets to ask a question unless that question is submitted beforehand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MH1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-22-07 09:38 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. And that's unlike Bush, how?
(for the Hillary defenders and the "oh my gosh how dare you compare her to Bush" folks)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-22-07 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #5
11. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
MH1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-22-07 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. I will go to the podcast of ATC and find out who is the "fool" and the liar.
It will be good to know for future reference.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cuke Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-22-07 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #13
15. Shouldn't you have done that BEFORE you agreed with a stranger on the Internet?
And don't you think it's foolish to believe anything the media says when there's video of HRC answering questions?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MH1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-22-07 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #15
21. No - because it fits with what I already know about the Clintons.
When someone references a generally reliable source saying something that fits well with things I already know, no I don't need to check it out first. This is only a message board, and my comment should be interpreted as: "IF THIS IS TRUE, that is different from Bush, how?"

I don't think it's foolish to believe what is on NPR - usually (unlike most of the media), it's fairly accurate.

Video of Hillary answering questions would not prove your assertion, btw.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bitwit1234 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-22-07 09:20 AM
Response to Original message
2. Yes and rope a dope thinks this article will bash Hillary.
This is so so stupid. If I didn't have respect for Obama and know that he just attracts these kinds of people I could surf the net and post all kinds of trash. In fact I did, find the stuff, but thought better of posting.

Wonder what they would think if, we got the information about Obama and his gangster friend and posted that every ten message like his supporters do about HIllary and her pet. Hillary and this crap and over and over. But then it just shows the mentality of those involved.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Forkboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-22-07 09:52 AM
Response to Reply #2
9. There's a Hillary supporter who always mentions the gangster stuff.
I eagerly await your pointing out to him how nasty it is.Somehow I suspect you wont.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-22-07 09:36 AM
Response to Original message
4. back in '04, it was perfectly fine around here that Howard Dean had his records sealed.
I would assume the same courtesy will be extended to Hillary. :P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MH1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-22-07 09:39 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. I wasn't here and it wasn't perfectly fine with me.
That might be part of why I chose Kerry over Dean.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-22-07 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #4
17. I don't remember it that way... seemed to me that lots of folks
were bashing him for it.

'Course those were the Kerry / Clark / Edwards folks. :P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-22-07 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. yeah.. that is my point...
Dean was the most popular on DU at the time, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oasis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-22-07 09:46 AM
Response to Original message
7. Isikoff and his "selective investigative reporting". He was 24/7 on "Monicagate". He deceided
to take a 6 year vacation when it came to Bush administration lies and corruption.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-22-07 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Oh please. Have you never heard of the book 'Hubris'? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oasis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-22-07 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. When was it published? Last summer?.Have you ever heard of the saying, "too little too late"?
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-22-07 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #10
16. But it's all about *, despite your assertion. Don't kill the messenger
just because you don't like the message.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oasis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-22-07 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #16
19. It's all about the timing. Isikoff was a "Johnny-come-lately" to the Bush pile-on.(eom)
Edited on Mon Oct-22-07 11:37 AM by oasis
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cuke Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-22-07 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
12. Hillary Haters love the right-wing attacks
Maybe Isikoff can dig up another love-chile
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bpeale Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-22-07 10:57 AM
Response to Original message
14. this is precisely one of the reasons i won't vote for her under any circumstances
if she has nothing to hide, release them. this smacks of george bush tactics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-22-07 12:08 PM
Response to Original message
20. I've always had the sense that the Clintons control their image with an iron
fist. They are very shrewd in what they present to the public, and they do it well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-22-07 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
22. Maybe he means pro-disclosure for everyone else.
It's good to be king.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 05:17 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC