http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090112/pl_politico/17334
 

Land mines ahead for Hillary

Amie Parnes, Glenn Thrush Amie Parnes, Glenn Thrush Mon Jan 12, 4:31 am ET 

Hillary Clinton, ever the preparation junkie, is cramming for Tuesday’s
confirmation hearing — intent on downplaying old disagreements with Barack
Obama and parrying questions about her husband’s overseas entanglements,
aides say.

Barring a bombshell revelation, all sides expect Clinton to be speedily
confirmed as secretary of state. But her rendezvous with the Foreign
Relations Committee at 9:30 a.m. Tuesday still offers its share of potential
land mines.

Nobody’s fonder of huddling secretly with a close-knit, tight-lipped clutch
of advisers than Hillary Clinton. And she’s been huddling plenty in recent
days, gaming out defenses to possible attacks against her husband while
synchronizing her policy positions with Obama to avoid embarrassing public
disagreements on Iraq, Iran and Israel. 

“If they hit her on any personal stuff or on the Bill s—t, she’ll hit the
ball out of the park,” said a longtime adviser, speaking on condition of
anonymity. 

“She’s far more concerned with the substance,” the person said. “This is the
re-emergence of the non-political Hillary. The most discomfort is where she
and Obama disagree — the ‘you’re naive’ stuff. She can’t show up the
president, she can’t appear like she’s trying to formulate her own foreign
policy.”

Clinton’s task is made easier by the fact that Obama quietly adopted many of
his former rival’s more hawkish foreign policy positions by the end of the
primaries.

Her path may also be eased by the fact that Obama’s attorney
general-designate, Eric Holder, has become the main lightning rod for GOP
opposition in the Senate. 

“Holder’s attracting most of the attention on the right,” says Steve
Clemons, vice president of the progressive New America Foundation. 

“She’s different. She’s a respected senator, and if they attack her, they
will just appear mean and nasty… and they’ll appear as if they are
undermining America’s diplomatic standing. And the Democrats are going to
use soft, soft gloves.” 

The committee’s staff is so confident Clinton will sail through that it has
scheduled only a single day of hearings — although it has taken the
precaution of reserving the committee room for Wednesday just in case.
That’s a far cry from previous secretary of state confirmations: In 1981, Al
Haig had to endure a five-day grilling about his role in Watergate before
earning approval.

“We expect her confirmation hearing to be congenial, fair and swift,” said
Sen. John Kerry’s committee spokesman Frederick Jones.

To ensure that nothing goes awry, Clinton has assembled a confirmation
commando unit of sorts, featuring her post-campaign inner circle, including
Cheryl Mills, Maggie Williams and her trusted Senate chief of staff, Tamera
Luzzatto. 

To that core, she’s added a new collection of Clinton-Obama foreign policy
experts to coach her on the issues and the Byzantine bureaucracy at Foggy
Bottom. They include Clinton Senate staffer Andrew Shapiro, former
ambassadors Joe Huggins and Vickie Huddleston, a pair of incoming deputy
secretaries of state — Jim Steinberg and Jack Lew — Clinton campaign policy
maven Jake Sullivan, and Wendy Sherman, a highly regarded State Department
veteran who helped shape Bill Clinton’s Haiti policy in the 1990s.

Moreover, the ever-conscientious Clinton has reached out to all of her
living predecessors at State, chatting often with pal Madeleine Albright.
She’s also contacted every member of the Foreign Relations Committee by
phone or in person. 

One of those sit-downs was with Indiana Sen. Richard Lugar, the committee’s
top Republican and a close friend of Vice President-elect Joe Biden. 

Lugar has told Republicans he’s concerned about the former president’s
charities but that he’s convinced Hillary Clinton is up to the job.
Nonetheless, there are several potential problem children on the GOP side,
with noise likely to come from the committee’s most conservative members Jim
DeMint (R-S.C), John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) and David Vitter (R-La.).

 

“Over the recess, Sen. Vitter has had his staff investigate some of the
potential conflicts of interest between the secretary of state and her
husband’s enterprises,” says Vitter spokesman Joel DiGrado. “He’s going to
ask her to provide a more substantial explanation.” 

Tennessee Republican Bob Corker is also reportedly a concern to Clinton’s
team, not so much over ideology but rather because he’s unpredictable,
creative and has a knack for getting press. 

The New York Times stoked the opposition on Sunday, with an editorial
exhorting the committee to explore “the awkward intersection between Mrs.
Clinton’s new post and the charitable and business activities of her
husband.” 

The editorial board, while expressing general support for her appointment,
urged the former first lady to revise a five-page agreement with Obama
requiring annual reports on Bill Clinton’s international fundraising efforts
on behalf of his charities. 

“Disclosure of Mr. Clinton’s charitable fundraising and relevant private
fees should be done monthly, or at least quarterly, not just once a year,”
the paper demanded. 

Obama transition spokeswoman Brooke Anderson quickly swatted aside that
suggestion, telling Politico in an e-mail: “The agreement with the Clinton
Foundation goes well beyond the requirements of the law to help avoid even
the appearance of a conflict of interest.” 

The Bill Clinton controversy is likely to attract the most attention, but
Clinton’s team is actually more focused on erasing lingering doubts about
whether she would be an Obama team player, according to people with
knowledge of the situation. 

Clinton and Obama clashed often on foreign affairs during their epic
17-month primary fight. He hammered her early and often over her Oct. 2002
vote for the Iraq invasion — and she returned fire by labeling him “naïve”
after a 2007 debate in which he said he would negotiate with foreign despots
with no preconditions. 

But after Clinton’s defeat, Obama moved closer to Clinton’s mildly more
hawkish worldview — and he began speaking out more stridently in support of
Israel, ratcheting up his rhetoric against Iran’s leadership and placing
pre-conditions on face-to-face talks with America’s enemies. 

Still, there’s some room for potential problems. One area is Iran: Clinton
voted for a 2007 resolution that labeled the country’s Revolutionary Guard a
“terrorist” organization; Obama skipped the vote but later said he would
have voted no, fearing the resolution could be misused as a pretext for the
Bush administration to attack the Tehran regime. 

And Clinton, a stalwart supporter of Israel in a state that demands such a
position, must also be careful not to move too far beyond Obama’s
noncommittal public statements about Israel’s controversial and bloody
invasion of Gaza. 

"People should not expect that she will go any further than what [Obama] has
said by that point,” said a Senate aide familiar with her confirmation
preparations. 

But Clemons, a longtime observer of Washington’s foreign policy
establishment, thinks Obama and Clinton are now in such lock-step on most
issues that he might use her testimony this week to signal shifts in policy
— even on Israel. 

“There’s going to be some very subtle shading of language that will be
intended to send messages to Israel and others,” said Clemons. 

Correction: An earlier version of this story misreported Clinton’s vote on a
2007 resolution labeling Iran’s Revolutionary Guard a “terrorist”
organization. She voted for it.

 

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.
-Winston Churchill

 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


------------------------------------

--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, 
[email protected].
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[email protected]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: [email protected]
  Subscribe:    [email protected]
  Unsubscribe:  [email protected]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtmlYahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[email protected] 
    mailto:[email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to