Hillary Clinton Condemns Trump’s Immigration Ban

Hilary Clinton and Bill Clinton attend The Nearness Of You Benefit Concert at Jazz at Lincoln Center on January 25, 2017 in New York City.
Hilary Clinton and Bill Clinton attend The Nearness Of You Benefit Concert at Jazz at Lincoln Center on January 25, 2017 in New York City.

After President Donald Trump signed an executive order suspending the entry of refugees and blocking entry of immigrants from seven predominantly Muslim countries, Hillary Clinton tweeted that the order “is not who we are.” The order was signed on Friday and blocks the entry of refugees from all countries for 90 days, but bars Syrian refugees indefinitely. The immigration ban in the order applies to seven countries: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. The ban has been condemned by US officials, members of Congress from both parties, the international community, and many in the public with demonstrations being held at major airports. On Saturday, a federal judge halted the deportation of immigrants and refugees who were detained at US airports after the ACLU sued the Trump administration.

Meanwhile, Clinton attended a fundraising event at Columbia University in New York on Wednesday. The event was held to raise money for cancer research. The two primary researchers at the university are themselves immigrants: Dr. Azra Raza is from Pakistan and Dr. Siddhartha Mukherjee is from India. The executive order has been condemned by the scientific community because it could block researchers from entering the United States to continue or begin new research. While the federal judge did block some deportations, many of the order’s provisions remain in effect.

Update: Chelsea Clinton tweeted photos from one of the protests in New York City.

For all the latest, follow our Scheduled Events page and follow the Clintons on Twitter @HillaryClinton, @billclinton, and @ChelseaClinton. You can also follow Hillary on Facebook and Instagram.

News Source: Stat News, The Washington Post, The New York Times

Advertisements

Judge Unseals Hillary Clinton FBI Search Warrant

landscape-1478711686-hbz-hrc-concession-speech-index

On Tuesday, a federal judge ordered that the search warrant that many have faulted for Hillary Clinton’s loss be unsealed. The warrant called for the investigation of emails between Clinton and aide Huma Abedin that were found on a laptop belonging to Abedin’s ex-husband, former Congressman Anthony Weiner. The document does not provide in detail what the FBI hoped to find, and the investigation ultimately turned up nothing. The warrant was approved by U.S. Magistrate Judge Kevin Nathaniel Fox.

Many people have criticized the timing of the investigation by the FBI and the manner in which FBI director James Comey handled the investigation. He sent a letter to Congress two weeks before the election saying that the email investigation had been reopened. A few days later they concluded that no new evidence was found, but the damage to Clinton had been done. Despite winning the popular vote, Clinton lost the electoral college and the presidency. Clinton and her former campaign staffers blame Comey and the Russian hacking of the Democratic National Committee and Hillary for America chair John Podesta for their loss.

Read a copy of the warrant below or download a PDF copy HERE.

For all the latest, follow our Scheduled Events page and follow Clinton on TwitterFacebookYouTube, and Instagram.

News Source: The Washington Post, USA Today, Fortune, ABC News, Newsweek

The Choice Is Clear: Hillary’s Vision for An America That Is Hopeful and Inclusive

hillary-logo-jpg-crop-thumbnail-small

On Thursday in North Carolina, Hillary Clinton continued to make her closing argument for the presidency, outlining her record of championing the interests of people of color throughout her career–in contrast with Donald Trump’s history of racial discrimination and divisive rhetoric. Throughout her professional life and candidacy, Hillary has pledged to take on social injustice, including systemic racism and sexism. If elected president, Hillary has vowed to pass end-to-end criminal justice reform and implement common sense gun reform, priorities of great concern to communities of color.

Trump, on the other hand, has throughout his life and this campaign repeatedly instilled division and hate–from championing the racist birther movement and courting conspiracy theorists, to calling for a deportation force for immigrant families and banning Muslims.

Long before Trump ran for president, he was sued by the Department of Justice for racial discrimination at his family’s housing developments in Brooklyn and Queens–in addition to discrimination at properties in Cincinnati, Ohio, and Norfolk, Virginia. Federal investigators were told that Trump employees would mark applications of prospective renters with “C” for “colored” and refused to rent to African Americans. At her event in Winterville today, Mae Brown Wiggins, a registered nurse who was turned away from an apartment Trump managed because of her skin color, introduced Hillary, describing the impact Trump’s actions had on her life.

Years later, in the 1980’s, Trump took out full-page ads in four newspapers calling for the death penalty for a group of black and Latino teenagers who were wrongly convicted of a crime, some as young as 14 years old. Just recently, Trump doubled down on his view that the five men, who were exonerated based on DNA evidence, are still guilty and should go to jail. Trump’s refusal to accept the evidence and admit he was wrong about the Central Park 5 is deeply disturbing, and continues to exacerbate deep and painful wounds borne by the men and their families.

The choice is clear. Americans deserve a president who believes Americans are stronger together, not one whose dark and divisive vision is fundamentally at odds with who we are as Americans.

As the presidential election draws to a close, here’s a recap of Trump’s pattern of discrimination and divisiveness:

A History of Housing Discrimination

  • Trump was twice sued by the Department of Justice for discrimination in housing.
  • Despite Trump’s claim that many companies were sued for discrimination when he was, the truth is that Fred and Donald Trump’s violation of the law was so egregious that the case made against them was “one of the strongest
  • At the first presidential debate, Trump admitted he was sued for housing discrimination saying, “we settled… it was very easy.”
  • Trump’s real estate company had a disturbing practice of marking applications from black families with the letter “‘C’, for ‘Colored.
  • A Trump building manager had the rental application of a black woman and was instructed to “‘Take the application and put it in a drawer and leave it there,’ Mr. Leibowitz, now 88, recalled in an interview.”
  • The N-word was used Trump offices and Donald was reportedly was in the room when it happened.
  • Black families made up a tiny percentage of renters in Trump-owned buildings.

Trump vs. Central Park 5

  • Trump paid for a racially provocative ad calling on New York lawmakers to reinstate the death penalty for five teenage Latino and African American men who were wrongfully accused of raping a woman.
  • Trump refused to acknowledge the innocence of The Central Park 5 even after their 2014 exoneration.

The Birtherism Conspiracy Theory

  • Trump led the birther movement in an attempt to delegitimize America’s first black president
  • Trump continued pushing his birtherism theory to delegitimize President Barack Obama every Trump’s conspiracy theory: President Obama is a Muslim and rendered ineligible for the presidency because he was born in Kenya.
  • When asked what he would say to people of color who were hurt by his remarks Trump repeatedly said, “I say nothing.

Trump’s Hateful Rhetoric

  • Trump has failed to appropriately disavow racists and white supremacists like David Duke supporting his campaign.
  • Trump said African Americans have “nothing to lose” by voting for him because: “You’re living in poverty. Your schools are no good. You have no jobs.”
  • Trump continues to ignore history and disparage black Americans, saying the African American community is in the worst shape “ever, ever, ever” and African Americans in cities are “living in hell” and living in “war zones.”
  • Trump retweeted “racially loaded” and “wildly inaccurate” statistics claiming Blacks were responsible for 81 percent of White homicides.

Hateful Movements

  • Trump’s campaign shared an anti-Semitic image on his twitter that first appeared on white supremacist websites.
  • Trump has received an outpouring of support from hate movements like the alt-right.
  • White Supremacists used Trump’s candidacy as a recruiting tool.
  • White Supremacists and Klan members supported Trump, comparing his views to their views.
  • David Duke said Trump has “Made it OK to talk about these incredible concerns of European Americans today, because I think European Americans know they are the only group that can’t defend their own essential interests and their point of view.
  • “Virginia KKK Leader Endorses Trump: ‘What He Believes In, We Believe In.’”
  • Trump on being supported by White Supremacists: “A lot of people like me.”

More Discrimination in Trump Organization

  • Trump Plaza was fined $200,000 for shuffling Black and female dealers away from a high-rollers table to accommodate the preferences of patron and “reputed mob figure” Robert LiButti.
  • Trump Marina was fined for requesting non-Black driver.
  • When Trump came to his casino, Black people were allegedly ordered off the floor, according to a former employee in a report by The New Yorker.

For all the latest, follow our Scheduled Events page and follow Clinton on TwitterFacebookYouTube, and Instagram. Also, be sure to subscribe to the campaign’s official Podcast, With Her.

State Department Releases New Batch of Clinton’s Emails

mc-mc-clinton-jpg-20160614

Yesterday, the State Department released a new batch of emails from Hillary Clinton’s private server. These emails are part of a group of emails that were recovered by the FBI and turned over to the State Department for review. The release includes 1,280 pages and more are expected to be released on Friday. None of the newly released emails contained classified information and there are several duplicate emails from those already released by the State Department. The emails were released following an agreement between a federal court and the State Department stating that the emails would be reviewed and released prior to the election. To access the emails, follow the steps below:

  1. Go to http://foia.state.gov/Search
  2. Type “F-2016-07895” in the Case Number field
  3. Click on the arrow next to the “Posted Date” column header and select “Sort Descending” so that the recently released documents show first
  4. Click the title of the document in the “Subject” field to open a PDF copy

For all the latest, follow our Scheduled Events page and follow Clinton on TwitterFacebookYouTube, and Instagram. Also, be sure to subscribe to the campaign’s official Podcast, With Her.

News Source: State Department, CNN, Fox 43

HFA Statement on Report Exposing Trump’s Secret Line of Communication to Russia

hillary-logo-jpg-crop-thumbnail-small

In response to a new report from Slate showing that the Trump Organization has a secret server registered to Trump Tower that has been covertly communicating with Russia, Hillary for America Senior Policy Adviser Jake Sullivan released the following statement Monday:

“This could be the most direct link yet between Donald Trump and Moscow. Computer scientists have apparently uncovered a covert server linking the Trump Organization to a Russian-based bank.

This secret hotline may be the key to unlocking the mystery of Trump’s ties to Russia. It certainly seems the Trump Organization felt it had something to hide, given that it apparently took steps to conceal the link when it was discovered by journalists.

This line of communication may help explain Trump’s bizarre adoration of Vladimir Putin and endorsement of so many pro-Kremlin positions throughout this campaign. It raises even more troubling questions in light of Russia’s masterminding of hacking efforts that are clearly intended to hurt Hillary Clinton’s campaign. We can only assume that federal authorities will now explore this direct connection between Trump and Russia as part of their existing probe into Russia’s meddling in our elections.”

For all the latest, follow our Scheduled Events page and follow Clinton on TwitterFacebookYouTube, and Instagram. Also, be sure to subscribe to the campaign’s official Podcast, With Her.

News Source: Slate

Bipartisan Group of Former DOJ Officials Raise Concerns Over Comey’s Breach Of Protocol

hillary-logo-jpg-crop-thumbnail-small

Sunday, as reported by the Associated Press, a group of nearly 100 former federal prosecutors and high-ranking DOJ officials from both Democratic and Republican administrations, including former AG Eric Holder and former Deputy AG Larry Thompson, issued the following joint letter expressing serious concerns over FBI Director Comey’s departure from long-standing department protocols:

As former federal prosecutors and high-ranking officials of the U.S. Department of Justice, we know that the impartiality and nonpartisanship of the United States justice system makes it exceptional throughout the world.  To maintain fairness and neutrality, federal law enforcement officials must exercise discipline whenever they make public statements in connection with an ongoing investigation.  Often, evidence uncovered during the course of an investigative inquiry is incomplete, misleading or even incorrect, and releasing such information before all of the facts are known and tested in a court of law can unfairly prejudice individuals and undermine the public’s faith in the integrity of our legal process.

For this reason, Justice Department officials are instructed to refrain from commenting publicly on the existence, let alone the substance, of pending investigative matters, except in exceptional circumstances and with explicit approval from the Department of Justice officials responsible for ultimate supervision of the matter.  They are also instructed to exercise heightened restraint near the time of a primary or general election because, as official guidance from the Department instructs, public comment on a pending investigative matter may affect the electoral process and create the appearance of political interference in the fair administration of justice.

It is out of our respect for such settled tenets of the United States Department of Justice that we are moved to express our concern with the recent letter issued by FBI Director James Comey to eight Congressional Committees.  Many of us have worked with Director Comey; all of us respect him.  But his unprecedented decision to publicly comment on evidence in what may be an ongoing inquiry just eleven days before a presidential election leaves us both astonished and perplexed. We cannot recall a prior instance where a senior Justice Department official—Republican or Democrat—has, on the eve of a major election, issued a public statement where the mere disclosure of information may impact the election’s outcome, yet the official acknowledges the information to be examined may not be significant or new.

Director Comey’s letter is inconsistent with prevailing Department policy, and it breaks with longstanding practices followed by officials of both parties during past elections.  Moreover, setting aside whether Director Comey’s original statements in July were warranted, by failing to responsibly supplement the public record with any substantive, explanatory information, his letter begs the question that further commentary was necessary.  For example, the letter provides no details regarding the content, source or recipient of the material; whether the newly-discovered evidence contains any classified or confidential information; whether the information duplicates material previously reviewed by the FBI; or even “whether or not [the] material may be significant.”

Perhaps most troubling to us is the precedent set by this departure from the Department’s widely-respected, non-partisan traditions.  The admonitions that warn officials against making public statements during election periods have helped to maintain the independence and integrity of both the Department’s important work and public confidence in the hardworking men and women who conduct themselves in a nonpartisan manner.

We believe that adherence to longstanding Justice Department guidelines is the best practice when considering public statements on investigative matters.  We do not question Director Comey’s motives. However, the fact remains that the Director’s disclosure has invited considerable, uninformed public speculation about the significance of newly-discovered material just days before a national election.  For this reason, we believe the American people deserve all the facts, and fairness dictates releasing information that provides a full and complete picture regarding the material at issue.

Signatories:

  • Eric H. Holder, former Attorney General of the United States
  • Stuart M. Gerson, former Acting Attorney General of the United States, former Assistant Attorney General
  • Donald B. Ayer, former Deputy Attorney General of the United States
  • James M. Cole, former Deputy Attorney General of the United States
  • Jamie S. Gorelick, former Deputy Attorney General of the United States
  • Gary G. Grindler, former Acting Deputy Attorney General of the United States
  • Larry D. Thompson, former Deputy Attorney General of the United States
  • David W. Ogden, former Deputy Attorney General of the United States
  • Wayne A. Budd, former Associate Attorney General of the United States, former U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts
  • Tony West, former Associate Attorney General of the United States
  • Neal Kumar Katyal, former Acting Solicitor General of the United States
  • Lanny A. Breuer, former Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division
  • Christine A. Varney, former Assistant Attorney General, Antitrust Division
  • Lourdes Baird, former U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California
  • Paul Coggins, former U.S. Attorney for Northern District of Texas
  • Jenny Durkan, former U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Washington
  • Melinda L. Haag, former U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of California
  • Timothy Heaphy, former U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Virginia
  • Scott R. Lassar, former U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois
  • Michael D. McKay, former U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Washington
  • Harry Litman, former U.S. Attorney for Western District of Pennsylvania
  • Neil H. MacBride, former U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia
  • Bill Nettles, former U.S. Attorney for the District of South Carolina
  • Timothy Q. Purdon, former U.S. Attorney for the District of North Dakota
  • Donald Stern, former U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts
  • Anne M. Tompkins, former U.S. Attorney for the Western District of North Carolina
  • Elkan Abramowitz, former Chief of the Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York
  • David B. Anders, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York
  • Jodi L. Avergun, former Section Chief, U.S. Department of Justice Criminal Division
  • Marion Bachrach, former Chief of General Crimes, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York
  • Richard Ben-Veniste, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, and former Assistant Watergate Prosecutor
  • Shay Bilchik, former Director, U.S. Department of Justice Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention
  • David M. Buckner, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida
  • Alex Busansky, former prosecutor, U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division
  • Helen V. Cantwell, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York
  • Sandra Cavazos, former Assistant US Attorney for the Northern District of California and the Eastern District of New York
  • Charles E. Clayman, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York
  • Joel M. Cohen, former Chief of the Business and Securities Fraud Division, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York
  • Leo P. Cunningham, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of California
  • Bert Deixler, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California
  • Keir Dougall, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York
  • Ira M. Feinberg, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York
  • Cary M. Feldman, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia
  • Martin Flumenbaum, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York
  • Stuart L. Gasner, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Hawaii
  • Douglas F. Gansler, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, and former Attorney General of Maryland
  • Faith Gay, former Deputy Chief of the Special Prosecutions and Civil Rights Divisions, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York
  • Gerald Greenberg, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida
  • Fred Hafetz, former Chief of the Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York
  • John Heuston, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California
  • Michele Hirshman, former Chief of the General Crimes and Public Corruption Units, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York
  • Sydney Hoffmann, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia
  • June M. Jeffries, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia
  • Marcia Jensen, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of California
  • John Joseph, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
  • Nancy Kestenbaum, former Chief of General Crimes, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York
  • David V. Kirby, former Chief of the Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Vermont
  • Barbara E. Kittay, former prosecutor, U.S. Department of Justice, Criminal Division, and former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia
  • David S. Krakoff, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia
  • Larry H. Krantz, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York
  • Miriam Krinsky, former Chief of General Crimes, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California
  • Laurie Levenson, former Assistant U.S. Attorney, Central District of California
  • Tim Lewis, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Pennsylvania, and former federal judge on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals
  • Lori Lightfoot, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois
  • Debra Long-Doyle, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia
  • Carl H. Loewenson, Jr., former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York
  • Jeffrey Marcus, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida
  • Richard Marmaro, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California
  • Douglass B. Maynard, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York
  • Seth Miles, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida
  • Amy Millard, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York
  • Curtis B. Miner, dormer Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida
  • Cynthia Monaco, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York
  • Martin Perschetz, Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York
  • Elliot R. Peters, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York
  • Karen A. Popp, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York
  • Jeff Rabkin, former Assistant U.S Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, and for the Northern District of California
  • Daniel L. Rashbaum, former Assistant U.S. Attorney Southern District of Florida
  • Alicia Strohl Resnicoff, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
  • David H. Resnicoff, former Assistant U.S. Attorney, Eastern District of Pennsylvania
  • Lawrence Robbins, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York
  • Frank A. Rothermel, former U.S. Department of Justice Civil Fraud Prosecutor
  • Lee Rubin, former prosecutor, U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, and former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia
  • Betty Santangelo, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York
  • John Savarese, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York
  • Richard L. Scheff, former Chief of the Corruption and Labor Divisions, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
  • William Schwartz, former Deputy Chief of the Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York
  • John Siffert, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York
  • David Sklansky, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California
  • Matthew E. Sloan, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia and the Central District of California
  • Judge Mike Snipes, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Texas
  • Stephen R. Spivack, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia
  • Jeremy H. Temkin, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York
  • Eric Tirschwell, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York
  • Michael Tremonte, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York
  • Amy Walsh, former Chief of the Business and Securities Fraud Division, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York
  • Richard D. Weinberg, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York
  • Peter Zeidenberg, former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, and U.S. Department of Justice Public Integrity Section
  • Lawrence J. Zweifach, former Chief of the Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York

For all the latest, follow our Scheduled Events page and follow Clinton on TwitterFacebookYouTube, and Instagram. Also, be sure to subscribe to the campaign’s official Podcast, With Her.

News Source: The Briefing

Clinton Campaign Calls for full Disclosure from the FBI

hillary-logo-jpg-crop-thumbnail-small

On Saturday, Hillary for America responded to the revelation that the FBI has found “additional evidence” related to Hillary Clinton’s email with a call for more information from the FBI and Director James Comey. Campaign Chair John Podesta and Manager Robby Mook held a press phone briefing earlier today. A transcript of their comments is below:

CAMPAIGN CHAIR JOHN PODESTA: The extraordinary letter that was long on innuendo and short on facts that Director Comey sent yesterday to eight Republican committee chairs. Twenty-four hours after that letter was sent, we have no real explanation of why Director Comey decided to send that letter to congressional leaders. In fact, the more information that has come out, the more overblown this all seems, and the more concern it creates about Director Comey’s actions. For starters, it seems clear that some of initial characterizations of the FBI’s actions were inaccurate, despite initial reporting that the letter amounted to the quote, unquote, “Reopening of the investigation concluded last July.” It seems that that is not at all the case. That notion was pushed of course was by Congressman Jason Chaffetz.

It is not surprising that Congressman Chaffetz would take the opportunity to distort the facts to mount an attack on Hillary Clinton. This is someone who has promised to launch years of new Hillary Clinton investigations when she is president. Even conservative columnist Jennifer Rubin, and said earlier this week that Chaffetz says undermined his own legitimacy and he was – that he was “obsessed with finding something, anything to hang around Hillary Clinton’s neck.” So while some initially ran with the notion that an investigation was being reopened, those were Chaffetz’s words, not Comey’s, and outlets have already walked back this claim.

But this is exactly the problem that Director Comey has created with sending off his letter just 11 days out from the presidential election. By providing selective information, he has allowed partisans to distort and exaggerate in order to inflict maximum political damage, and no one can separate what is true from what is not because Comey is not been forthcoming with the facts. What little Comey has told us makes it hard to understand why this step has been warranted at all. For instance, he says, quote, “The FBI cannot assess whether or not this material may even be significant,” unquote.

And the reporting that has surfaced in the hour since this letter surfaced create even more confusion why Comey would have raised this on the eve of the election. NBC has reported from law enforcement sources that the emails in question were never withheld by Hillary Clinton or the Clinton campaign. NBC reported that the emails in question did not come from Clinton’s server at all. That has now been corroborated by a slew of other news outlets, and according to the Los Angeles Times, Clinton did not even personally or receive any of the emails in question.

Reports indicate that many of these emails are likely duplicates of ones that have already been turned over and reviewed by the bureau and its investigation last July. It is in fact entirely possible all the emails in question are just that, duplicates. So that is what we have learned from reporting in the wake of Director Comey’s message to congressional leaders. So just to recap and to put this in perspective, there is no evidence of wrong doing, no charge of wrong doing, no indication that this is even about Hillary. In fact, there are reports that the emails they want to look at are duplicates of things they already have and aren’t even from or to Hillary.

Even Director Comey said, “This may not be significant.” If that is all true, it is hard to see how this amounts to anything, and we are not going to be distracted, and Hillary is not going to be distracted in the final days of this election over nothing. But we should not be forced to get this information from second and third hand sources, from leaks, from law enforcement and FBI sources, Director Comey was the one who decided to take this unprecedented step. We now learned against the advice of senior Justice Department officials, who told him it was against long-standing department policy from Democratic and Republican administrations. Director Comey was the one who wrote a letter that was light on facts, heavy on innuendo, knowing full well what Republicans in Congress would do with it. It’s now up to him, who owes the public answers to the questions that are now on the table, and we’re calling on him to come forward and give those answers to the American public. So with that, let me turn it over to our campaign manager, Robby Mook.

CAMPAIGN MANAGER ROBBY MOOK: Well, thank you John, and this is a very concerning situation. As John explained, the more information that comes out, the more overblown this entire situation seems to be. That, in turn, has raised more questions about Director Comey from his colleagues in law enforcement circles to take this extraordinary step 11 days out from the presidential election. Just this morning, there is a startling report in the Washington Post saying that senior Justice Department officials warned Director Comey not to do this and that it was inconsistent with the practices of the department. He was apparently told that “we do not comment on an ongoing investigation, and we don’t take steps that will be viewed as influencing an election,” according to one Justice official who spoke to the Post. As a result of this, Comey has come under considerable pressure from not just Democrats but also Republicans and legal experts alike.

The Washington Post amplifies this point. Former Assistant U.S. Attorney Nick Akerman says, “Director Comey acted totally inappropriately. He has no business writing to Congress about supposed new emails that neither he nor anyone in the FBI had ever reviewed. It is not the function of the FBI director to be making public pronouncements about an investigation, never mind about an investigation based on evidence that he acknowledges may not be significant.”

Also former federal prosecutor Peter Zeidenberg said he respects Comey, however, quote, “I don’t understand this idea of dropping this bombshell, which could be a big dud. Doing it in the last week or 10 days of a presidential election without more information, I don’t think that he, I don’t think he should because how does it inform voters? It just invites speculation.” And in addition, former Justice Department spokesperson, Matt Miller, said, “The Justice Department’s long-time, long-standing practice is ‘don’t do anything seen as trying to influence an election.’ That’s usually interpreted as 60 days, let alone 11. It’s completely unfair to Secretary Clinton, and it’s really unfair to the voters. There’s no reason he had to send this letter.”

And finally, according to reports, Attorney General Loretta Lynch “expressed her preference that Comey follow the department’s long-standing practice of not commenting on ongoing investigations and not taking any action that could influence the outcome of an election,” but he said he felt compelled to do otherwise. So as John said, “It’s now incumbent on Director Comey to immediately provide the American people with more information than what is contained in his letter.” He owes the public the whole story, or else he shouldn’t have cracked open this door in the first place. Both campaigns and leaders in both parties of Congress are in full agreement on this fact.

And the last thing I’d say before I turn it back to Brian is that based on the anecdotes I’m hearing from our team on the ground, this situation has created an urgency, an intensity among our volunteers and activists that was already high because we are so close to the election but that our volunteers are rallying behind Hillary. They know what a fighter she is. I think they were heartened that she came out and addressed this so forthrightly, that she is calling for the full story to be told. And they’re as upset and concerned as we are here, and they are turning out, not only to have her back but to rally our supporters to turn out and vote as early voting goes into full swing. And we’re not just seeing this in our offices on the ground, but also in our, in our online, in the online space as well. And the, I think this is, we already had momentum and wind behind our back going into yesterday. I think this has only increased the momentum that we’re feeling among our activists on the ground.

In addition, HFA released two briefs featuring articles and coverage from the press showing that as more details have been released, the less significant the evidence appears. The releases are below:

Comey Under Fire After Sending Unprecedented Letter

FBI Director James Comey is under widespread criticism for breaking department precedent by commenting on an ongoing investigation, and doing so just days before a presidential election. Indeed, the Washington Post reported this morning senior Justice Department officials made perfectly clear to Comey that he would be in violation of long-standing DOJ policy.

Moreover, according to CNN, Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates both objected to Comey sending this inappropriate letter to Congress. Nevertheless, Director Comey independently decided to move forward, rattling the presidential election with a note that was heavy on innuendo and extremely light on actual information or needed details.

The result? Broad bipartisan condemnation and demands for the swift disclosure of more information:

Washington Post: Justice officials warned FBI that Comey’s decision to update Congress was not consistent with department policy: “Senior Justice Department officials warned the FBI that Director James B. Comey’s decision to notify Congress about renewing the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server was not consistent with long-standing practices of the department, according to officials familiar with the discussions. Comey told Justice Department officials that he intended to inform lawmakers of newly discovered emails. These officials told him the department’s position “that we don’t comment on an ongoing investigation. And we don’t take steps that will be viewed as influencing an election,” said one Justice Department official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe the high-level conversations.”

CNN: Comey notified Congress of email probe despite DOJ concerns: “Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates objected to FBI Director James Comey’s decision to notify Congress about his bureau’s review of emails related to Hillary Clinton’s personal server, law enforcement officials familiar with the discussion said. Comey decided to disregard their objections and sent the letter Friday anyway, shaking the presidential race 11 days before the election and nearly four months after the FBI chief said he wouldn’t recommend criminal charges over the Democratic nominee’s use of the server.

New York Times: Justice Dept. Strongly Discouraged Comey on Move in Clinton Email Case: “Mr. Comey’s letter opened him up to criticism not only from Democrats but also from current and former officials at the F.B.I. and the Justice Department, including Republicans. ‘There’s a longstanding policy of not doing anything that could influence an election,’ said George J. Terwilliger III, a deputy attorney general under the first President George Bush. ‘Those guidelines exist for a reason. Sometimes that makes for hard decisions. But bypassing them has consequences.’”

Politico: Comey’s disclosure shocks former prosecutors: “James Comey’s surprise announcement that investigators are examining new evidence in the probe of Hillary Clinton’s email server put the FBI director back under a harsh spotlight, reigniting criticism of his unusual decision to discuss the high-profile case in front of the media and two congressional committees.”

Los Angeles Times: “The emails were not to or from Clinton, and contained information that appeared to be more of what agents had already uncovered, the official said, but in an abundance of caution, they felt they needed to further scrutinize them.

Washington Post Editorial: The damage Comey’s bad timing could do: “Mr. Podesta said he is ‘confident’ full disclosure ‘will not produce any conclusions different from the one the FBI reached in July.’ If so, the question will be how badly damaged was Ms. Clinton’s candidacy by the 11th-hour re-eruption of a controversy that never should have generated so much suspicion or accusation in the first place.”

New York Times Editorial: “But Mr. Comey’s failure to provide any specifics about a new, potentially important development, less than two weeks before Election Day, is confounding. As Mr. Comey put it in July: “The American people deserve those details in a case of intense public interest.” They deserve details even more urgently today.”

Bloomberg: FBI Shocker on Clinton Fuels Criticism of Comey’s Tactics: “FBI Director James Comey is facing extraordinary pressure to explain himself after dropping a bombshell on the campaign of Hillary Clinton just 11 days before the presidential election… Former prosecutors and lawmakers from both parties expressed shock and dismay at Comey’s highly unusual decision, which flouted decades of legal custom that call for avoiding taking actions that could affect the outcome of an election.”

Washington Post: FBI Director James B. Comey under fire for his controversial decision on the Clinton email inquiry: “Nick Ackerman, a former federal prosecutor in New York and an assistant special Watergate prosecutor, said Comey ‘had no business writing to Congress about supposed new emails that neither he nor anyone in the FBI has ever reviewed.’”

Huffington Post: News Outlets Dial Back Reports Of FBI ‘Reopening’ Clinton Email Case: “The story took several other turns on Friday afternoon that complicated the early, screaming headlines, and then ensured the story would remain a topic of discussion in the days ahead. Multiple outlets subsequently reported that the new emails weren’t sent by Clinton and didn’t come from her private server.”

CNN Legal Analyst, Paul Callan: Time for FBI director Comey to go: “Comey’s public announcement in July that the FBI had concluded its investigation regarding Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server in the conduct of official State Department business and would not recommend the lodging of criminal charges was historically unprecedented in a high-profile political case.”

Washington Post Op-Ed by Former DOJ Spokesman Matt Miller: James Comey fails to follow Justice Department rules yet again: “With each step, Comey moved further away from department guidelines and precedents, culminating in Friday’s letter to Congress. This letter not only violated Justice rules on commenting on ongoing investigations but also flew in the face of years of precedent about how to handle sensitive cases as Election Day nears…. The director of the FBI has great power at his disposal…. With that independence comes a responsibility to adhere to the rules that protect the rights of those whom the FBI investigates. Comey has failed that standard repeatedly in his handling of the Clinton investigation.”

New York Times: F.B.I. Chief James Comey Is in Political Crossfire Again Over Emails: “The reaction was swift and damning, with Mrs. Clinton’s supporters and even some Republicans blasting Mr. Comey. Indeed, Mr. Comey, who was attacked this summer by Democrats and Republicans for both his decision not to bring charges against Mrs. Clinton and for the way he handled it, found himself in an even stronger crossfire on Friday.”

Los Angeles Times’ Michael McGough: FBI director should have known what his Clinton emails letter would unleash: “Having raised new doubts about Clinton so close to an election, Comey has an obligation —a moral obligation if not a legal one — to do everything he can to expedite the “additional work” required to determine whether this new information does, in fact, cast doubt on his earlier conclusion that Clinton wasn’t criminally culpable.”

Aurora Sentinel Editorial: FBI’s Comey needs to come clean on details, motivation — or resign: “If there’s damning or critical information about Clinton staff handling of email that creates the clear and immediate threat to national security that would warrant such a ploy, Americans deserve to have Clinton explain them, and Clinton must get that opportunity. Otherwise, Comey needs to apologize for his infelicity and possibly politically motivated stunt, and immediately step aside.”

Newsweek: Hillary Clinton’s Emails: The Real Reason The FBI Is Reviewing More Of Them: “Unfortunately, by trying to have things both ways – revealing the change in circumstances while remaining vague about what the agents know – Comey has created that misleading impression that could change the outcome of a presidential election, an act that, if uncorrected, will undoubtedly go down as one of the darkest moments in the bureau’s history.”

New Yorker: James Comey Broke With Loretta Lynch And Justice Department Tradition: “Coming less than two weeks before the Presidential election, Comey’s decision to make public new evidence that may raise additional legal questions about Clinton was contrary to the views of the Attorney General, according to a well-informed Administration official. Lynch expressed her preference that Comey follow the department’s longstanding practice of not commenting on ongoing investigations, and not taking any action that could influence the outcome of an election, but he said that he felt compelled to do otherwise.”

Charlotte Observer Editorial: Comey drops Hillary Clinton email bombshell; so tell us more: “But it is extraordinary for such volatile information to emerge so close to Election Day and that’s especially true given how few specifics are known. Because Comey was so vague, voters can’t know what to think. The new emails could be anything from meaningless to evidence of criminal activity by Clinton to most anything in between.”

ThinkProgress: The ‘new’ Clinton emails might all be duplicates: “So, to be clear, the FBI Director delivered a gut punch to the Clinton campaign, despite the fact that 1) he doesn’t know what he has; 2) it may be something that he already had; and, 3) whatever it is that he has, it reportedly didn’t come from Secretary Clinton, and was not sent to her.”

Huffington Post: Heat Rises For FBI Director James Comey As Both Campaigns Demand Email Answers: “Both camps demanded that FBI Director James Comey disclose more details about the emails and the bureau’s investigation, which he made known in a letter to Congress just 11 days before the election…. Many challenged the FBI director’s motives, increasing the pressure on him to comply with calls from both campaigns for more information.”

Once Again, “Bombshell” Clinton Revelation Fizzles As Facts Come Out

Yesterday, Republican Congressional leaders leaked an unprecedented letter from FBI Director James Comey, with initial reports including dire headlines for Hillary Clinton. But like most “bombshell” discoveries about Clinton over the course of this campaign, it fizzled rapidly as facts actually became available. Let’s review…

YESTERDAY’S BOMBSHELL: NBC News: FBI re-opening investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private e-mail server

  • Jason Chaffetz: “FBI Dir just informed me, ‘The FBI has learned of the existence of emails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation.’ Case reopened”
  • GOP: “BREAKING NEWS: The FBI is re-opening their investigation into @HillaryClinton’s secret server.”

…facts emerge:

  1.  Investigation not reopened. Huffington Post: News Outlets Dial Back Reports Of FBI ‘Reopening’ Hillary Clinton Email Case
  2. No emails had been withheld. NBC News: “the e-mails Comey announced today were NOT originally withheld by Clinton or campaign.”
  3. Emils not from Clinton’s server. Bloomberg: New Clinton E-mails Not From Her Private Server, AP Says
  4. Emails reportedly not to or from Clinton. Los Angeles Times: “The emails were not to or from Clinton”
  5. No indication emails bear significance. Comey memo to employees: “we don’t know the significance of this newly discovered collection of emails”
  6. Many emails likely duplicates of ones already turned over. ThinkProgress: The ‘new’ Clinton emails might all be duplicates
  7. Comey letter violates DOJ policy. Washington Post: Justice officials warned FBI that Comey’s decision to update Congress was not consistent with department policy
  8. Comey overruled AG Loretta Lynch. CNN: “Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates disagreed with FBI Director James Comey’s decision to notify Congress about his bureau’s review…”
  9. Former officials on both sides of aisle criticized Comey. New York Times: “Mr. Comey’s letter opened him up to criticism not only from Democrats but also from current and former officials at the F.B.I. and the Justice Department, including Republicans.”
  10.  Clinton and Trump both calling for more information. Huffington Post: “Both camps demanded that FBI Director James Comey disclose more details about the emails and the bureau’s investigation”

This is hardly the first time. It seems the script is always the same:

  1. Bombshell allegation is made hastily without facts available
  2. Media breathlessly covers the latest supposed Clinton Scandal
  3. Republicans declare that this time they’ve found the smoking gun
  4. Initial explosive reports slowly fizzle on account of facts

Here are just five of the many recent examples:

BOMBSHELL: @GOP, 8/30/16: “BREAKING: State Dept discovered 30 emails recovered from Hillary Clinton’s private server that discussed Benghazi.”

…facts emerge: Los Angeles Times, 9/7/16: “There appears to be only one new communication related to Benghazi… a complimentary note from a diplomat to Clinton, praising how she handled herself before a Senate panel investigating the matter.”

BOMBSHELL: @GOP, 5/5/16: “Hacker ‘Guccifer’ told news outlets that he repeatedly accessed Clinton’s unsecure email server & that ‘it was easy’”

…facts emerge: FOX News, 7/7/16: Comey: Hacker ‘Guccifer’ Lied About Accessing Clinton’s Emails

BOMBSHELL: @AP, 8/23/16: “BREAKING: AP analysis: More than half those who met Clinton as Cabinet secretary gave money to Clinton Foundation.”

…facts emerge: Vox, 8/24/16: “Except it turns out not to be true. The nut fact that the AP uses to lead its coverage is wrong, and Braun and Sullivan’s reporting reveals absolutely no unethical conduct….  the AP excluded from the denominator all employees of any government, whether US or foreign.”

BOMBSHELL: Washington Post, 8/22/16: The FBI found 15,000 emails Hillary Clinton didn’t turn over. Uh oh.

…facts emerge: CNN, 10/7/16: “Okay, so what’s in this latest batch? Short answer: No bombshells. More than half of the emails are these so-called “near duplicates” of previously released emails… There are also a number of emails between Clinton and her close aides in which they discuss scheduling matters — timing for phone calls, meetings, etc…. None of the new emails contained information marked as classified or upgraded to classified.”

BOMBSHELL: The Hill, 7/5/16: FBI director: Clinton emails were marked as classified at the time

…facts emerge: MediaIte, 7/7/16: FBI Director Admits Hillary Clinton Emails Were Not Properly Marked Classified

For all the latest, follow our Scheduled Events page and follow Clinton on TwitterFacebookYouTube, and Instagram. Also, be sure to subscribe to the campaign’s official Podcast, With Her.

Bill Clinton Stresses Early Voting in Pennsylvania

bill-clinton-10282016-1

Bill Clinton returned to Pennsylvania where he spoke at a series of event focused on early voting. At his first stop in Aliquippa, he spoke about a number of Hillary Clinton’s platform points including her plans to grow the economy and create new jobs. Bill spoke about a number of ways Hillary would create jobs including investing in infrastructure, focusing on growth in the manufacturing sector, and investing in clean energy. He admitted that there have been parts of the country left behind, and Hillary will focus on ensuring everyone has an equal opportunity. He concluded by encouraging everyone to vote on November 8th or to take advantage of early voting. A partial video from the event is below.

Bill then traveled to Duncansville where he continued to speak his wife’s blueprint for America and how her vision is starkly different from that of Republican Donald Trump’s. He spoke about a number of Hillary’s primary areas of focus including health care, making college affordable, and investing in rural communities. “Of all the federal development money for economics, should be devoted exclusively to small towns, rural areas, from Coal Country, to Indian Country to places in rural Pennsylvania, rural Arkansas, where nothing good has happened in a long time,” he said. Again, he concluded his speech by urging everyone to get out and vote. Watch a partial video from the event below.

Tonight, Bill was scheduled to speak at an event in Reading. Full coverage from the event will be posted tomorrow.

Meanwhile, in Austin, Texas, a fundraiser was held on behalf of Hillary for America. The event included a conversation with Chris Sacca, Founder and Chairman of Lowercase Capital and star of ABC’s Shark Tank.

For all the latest, follow our Scheduled Events page and follow Clinton on TwitterFacebookYouTube, and Instagram. Also, be sure to subscribe to the campaign’s official Podcast, With Her.

News Source: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, CentralPA

Hillary Clinton Announces Major Anti-Bullying Policy

hillary-logo-jpg-crop-thumbnail-small

Today, Hillary Clinton announced a major new plan to help children, families and educators confront the challenge of bullying and heal divisions in communities around the country. The initiative, Better Than Bullying, would provide $500 million in new funding to states that develop comprehensive anti-bullying plans, empowering communities to improve school climates and support our kids. Clinton believes that no child should face bullying or harassment, and she believes we all have a responsibility to our kids to find solutions to these challenges, to prioritize them and to implement them.

Hillary Clinton addressed the new plan during a rally today in North Carolina, saying:

“We all know that bullying is a real problem in our classrooms our playgrounds and online – and teachers have reported that this election has made it worse.  I want you to know, we’re going to launch a major new effort to help states and communities and schools and families end bullying wherever it takes place…  I can’t think of anything more important than making sure every single one of our children knows that they are loved just as they are. So ultimately, my friends, as Michelle reminds us, this election is about our kids – and in my case, my grandkids. Their lives and their futures, nothing is more important to me than that. I’ve been fighting for kids throughout my career. I will fight for them every single day of my Presidency.”

More About Better Than Bullying:

The federal government will provide flexible grants to states to tailor anti-bullying plans to their local communities, in keeping with the following national priorities:

  • Developing comprehensive anti-bullying laws and policies that explicitly prohibit bullying on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, and religion.
  • Making the Internet a safer space for kids by addressing cyberbullying.
  • Supporting educators working to improve school climate.
  • Providing support for students impacted by bullying and abuse.
  • Expanding behavioral health programming — teaching young people to control their impulses, recognize the feelings of others, and manage stress and anxiety.

Read the Better Than Bullying Fact Sheet here.

Hillary for America also released a new television ad, “Bryce,” that tells the story of a young man with muscular dystrophy who has overcome bullying. Throughout the campaign, Clinton has talked about the need for more love and kindness in our culture, and she’s recognized that bullying is an urgent crisis that contributes to poor academic performance, increased incidence of depression, and in some extreme cases, suicide.

Hillary for America hosted a press call this morning to discuss the new policy and the dangerous effect of bullying that leaders are seeing through the country. Following the call, supportive statements rolled in from leaders in the education policy and civil rights communities:

Ann McQuade, a New Hampshire educator who teaches english to refugee and immigrant students from more than 30 countries: “We’re seeing a terrible trickle-down effect from the Trump effect into our public schools. And since Donald Trump officially became the republican nominee for president, many of my refugee and immigrant students have come to me to ask questions that revolve around, ‘What if?’ These honest conversations have been sobering and sad… These beautiful, hopeful kids, they come to this country to find a better life and we say to them: ‘Welcome to America,’ and then they watch television and are exposed to angry social media that sends a different message.”

Tony Coelho, former Congressman and architect of the Americans with Disabilities Act: “One of the things we are most concerned about in the disability community is getting rid of the stigma that has existed for years and years. We were making tremendous progress when it comes to that. My really strong belief is that Donald Trump has brought hate back… When you have a candidate who is a nominee for president of one of our legitimate parties who is openly mocking, openly stigmatizing those of us with disabilities, that is a huge setback. We, in our community, really appreciate what Hillary is trying to do to take it the other way and get back to the progress that we were making… She has been with us all these years, and now she is coming in on a major issue and defending us again.”

Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers: “This election cycle—with candidates like Donald Trump using the currency of hate, fear and marginalization—has made combating bullying a more urgent issue. Trump is a bully’s bully, and the consequences of his actions will last far beyond Nov. 8. Hillary Clinton gets this, and her ‘Better than Bullying’ plan demonstrates her understanding of the need for comprehensive and long-term solutions. ‘Better than Bullying’ will give states the incentive to develop comprehensive anti-bullying plans, and it will provide parents, educators, school staff and communities with the resources and skills they need to prevent bullying and to support those who experience bullying… We appreciate that Hillary Clinton understands the importance of tackling bullying, and we look forward to partnering with the next president of the United States on an even more comprehensive approach to addressing bullying and other school climate issues.”

Lily Eskelsen García, president of the National Education Association: “Like our educators, Hillary Clinton understands that kindness, collaboration and cooperation are important in school and in life. The rise in vitriolic speech in classrooms and the anxiety created by Donald Trump illustrate that students need this support now more than ever. Educators are proud to have a partner in policies that help our children and look forward to working with Secretary Clinton to implement these proposals as president.”

Chad Griffin, president of the Human Rights Campaign: “As Donald Trump’s rhetoric continues to foment violence and encourage division among Americans of all ages, Hillary Clinton is bringing real solutions to fight the bullying and abuse that so many LGBTQ youth face on a daily basis. We know from our own research and work in schools that growing up LGBTQ in America today is not easy. Hillary Clinton’s comprehensive anti-bullying plan is a crucial and welcome step toward improving the lives of our youngest, most vulnerable Americans.”

Deb Delisle, executive director and CEO of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development: “Secretary Clinton’s proposal to take on bullying in schools couldn’t have come at a better time. Educators have long known that in order for kids to succeed, we must focus on the whole child, which starts with a safe and supportive learning environment. Our kids are counting on adults and especially our elected officials to make this a priority and to lead by example. Bullying has no place at school, in the workplace, or in politics.”

Pamela Cantor, M.D., president and CEO of Turnaround for Children: “Children will struggle to learn if they feel fear in their classrooms, lunch rooms and hallways. Bullying is a source of trauma and trauma sets off a stress response that impacts the learning centers of the developing brain, interfering with attention, working memory and organization. All children need to attend schools where they feel physically and emotionally safe in order to engage in learning. It is critically important to have national leadership on this issue so that many more children can succeed in school.”

Alice Johnson Cain, executive vice president of policy and partnerships for Teach Plus: “Children watch and learn from the adults in their lives every day. When the bar for what is acceptable behavior in political discourse is lowered — as Donald Trump has lowered it throughout the campaign — there is a ripple effect that has reached into our schools and classrooms. I applaud Secretary Clinton for, once again, stepping up to help kids. These smart and concrete steps, taken in partnership with educators, will make a tremendous difference in addressing this growing problem.”

Joan Lombardi, PhD, international expert on child development and social policy: “Stopping bullying before it starts is not only the right thing to do, but a smart thing to do to promote important  social skills among children.”

Kelsey Louie, CEO of the Gay Men’s Health Crisis: “The hateful rhetoric about the LGBT community heard on the campaign trail has been both horrifying and inexcusable. There can be no question that LGBT kids face a much higher risk of bullying, harassment and other forms of violence. And it is not just the LGBT community that has been targeted. Silence in the face of hatred, racism and homophobia is dangerous since it only foments bullying, harassment and violence. We at GMHC support this and all efforts to end the silence and combat bullying in order to advance our nation’s promise of equality for all.”

Michael Yudin, former Assistant Secretary of Special Education: “We must do everything we can to make sure all of our children have the opportunity to grow up free of fear, violence, and bullying. Bullying of children in our schools or on the internet cannot be tolerated, and Secretary Clinton’s comprehensive anti-bullying plan will empower States and local communities to make sure all of our children have the opportunity to learn and thrive.”

National Center for Special Education in Charter Schools: “We’re glad @HillaryClinton’s anti-bullying plan aligns w/our guidelines for positive learning environments for all! http://bit.ly/2dM8ZEF

Erica L Smegielski, Gun Violence Prevention Advocate: “.@HillaryClinton takes cyberbullying seriously! Having lived with these attacks for years, I thank you for standing up to this serious issue”

Morgan Polikoff, associate professor of K-12 policy, USC Rossier School of Education: “I think there are some really excellent ideas in Hillary’s new anti-bullying plan.”

For all the latest, follow our Scheduled Events page and follow Clinton on TwitterFacebookYouTube, and Instagram. Also, be sure to subscribe to the campaign’s official Podcast, With Her.

News Source: The Briefing

Hillary’s Plan: Debt and Entitlements

hillary-logo-jpg-crop-thumbnail-small

Clinton Will Fight For Medicare & Social Security, Pay For Her Plans; Trump Will Risk These Programs & Add Trillions To Debt

Tonight, voters will hear from Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump on six topics of national importance: debt and entitlements, immigration, economy, the Supreme Court, foreign policy, and the fitness of the candidates to serve as president.

Clinton has stood up for Medicare, Social Security, and Medicaid her entire career, and she will not stop now.  She will ensure the wealthy, Wall Street, and big corporations pay their fair share, invest in middle-class families, and defend and expand Medicare and Social Security.  Furthermore, her new plans are paid for, so they will not add to the national debt.

Conversely, Trump’s plans will add $21 trillion to the national debt over 20 years and give reckless tax cuts to the wealthy instead of investing in Medicare and Social Security for generations to come.

topic-1-image

Hillary’s vision on fiscal matters is clear. As she has said before, “We know what sound fiscal policy looks like and it sure isn’t running up massive debts to pay for giveaways to the rich. And it is not painful austerity that hurts working families and undercuts our long-term progress. It’s being strong, stable, and making smart investments in our future. So let’s set the right priorities and pay for them, so we can hand our children a healthier economy and a better future.”

Hillary has put forward credible plans to pay for her proposals without adding to the national debt.  As president, Hillary will:

  • Continue to put forth plans that add up, are paid for, and will not add to the national debt. As the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget said recently, “We are encouraged that Clinton continues to largely pay for her new spending…”
  • Restore fairness to the tax code and make sure the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share. The independent, non-partisan Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center found that around 2/3rds of the revenue from Hillary’s tax plan came from the top 0.1%, earning more than $3.7 million per year.
  • NYT: “Mrs. Clinton would substantially raise taxes on high-income taxpayers, mostly on the top 1 percent; … reduce taxes on average for middle- and low-income households; and overhaul corporate taxes. Her plan would increase federal revenue $1.4 trillion over the first decade….Mrs. Clinton would use the money to pay for education and other initiatives.”
  • Hillary has a responsible, progressive fiscal vision. Progressive policies such as investing in growth and the middle class, and asking the wealthy to pay their fair share – not trillions of dollars in tax cuts for the wealthy, have been successful. For example, President Bill Clinton took a $300 billion deficit in the year before he took office and turned it into a $200 billion surplus.

Hillary believes seniors have paid into Social Security for a lifetime, and they’ve earned these benefits when they retire. Social Security isn’t just a program—it’s a promise.  As president, Hillary will:

  • Defend Social Security against Republican attacks and attempts to privatize the program – and refuse to embrace proposals to raise the retirement age or reduce cost-of-living adjustments
  • Expand Social Security for those who need it most and who are treated unfairly by the current system—including women who are widows and those who took significant time out of the paid workforce to take care of their children, aging parents, or ailing family members.
  • Preserve Social Security for decades to come by asking the wealthiest to contribute more.

Hillary believes Medicare and Medicaid are the bedrock of health care coverage for more than 50 million Americans, from seniors to people with disabilities.  As president, Hillary will:

  • Fight to preserve Medicare benefits for Americans – and stand strongly against Republican attempts to “phase out” or privatize Medicare.
  • Require drug manufacturers to provide rebates for low-income Medicare enrollees that are equivalent to rebates in the Medicaid program through her prescription drug plan.
  • Reduce the cost of prescription drugs for seniors by allowing Medicare to use its leverage with more than 40 million enrollees to negotiate drug and biologic prices.
  • Tackle rising medical costs by expanding value-based delivery system reform in Medicare.
  • Help protect consumers from unjustified price hikes for long-available drugs.
  • Ensure we expand Medicaid in the states where Republican governors and legislatures have refused to do so.

Donald Trump may have abused the tax system to avoid paying taxes into Social Security and Medicare – Hillary Clinton would help end this practice. Based on what we do know about Donald Trump’s tax returns, independent experts at the Tax Policy Center believe that Trump may have avoided paying his fair share in taxes into Social Security and Medicare by abusively taking advantage of the so-called “Gingrich-Edwards” loophole. This loophole allows some high-income business people to funnel their wages through a business.  While the law still requires these business owners to pay payroll taxes on a reasonable portion of compensation, Trump may have flouted this legal requirement and avoided paying his fair share in payroll taxes that support programs like Social Security and Medicare. Earlier this year, Hillary Clinton embraced a proposal from President Obama’s budget that would end such abuses and crack down on tax gaming by high-income individuals through shifting business income, including addressing the so-called “Gingrich-Edwards” loophole.

Donald Trump’s tax plan would increase the debt by $21 trillion over 20 years to give tax cuts to the rich, and he has recklessly considered defaulting on the national debt.

  • Trump infamously called himself the “king of debt” and has proposed a tax plan that would increase our national debt by 21 trillion over 20 years – with more than half of the benefits going to the top 1%.
  • Trump displayed his willingness to play Russian roulette with the full faith and credit of the U.S., suggesting recently that “you could make the case” for defaulting on the debt, or maybe we could just “make a deal.” Defaulting on our debt would undermine more than 200 years of confidence in the American economy, and could cause a global financial crisis.

Paying for Donald Trump’s tax cuts for the rich could require cutting Medicare and Social Security by trillions:

  • As an analysis by CAP Action explains, “Trump says his agenda ‘will be completely paid-for,’ but paying for his tax plan would require cutting federal spending by an average of approximately 13.5 percent. In the next 10 years, an across-the-board cut of 13.5 percent would mean cutting Social Security by $1.7 trillion and cutting Medicare by $1.1 trillion.”

Trump is willing to jeopardize Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, which he once called a Ponzi scheme.

Trump’s plan to block grant Medicaid could cause millions of low-income adults and people with disabilities to lose or see lower benefits.

For all the latest, follow our Scheduled Events page and follow Clinton on TwitterFacebookYouTube, and Instagram. Also, be sure to subscribe to the campaign’s official Podcast, With Her.