This is from the Washington Post (which in itself I distrust) discussing a book by Dick Morris (which might be hiding some things - I do not trust his recent commentary and some of it is really strange. But here is something for what it is worth. I got this through Wayne Mann's The Political Digest. A text search for mentions of TWA turned this up. I believe the meeting the night of the crash, July 17, 1996 was mentioned in 1996 in a New York Times fr on Thursday nights. The version of what happened there may be a deliberate leak and may be a half truth. Here in this column we do not hear about July 17, 1996 but rather August 1 - which was a Thursday, wasn't it? Date: 12-22-98 (16:37) Number: 466517 of 469239 (Refer# NONE) To: SAMMY FINKELMAN From: [EMAIL PROTECTED], WAYNE MANN Subj: TPD 4-122298 4 Read: NO Status: RECEIVER ONLY Conf: email-1 (1099) Read Type: TEXT SCAN (+) [15] New Morris Book Portrays How Polls, Clinton Policy Intersected By John F. Harris Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, December 22, 1998; Page A18 Once a week, every Wednesday night, the group huddled in the Yellow Oval Room of the White House residence. The discussion grazed across an ever-changing buffet of subjects high and low: welfare andimmigration, O.J. Simpson and Paula Jones. But the real agenda was always centered on the man sitting at the center in a large stuffed chair: President Clinton and his plans for winning a second term. The group of political consultants and senior White House staff, joined by Vice President Gore and a handful of Cabinet members, was essentially the war council for the 1996 campaign. Two years later, a window has opened on that campaign and the techniques of its erratic chief strategist Dick Morris, thanks to a new book by Morris that reprints 18 months of the agendas he produced for the weekly strategy sessions. The agendas reflect Morris's polling-based approach to politics and suggest the degree to which Clinton's policy initiatives on such subjects as crime, immigration and welfare were influenced by public opinion surveys and other political judgments about how best to position the president against the Republicans. The documents also reveal how Clinton's advisers weighed thepolitical implications of even the most tragic events, and assessed ways in which he might gain side benefits from his presidential duties. On April 27, 1995 -- eight days after the Oklahoma City bombing -- Morris directed a discussion of how to reap political advantage from the aftermath, according to the agenda for the date. As the consultant saw it, Clinton's handling of the tragedy would lead to "temporary gain: boost in ratings," and how he could create "a permanent possible gain: sets up Extremist Issue vs. Republicans." || || || \/ \/ \/ On Aug. 1, 1996, among topics at the weekly meeting was how well Clinton had responded to the mid-air explosion of TWA Flight 800. Polling data showed that 84 percent of Americans had heard about Clinton's meeting with families of the victims. Fifty percent said the emotional meeting made them more likely to vote for Clinton over Robert J. Dole. The agendas are printed as an appendix to a newly released edition of "Behind the Oval Office," the campaign memoir that Morrispublished early last year. Two years after the election, the agendas -- which were once so sensitive that Gore had to return his copy at the end of each session -- are noteworthy now primarily as historical documents. They also highlight an irony that echoes through Clinton's presidency to this day. At the very time that he was working somethodically to rebuild his presidency -- polling on every event or issue thatmight conceivably affect his prospects -- he was carrying on a relationship with Monica S. Lewinsky that would later help opponents tear him down. Senior White House officials said yesterday they had not reviewed Morris's newbook but said they had no reason to suspect that the agendas he printed were not authentic. They cautioned, however, that the agendas that Morris presented at the weekly political meetings -- before he left the campaign in August 1996 -- often reflected his own interests and obsessions more than Clinton's. Even Morris, who said he published the agendas because they were "historical documents," emphasized: "I'm the author of the agendas, not Clinton." Yet reading through the 200 pages of agendas -- and comparing them to Clinton's schedule and statements in 1995 and 1996 -- make clear that politics and policy became fused in Clinton's White House to a greater degree than had been demonstrated. On April 24, 1996, polling data presented at the weekly meeting showed that aninitiative to crack down on "deadbeat dads" who don't pay child support would make 80 percent of respondents more likely to vote for Clinton. Later that spring, he announced new regulations requiring states to take more aggressive stepsto track down fathers. On June 12, consultants presented data showing that 87 percent of the electorate favored a constitutional amendment guaranteeing new rights to crime victims. Two weeks later, Clinton, surrounded by parents of slain children, overruled recommendations of someconstitutional experts in the Justice Department and endorsed an amendment. Hehas rarely mentioned the idea since 1996. Clinton also looked closely at polls the next month in deciding to sign what he called a flawed bill to overhaul welfare. Morris warned him that a veto -- asstrongly urged by Health and Human Services Secretary Donna E. Shalala -- "would be a disaster" that would cause him to lose 8 percentage points against Dole. While the agendas Morris reprints may buttress those who believe Clinton is a finger-in-the-wind politician, Morris in an interviewyesterday said the perception is unfair. Clinton may poll more than other presidents, he said, but he has proven himself willing to take actions that go against public opinion -- such as approving a U.S.-led financial rescue of Mexico or sending U.S. troops to Bosnia. It is when heis taking unpopular steps, Morris said, that Clinton examines polls most minutely to figure out the best way to make a hard sale. Numerous White House aides groaned or sputtered expletives when informed aboutthe new book by Morris. The consultant, who has worked with numerous Republicans, was a despised figure among many Clinton aides even before he was fired forconsorting with a prostitute. But even some aides who disdain Morris acknowledge that, over the years, he has been far closer to Clinton than any other adviser. Especially in times of crisis in his career -- after a defeat in Arkansas, after the 1994 elections, and after the Lewinsky story broke in January -- Clinton has turned to his old adviser. The agendas reflect a continuing concern of the president -- maintaining his popularity amid news of scandal. The team polled extensively on such controversies as the White House's improper possession of FBI files, which was hurting hisnumbers for a time in June 1996, and whether Clinton was being hurt by the Paula Jones sexual harassment case. In the end, though, the numbers always showed that people's support of Clinton's policies overcame mistrust of him personally.But the agendas also hint at a controversy to come: Morris urged extensive Democratic National Committee issue advertising. "Use DNC to pay for it; we control production," the consultant wrote on the agenda for June 26, 1995. The agendas also reflect the Clinton team's belief in sending messages about cultural values. On Oct. 11, 1995, the agenda for the weekly meeting was about how Clinton could recast his style to present more of a reassuring "father image" -- in part to draw more female votes. "Women crave men who act responsibly," Morris wrote. "Romance novel themes arenow of woman done wrong and rescued by Mr. Right."
