TO: Interested Parties
FROM: Brad Woodhouse, President of Correct The Record
RE: What You Need to Know About Donald Trump’s Chief Apologist, Mike Pence
DATE: October 4, 2016

Compared to the bombastic Donald Trump, many have painted vice presidential nominee Mike Pence as the voice of reason on the Republican ticket. In reality, Indiana Governor Mike Pence is as extreme as Republicans come and has emerged as the GOP’s leading apologist for Trump’s most outrageous comments and policies.

For years, Pence has been at the forefront of right-wing attacks on women’s health, LGBT rights and immigrants and refugees in both Washington and Indiana. So it is no surprise that since signing up for the Donald Trump campaign, Pence himself has emerged as the the chief defender and explainer of Trump’s hateful politics. Ahead of tonight’s vice presidential debate, here is what you need to know about the other half of the Republican ticket.

Cleaning up for Donald Trump

For someone who claims to be “a Christian, a conservative, and a Republican, in that order,” Pence has inexplicably defended Donald Trump’s offensive rhetoric and behavior at every turn. Pence has proven a remarkable willingness to try to dismiss, explain, or otherwise condone offensive statements and policies from his running mate and the Trump family. In the process, he has become an apologist for some of Trump’s ugliest and most poisonous rhetoric—including Birtherism, Trump’s insinuation of violence against Hillary Clinton  and Donald Trump Jr.’s infamous Skittles tweet.

• MACHADO: Ignoring the blatantly offensive nature of Trump’s comments, Pence brushed off Donald Trump’s body shaming and incendiary tweets about a “sex tape” (that doesn’t exist) regarding former Miss Universe Alicia Machado as the media being too focused on “he said this, he tweeted that.”

• RUSSIA: On Trump’s dangerous admiration of Putin’s Russia, Pence offered the head-shaking assertion that it was “inarguable” that Putin has been a stronger leader than President Obama and compared Trump’s encouragement of Russia to hack Hillary Clinton’s emails to an Abraham Lincoln quote.

• BIRTHERISM: Governor Pence defended Trump’s leading role in the birther conspiracy theory, saying Trump “brought that issue to an end this week” after Trump’s one-sentence admission and, in the same week, Trump refused to admit President Obama was born in Hawaii.

• OBAMA FOUNDED ISIS: Pence has defended Trump’s assertion that Obama founded ISIS and Trump’s support for bringing back waterboarding, saying–without proof–“enhanced interrogation saved lives.”

• ENCOURAGING VIOLENCE: Pence has tried to explain away Trump’s insinuation of violence against Clinton with his comment that “Second Amendment people” could do something about Clinton picking judges and Clinton’s secret service protection should disarm and “see what happens to her.”

• POLICE POLICIES AND GUN VIOLENCE: Pence defended Trump’s call for profiling, calling it “common sense,” claimed Trump is “on a sound constitutional footing” with his stop-and-frisk proposal (not true), and defended Trump for politicizing the shooting death of NBA player Dwyane Wade’s cousin.

• SKITTLES: He defended Donald Trump Jr.’s tweet comparing Syrian refugees to poisoned Skittles, saying he was simply using a “metaphor” and condescendingly said it was “remarkable to see the level of outrage” about the tweet.

“Nobody hates Planned Parenthood quite as much as Mike Pence.”

While Trump continues to make headlines for his disparaging, offensive comments about women, Mike Pence’s record expands upon this disrespect for women. Perhaps more than any other Republican politician in the recent past, Pence has fought to undermine women’s access to health care services on both the national level and in Indiana. In 2011, Politico even declared that  “Nobody hates Planned Parenthood quite as much as Mike Pence.”

Pence has a long history of trying to take down Planned Parenthood in his larger campaign to take away a woman’s right to choose. He has said he wants to send Roe v. Wade “to the ash heap of history where it belongs.” Pence signed into Indiana law earlier this year a bill that would ban women from seeking abortion based on a fetal diagnosis of physical or mental disability and require women to seek funerary services for a fetus, no matter if an abortion or miscarriage, at any point in time in the pregnancy. The law was blocked by a federal judge in June 2016.

In Congress, Pence was the defacto leader of efforts to defund Planned Parenthood and eliminate the Title X program, which provides family planning and reproductive health funding. In 2011, Politico wrote Mike Pence was “on a one-man crusade to deny all federal funding to [Planned Parenthood]—not just the money it gets for reproductive health and family planning services, but every penny it gets for anything.” He sponsored legislation that would make it legal for hospitals to deny abortions to pregnant women with life-threatening conditions and supported a federal ban on abortions after 20 weeks. He cosponsored a bill that would redefine certain rape cases as “forcible rape,” redefining “rape” in the case of federal funding for abortions in case of “forcible” rape only.

Enacting LGBT discrimination in the name of “religious freedom”

Donald Trump’s repeated refrain to the religious right is a promise that he will protect religious freedom by repealing the Johnson Amendment. His running mate is right in line with Trump’s extreme agenda, having already taking action in the name of “religious freedom” in 2015. Governor Mike Pence signed into law the Religious Freedom Restoration Act in 2015 and with it, exacted LGBT discrimination. The widely-condemned law alienated the Republican governor’s natural allies in the business community, drew national condemnation and deeply embarrassed the Hoosier state. Throughout the scandal, Pence displayed an almost Trump-like level of disingenuousness and dishonesty. In one devastating interview with ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos, Pence refused to answer six yes-or-no questions about whether the law legalized discrimination against the LGBT community.

Pence at first said he would not support legislation to clean up the mess he made, was “knowingly disingenuous” when trying to compare Indiana’s law to those passed in other states, and finally supported a bill to “clarify” RFRA after an uproar from Indiana business and community leaders and other governors and mayors banned taxpayer-funded travel to Indiana.

Discriminating against the LGBT community was nothing new for Governor Pence. When in Congress, he cosponsored an amendment to the Constitution that would ban same-sex marriage, voted against the Employment Non-Discrimination Act and against the Matthew Shepard Act in 2007 and 2009. During his first successful run for Congress in 2000, his campaign said “Homosexuality is incompatible with military service because the presence of homosexuals in the ranks weakens unit cohesion.”

Test driving Trump’s Muslim ban in Indiana

It’s no surprise Pence is “very supportive” of Trump’s proposed ban of Muslims from coming to the U.S. In 2015, Governor Pence announced he was suspending the resettlement of all Syrian refugees in Indiana. Religious leaders defied the Governor. The Archbishop of Indianapolis, Joseph Tobin, met with the Pence to hear his concerns but defied his ban, declaring Catholic Charities would welcome a family of four from Syria anyway. This ban was challenged in court by the ACLU and blocked by a federal judge on the grounds that it “clearly discriminates” against Syrian refugees.

Pence honed his anti-immigrant agenda while serving in Congress. He said it was “wrong” to oppose Arizona’s “papers, please” immigration law, sponsored legislation that would end birthright citizenship, opposed a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants, and sponsored a bill to declare English the official language of the United States. He even introduced an immigration plan that would push undocumented immigrants to “self-deport.”

BONUS: Bringing Pravda to the Plains

Trump disparages members of the media nearly every day, whether through going after certain newspapers or networks or encouraging rally attendees to boo reporters covering his events. This concerning lack of respect for a free and open press is something Governor Pence can relate to. In 2015, Governor Pence tried to launch a state-run news service in Indiana that earned the nickname “Pravda on the Plains.” His state-run taxpayer-funded news outlet was going to produce pre-written news stories and even break news about the Pence administration. Not surprisingly, Pence was forced to drop the project after planning documents were leaked to the Indianapolis Star.

At Correct The Record, we’ve been closely monitoring and scrutinizing the Benghazi Committee’s activities for more than a year.  When it became clear last spring that Republicans would try to manipulate this tragedy to hurt Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign, we mobilized to defend her. We launched the Benghazi Research Center; published The Complete Guide to the Benghazi Select Committee; and responded in real time to the Committee’s 11-hour hearing with Secretary Clinton, fact-checking Chairman Gowdy and his colleagues.

This week, we published Committee No. 10: The True Story of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, the definitive account of how the Committee shamefully exploited the tragic death of four Americans in a desperate attempt to politically damage Hillary Clinton.

Now, as you review the report’s findings, we wanted to share with you what we’ve uncovered about the Committee’s more than two-year, taxpayer-funded investigation into the Benghazi tragedy.

A Shameless, Partisan Exercise

Instead of conducting a genuine investigation into the Benghazi terrorist attack, for over two years the Committee has run a taxpayer-funded witch-hunt against Hillary Clinton. Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy admitted as much when he said last fall that the committee was formed to drive down Clinton’s poll numbers and make her appear “untrustable.” And last year, U.S. Representative Richard Hanna (R-NY) acknowledged that the Committee “was designed to go after people, an individual, Hillary Clinton.” Benghazi Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy even toldFox News that the Benghazi Committee is conducting a political “trial” of Secretary Clinton.

This politicized mission has completely compromised the Committee’s investigation. As The New York Times noted, Gowdy has run the Benghazi Committee more like a “Republican opposition research shop” than a congressional investigation. Republican Committee members have engaged in more than a dozen major leaks. On three occasions, they’ve even given fabricated documents to reporters. Most troublingly, House Republicans have used their positions on the Committee to pad their campaign coffers and shamelessly advance their own political careers.

The Benghazi Committee was able to get away with this by conducting much of their work behind closed doors. Unlike other congressional investigations, the Committee rarely held public hearings. Gowdy repeatedly withheld transcripts of witness testimony and documents from the public and from Democratic Committee members. Throughout the probe, Democratic members were often forced to learn of major developments—like the subpoena of Clinton’s emails—through media reports. The fact that Committee Republicans leaked sections of the final report in the middle of the night, before even showing the report to Democratic members of the Committee, proves just how desperate they are to avoid any public scrutiny.

The Truth Matters

Ten congressional committees have now participated in eight investigations into the Benghazi tragedy. Thirteen reports on the attacks have been published. Since the attack, witnesses have appeared before the committee 252 times. Investigators have reviewed thousands of pages of Secretary Clinton’s emails and spent millions of dollars. None of these investigations have found any evidence of an intelligence failure leading to the Benghazi tragedy or a “stand-down order” that supposedly prevented military personnel from saving the Americans in Benghazi. And, perhaps most telling, not a single investigation has found any wrongdoing by Obama Administration officials.

At Correct The Record, we believe that the truth matters and the American people deserve to know the facts. With the Trump campaign now in meltdown, Republicans will eagerly seize on the Committee’s report to attack Clinton and deflect the problems within their own party. We hope that scrutiny of the Committee’s deeply flawed report from journalists like yourself will expose the truth about the Committee and finally put a rest to the right wing’s exploitation of the death of the four Americans on September 11, 2012. The information following outlines some of the key facts about the Committee’s slow-moving, partisan investigation. Please let us know if you need any additional information.

BENGHAZI INVESTIGATIONS BY THE NUMBERS: A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE COMMITTEE TO DESTROY HILLARY CLINTON

The Benghazi Committee’s partisan witch hunt has come at a steep price. Even before the Benghazi Committee was established in May 2014, the Defense Department estimated that thousands of staffer hours and millions of dollars had already been spent on Benghazi-related investigations. More than two years later, the Benghazi Committee, on an unlimited budget, has spent more than $7 million in taxpayer dollars and is estimated to cost $8,000 a day. In 2015, the Committee spent more than $3.59 million on staff salaries alone.

The results? Only four public hearings and an unrelenting focus on Secretary Clinton’s email—not the tragedy of September 11, 2012. The Benghazi Committee has received more than 100,000 pages of documents from federal agencies and departments—including more than a thousand of Secretary Clinton’s emails. They have interviewed at least 107 witnesses, including a number of State Department and Clinton campaign staffers.  After the relentless, politically-motivated focus on damaging Hillary Clinton, the Committee’s costly two-year investigation has revealed no new significant information about the attacks of September 11, 2012.

COST

• $+23 Million: Minimum total cost to the taxpayers of congressional investigations into Benghazi.
• $14 Million: The State Department has spent more than $14 million responding to congressional investigations into Benghazi.“During yesterday’s meeting, the State Department reported that it has now spent more than $14 million responding to the eight congressional investigations of the Benghazi attacks, turning over tens of thousands of pages of documents, and making dozens of witnesses available for scores of hearings, interviews, and briefings.” [Benghazi Committee Democrats press release, 10/10/15]
• $7.1 Million: The Benghazi Committee’s investigation has cost more than $7.1 million.[Benghazi Investigation: The Cost to Taxpayers ,accessed 6/27/16]
• +$2 Million: The Pentagon said multiple investigations into Benghazi had cost the Department of Defense “millions of dollars.” “The Pentagon said Tuesday that its work to comply with the six congressional investigations into the September 2012 attack in Benghazi, Libya, has cost the military millions of dollars and thousands of man hours. The Pentagon said in a letter to Rep. Adam Smith (Wash.), the top Democrat on the House Armed services Committee, that Defense Department officials have participated in 50 congressional hearings, briefings and interviews about the attack.” [The Hill, 3/22/14]

COMMITTEE PARTICIPATION

10: Number of congressional committees that have participated in Benghazi investigations.

• House Committee on the Judiciary. [Interim Progress Report on Benghazi Investigation,4/23/13]
• House Committee on Armed Services. [Interim Progress Report on Benghazi Investigation,4/23/13]
• House Committee on Foreign Affairs. [Interim Progress Report on Benghazi Investigation,4/23/13]
• House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. [Interim Progress Report on Benghazi Investigation,4/23/13]
• House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. [Interim Progress Report on Benghazi Investigation,4/23/13]
• Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs. [Flashing Red: A Special Report on the Terrorist Attack at Benghazi,12/30/12]
• Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. [Senate Intelligence Committee press release,10/25/12]
• Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. [Benghazi: The Attacks and the Lessons Learned,1/23/13]
• Senate Committee on Armed Services. [Attack on U.S. Facilities in Benghazi, Libya,2/7/13]
• The Select Committee on Benghazi. [Select Committee on Benghazi,accessed 3/24/15]

PRIOR CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATIONS

• 7: Number of prior congressional investigations into the Benghazi tragedy.
  • House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. [“Interim Report on the Accountability Review Board,” Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 9/16/13]
  • Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs. [“Flashing Red: A Special Report on the Terrorist Attack at Benghazi,” the Senate Committee On Homeland Security And Governmental Affairs 12/30/12]
  • Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. [“Review of the Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Facilities in Benghazi, Libya, September 11-12, 2012,” Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, 1/15/14]
  • House Committee on Foreign Affairs. [“Benghazi: Where is the State Department Accountability?,” Majority Staff Report – House Foreign Affairs Committee, 2/7/14]
  • House Committee on the Judiciary. [Interim Progress Report on Benghazi Investigation, 4/23/13]
  • House Committee on Armed Services. [“Armed Services Committee slams White House on Benghazi,” USA Today, 2/11/14]
  • House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. [“Investigative Report on the Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Facilities in Benghazi, Libya, September 11-12, 2012,” House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, 11/21/14]

HEARINGS

• 33:Number of congressional hearings, public or private, held on the Benghazi tragedy according to publicly available hearing transcripts, congressional reports, and committee websites and fact sheets.

QUESTIONS

• 3,194:Number of questions asked in public hearings held on the Benghazi tragedy. [CTR Analysis, 5/3/16]

WITNESSES

• 252: Approximate number of witness appearances before House and Senate committees and staff for hearings, briefings, and interviews according to available congressional reports, hearing transcripts, declassified briefing transcripts, committee websites, and fact sheets. [CTR Analysis, updated6/8/16]

REPORTS

• 1,982:Number of pages in published reports on the Benghazi attacks and investigations.
• 13:Number of published reports on the Benghazi attacks and subsequent investigations.

Ø  State Department Accountability Review Board’s report. [Accountability Review Board, 39 pages, 12/20/12]

Ø  Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs report, Flashing Red: A Special Report on the Terrorist Attack at Benghazi. [Flashing Red: A Special Report on the Terrorist Attack at Benghazi, 31 pages, 12/30/12]

Ø  House Republicans’ Interim Progress Report for the Members of the House Republican Conference on the Events Surrounding the September 11, 2012 Terrorist Attacks in Benghazi Libya. [House GOP Interim Progress Report, 46 pages, 4/23/13]

Ø  Report of the Independent Panel on Best Practices. [Report of the Independent Panel on Best Practices, 53 pages 8/29/13]

Ø  House Oversight’s Interim Report on the Accountability Review Board. [“Interim Report on the Accountability Review Board,” 99 pages,9/16/13]

Ø  House Oversight Democrat’s Status Update on Investigation of Attacks on U.S. Personnel and Facilities in Benghazi. [“Status Update on Investigation of Attacks on U.S. Personnel and Facilities in Benghazi,” 80 pages, September 2013]

Ø  Senate Select Committee on Intelligence report, Review of the Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Facilities in Benghazi, Libya, September 11-12, 2012. [“Review of the Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Facilities in Benghazi, Libya, September 11-12, 2012,” 85 pages, 1/15/14]

Ø  House Foreign Affairs Majority Staff report, Benghazi: Where is the State Department Accountability? [“Benghazi: Where is the State Department Accountability?,” 28 pages, 2/7/14]

Ø  House Armed Services Committee Majority Interim Report, Benghazi Investigation Update. [“Benghazi Investigation Update,” 31 pages, February 2014]

Ø  House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, Investigative Report on the Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Facilities in Benghazi, Libya, September 11-12, 2012. [“Investigative Report on the Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Facilities in Benghazi, Libya, September 11-12, 2012,” 277 pages, 11/21/14]

Ø  House Select Committee on Benghazi, Interim Progress Update. [“Interim Progress Update,” 15 pages, 5/8/15]

Ø  House Select Committee on Benghazi Democrats Report, Honoring Courage, Improving Security, and Fighting the Exploitation of a Tragedy. [“Honoring Courage, Improving Security, and Fighting the Exploitation of a Tragedy,” 345 pages, June 2016]

Ø  House Select Committee on Benghazi Republicans Report, Report of the Select Committee on the Events Surrounding the 2012 Terrorist Attack in Benghazi. [“Report of the Select Committee on the Events Surrounding the 2012 Terrorist Attack in Benghazi,” 853 pages, 6/28/16]

STATE DEPARTMENT

• $700 Million: State Department operational funding threatened by Republicans if officials do not give in to the ongoing “sham investigation.” [The Hill, 6/11/15]
• $14 Million: Cost to the State Department of responding to eight congressional investigations into the Benghazi attacks, document production, and witness availability. [Benghazi Committee Democrats press release, “On Three-Year Anniversary of First Republican Benghazi Hearing, State Dept. Reports Spending $14 Million–and Counting,” 10/10/15]

DEFENSE DEPARTMENT

• 50: Approximate number of hearings, briefings, and interviews the Department of Defense has led or participated in during previous Benghazi investigations. [Department of Defense letter to Rep. Adam Smith,3/11/14]
• Thousands: Number of hours spent by Department of Defense in hearings, briefings, and interviews, and other repetitive congressional requests. [Department of Defense letter to Rep. Adam Smith,3/11/14]
• Millions: Cost to the Department of Defense and other agencies responding to previous congressional investigations into the Benghazi attacks. [Department of Defense letter to Rep. Adam Smith,3/11/14]

RECOMMENDATIONS

• 29: Number of recommendations issued by the Accountability Review Board and accepted by the State Department to ensure the security of American diplomats serving abroad. [“Benghazi Accountability Review Board Implementation,” state.gov, 1/15/14]

ACCUSATIONS

• 0: Number of investigations that have found any administration wrongdoing related to the Benghazi tragedy. [NPR, 11/24/14]
• 0: Number of investigations to find evidence of an intelligence failure leading to the Benghazi tragedy. [LA Times, 11/22/14]
• 0: Number of investigations to find evidence of a stand down order. [LA Times, 11/22/14]

BENGHAZI SELECT COMMITTEE BY THE NUMBERS     

• 2016: Year the Select Committee suggested it would release a final report, making it one of the longest congressional investigation in U.S. history, and ensuring the investigation continues well into the presidential campaign cycle. [MSNBC,4/23/15]

BUDGET AND COST

• Unlimited:Budget granted to the Benghazi Select Committee by the Republican controlled House of Representatives. [Letter to Committee on House Administration Chairman and Ranking Member, 2/5/15]
• $1.8 Million:Approximate cost of the Benghazi Select Committee in 2014. [Letter to Committee on House Administration Chairman and Ranking Member, 2/5/15]
• $2.5 Million:Approximate cost of the Benghazi Select Committee in its first 10 months. [“Benghazi Investigation Now Longer than Iran-Contra and other Investigations,” Benghazi Select Committee Democrats press release, 3/23/15]
• $7.1 Million:Approximate cost of the Benghazi Select Committee to date. [Benghazi Investigation: The Cost to the Taxpayers, accessed 6/27/16]
• $8,000:Estimated daily cost of the Benghazi Select Committee investigation at its current rate. [Letter to Committee on House Administration Chairman and Ranking Member, 2/5/15]
• $1.35 Million:Approximate total salary expenditures in 2014 for Benghazi Select Committee staff. [Legistorm, accessed 4/24/15]
• $3.59 Million:Approximate total salary expenditures for Benghazi Select Committee staff. [Legistorm, accessed 3/9/16]
• $128,750:Average salary of House GOP staff on the Benghazi Select Committee. [New York Observer, 6/18/15]
• 46:Number of professional staff members who have worked on the Benghazi Select Committee according to Legistorm. [Legistorm,accessed 3/9/16]
• 5:Number of permanent House committees that have spent less in 2015 than the Select Committee on Benghazi. [Committee Reports from 114^th Congress, Committee on House Administration, accessed 5/4/16]

HEARINGS

• 4:Number of public hearings held by the Benghazi Select Committee since its formation in May 2014. [Select Committee on Benghazi, accessed 3/9/16]
• 11: Number of months Secretary Clinton had to wait to testify in an open, public hearing before the Benghazi Committee despite a standing offer from November 2014. [Clinton Attorney Letter to Chairman Gowdy,4/22/15; Select Committee Confirms Date for Appearance by Former Secretary of State Clinton, 6/29/15]

DOCUMENTS

• 100,000+:Approximate number of pages of documents provided by the State Department and other agencies for Select Committee review. [Select Committee Announces Scheduled Testimony of Additional Witnesses, 12/3/15]
• 300:Approximate number of Secretary Clinton’s emails related to Benghazi and provided to the Select Committee in February. [New York Times, 3/3/15]
• 900:Approximate number of pages of Secretary Clinton’s emails provided to the Select Committee in February. [New York Times, 3/3/15]
• 925:Approximate number of Hillary Clinton’s emails provided to the Select Committee in October 2015. A “small number” of these related to Benghazi, while the rest were about Libya more generally or were previously assessed to be personal in nature. [Daily Beast, 9/25/15]
• 0:Number of prior State Department Accountability Review Boards whose investigative files have been produced to Congress. [State Department letter to Chairman Gowdy, 4/15/15] 

WITNESSES

• 107:Approximate number witnesses brought in for interviews with the Select Committee to date. [Benghazi Committee Press Release, updated 6/17/16]
• 8: Number of current or former Clinton campaign staffers interviewed or deposed by the Benghazi Committee. [Benghazi Committee Democrats press release,10/1/15]

SELECT COMMITTEE’S FOCUS ON HILLARY CLINTON’S EMAIL

• 11:Number of planned hearings abandoned by Trey Gowdy and the Republicans on the Select Committee in order to focus on Hillary Clinton and Hillary Clinton’s email. [Republicans Abandon Plan for Benghazi Hearings to Focus on Clinton, 7/15/15]
• 136:Number of written questions posed by Benghazi Select Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy in a letter to Secretary Clinton’s attorney. [Chairman Gowdy letter to Clinton attorney, 4/23/15]
• 8:Number of questions, out of 136 posed by the Select Committee in a letter to Secretary Clinton, directly related to the tragedy in Benghazi. [Washington Post, 4/23/15]

TO: Interested Parties
FROM: David Brock, Founder of Correct The Record
RE: Donald Trump’s “Major Speech”
DATE: June 22, 2016

Trump’s Slow Motion Meltdown

Donald Trump’s presidential campaign is melting down.

It started on May 19th, when CNN reported that, in 2006, Trump had said he hoped that the housing market would fail “because then people like me would go in and buy.” The story marked the beginning of a series of self-inflicted wounds and devastating revelations about Trump’s past that paralyzed his campaign. A week later, Trump attacked New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez, the most prominent Republican Latina politician in the country and the leader of the Republican Governors Association, for her poor performance as governor. The New York Times called the comments “a rocky start” to the general election and Republican leaders like Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker strongly defended Martinez from Trump’s attacks.

The next week, U.S. Judge Gonzalo Curiel, the presiding judge in the Trump University lawsuit, released court documents showing that former Trump U employees called the business a predatory “fraudulent scheme” and a “lie.” Under fire for allegedly defrauding hundreds of former students, Trump responded with a series of racist and incendiary attacks against Judge Curiel. Trump insisted that Curiel’s “Mexican heritage” (he was born in Indiana) made him biased, called the judge a “hater” and ominously suggested that “they ought to look into Judge Curiel.”

The comments have fueled a crisis in the Republican Party. In early June, Republican Senator Mark Kirk (IL) announced he would no longer support Trump. The party’s top two elected officials denounced the comments. House Speaker Paul Ryan called Trump’s remarks “racist.” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell even suggested he may withdraw his support from the presumptive Republican nominee. And a number of Senators continue to refuse to endorse him, including up-and-coming Republicans like Colorado Senator Cory Gardner, Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse and Arizona Senator Jeff Flake. There is now even open discussion about a “delegate revolt” against Trump at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland.

The loss of support among Republican elected officials comes at the worst possible time for the Trump campaign. Recent reporting has revealed the campaign remains a top-down, one-man show, that promotes Trump products and financially benefits the candidate and his companies to the tune of at least $6.2 million. As of the end of May, the campaign has less cash on hand than the top 50 House campaigns and remains skeletal, lacking even the most basic infrastructure needed to run a general election. There is no real data team or field operation and few or no staff in many key battleground states. RNC staff members charged with leading outreach to black and Hispanic voters have both resigned in the past few months. Trump himself admitted the campaign would be unable to meet his fundraising goals. On top of all of that, the epic power struggle between Trump senior advisor Paul Manafort and campaign manager Corey Lewandowski, in part, led to Trump’s firing of Lewandowski on Monday.

Even the campaign’s attempt to “pivot” on June 9th was an unmitigated disaster. As his family painfully watched at his side, Trump used a teleprompter to give the worst speech of his campaign. As former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm memorably described it, Trump was “low energy.” It was a bad night for Donald Trump—but somewhere Jeb Bush must have been smiling.

Today’s Speech

Here is what we know about this morning: Trump will be depending on widely-discredited sources like right-wing books Clinton Cash, which was panned by many for a lack of evidence and many errors, and Crisis of Character, which has been denounced by Secret Service veterans because the author was too low-ranking to have seen any of what he claims. Trump will also lie about Hillary Clinton today as he has lied about her before. There have been at least a dozen fact checks calling out Trump for lying about Clinton—on the issues, on the polls and on Benghazi. You name it; he’s lied about it.

Trump asserted that Hillary Clinton “started” the birther movement, resulting in Four Pinocchios from The Washington Post, a “False” from PolitiFact, and being called “false” by FactCheck.org. He claimed Clinton “doesn’t do very well with women,” earning a Pants on Fire from PolitiFact. He earned another pair of Pants on Fire for saying Clinton wants to “release the violent criminals from jail” and that “she wants them all released.” FactCheck.org said Trump “distorts the facts” when he claimed Clinton wanted “to abolish the Second Amendment.” Trump has repeatedly lied about Clinton’s leadership during the Benghazi tragedy, claiming that she decided to “go home and sleep” during the attacks and ignored hundreds of calls for help from U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens. The comments have earned Trump Pinocchios and a “no evidence” rating. (For more Trump Lies, visit trumplies.com)

Trump is also a practiced conspiracy theorist who recently reached a new low. He was a leading voice in the birther movement and, earlier this year, peddled tales about Ted Cruz’s father’s involvement in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Incredibly, following the Orlando attack that killed 49 Americans last week, Trump insinuated President Obama sympathizes with terrorists. In interviews the day after the shooting, Trump suggested about Obama: “maybe he doesn’t want to know about it…there are many people that think maybe he doesn’t want to get it.” He also warned “there’s something going on” with Obama because he refused to use the term “radical Islamic terrorism.”

The corrupt, unscrupulous Donald Trump is in no position to question the ethics of others.  Allegations about Trump U by his own staff continue to dog Trump’s campaign. Newspaper editorial boards called for investigations into reports that Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi accepted a $25,000 donation from Trump around the time she declined to investigate Trump U in 2013. Wrote Miami Herald columnist Fred Grimm, “When Donald Trump buys himself an attorney general, he gets his money’s worth.” Further, the Trump Foundation has been accused of operating as a political slush fund rather than a charity. He has tried to make money off of dictators, worked with shady foreign governments and done business with gangsters. Throughout his career, Trump has both sought to curry favor with sworn enemies of the United States and surrounded himself with convicted criminals.

Here are just a few examples:

• Donald Trump sought to do business with notorious Libyan dictator Muammar al-Qaddafi. “Overlooking terrorism that killed Americans, including the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, Donald Trump sought investment partnerships with Muammar al-Qaddafi and the Libyan regime. He rented his Westchester estate to the dictator, tried to set up a face-to-face meeting, and took the Libyan ambassador golfing.”

• Donald Trump did business in Azerbaijan with the son of a notoriously corrupt official suspected of laundering money for Iran.  “Six months before he entered the presidential race, Donald Trump announced a new real estate project in Baku, Azerbaijan. His partner was the son of a government minister suspected by U.S. diplomats of laundering money for Iran’s military and described as ‘notoriously corrupt.’”

• Donald Trump’s top aide and his lobbying firm have represented dictators, guerilla groups, and despots with no regard for human rights. Top Trump aide Paul Manafort and his lobbying firm have represented “dictators, guerilla groups, and despots with no regard for human rights—including one man responsible for mass amputations, and another who oversaw state-sanctioned rape.”  According to the Daily Beast, “Manafort and the partners at his firm made a fortune repping some of the most despicable dictators of the 20th century.”

• Donald Trump was “eager” to meet with Vladimir Putin, and he and his family have traveled to Russia to pursue numerous business opportunities in the country since the 1980s. “Trump was especially eager for the presence of another honored guest: Russian President Vladimir Putin. Trump tweeted Putin a personal invitation to attend the pageant, and a one-on-one meeting between the New York businessman and the Russian leader was scheduled for the day before the show. Putin canceled at the last minute, but he sent a decorative lacquered box, a traditional Russian gift, and a warm note, according to Aras Agalarov, a Moscow billionaire who served as a liaison between Trump and the Russian leader. […] Since the 1980s, Trump and his family members have made numerous trips to Moscow in search of business opportunities, and they have relied on Russian investors to buy their properties around the world.”

• Donald Trump has been involved in development deals with convicted criminals at least twice. “At least twice, Trump has been involved in development deals with convicted criminals. In 2001, Trump announced he was partnering with developer Leib Waldman to build a massive condo and hotel tower in Toronto. Two months later, Canadian newspapers revealed that Waldman had fled the United States after pleading guilty to bankruptcy fraud in the mid-1990s. His extradition sent the project into a tailspin. […] In the early years of the last decade, Trump also struck an alliance with Bayrock Group LLC, an upstart property development firm that had recently moved into the Trump Tower. As a partner, Bayrock didn’t have much of a track record. The firm was created in July 2001. Its two top officials were Tevfik Arif, a former Soviet hospitality minister whose previous development experience had been in Turkey, and Felix Satter. Digging into the background of Satter wouldn’t have turned up much because Satter did not actually exist. But a man with a similarly spelled name, Felix Sater, had been sentenced to prison for stabbing a man in the face with a broken margarita glass and barred for life from selling securities.”

• Donald Trump’s purported mentor was a lawyer for the mafia. New York lawyer Roy Cohn had “a long, formidable list [of clients] that included the executives of media empires, the Archbishop of New York and mafia kingpin Fat Tony Salerno, and there, too, near the top, was budding, grasping Donald John Trump. ‘He considered Cohn a mentor,’ Mike Gentile, the lead prosecutor who got Cohn disbarred for fraud and deceit not long before he died, said in a recent interview.”

• Donald Trump hired an indicted drug trafficker to fly high rollers around Atlantic City. “Trump’s casinos retained [Joseph] Weichselbaum’s firm to fly high rollers to Atlantic City. Weichselbaum was indicted in Ohio on charges of trafficking in marijuana and cocaine. The head of one of Trump’s casinos was notified of the indictment in October 1985, but Trump continued using Weichselbaum—conduct that again could have cost Trump his casino license had state regulators pressed the matter, because casino owners were required to distance themselves from any hint of crime.”

• Donald Trump retained a senior advisor though it was known the man was linked to a major mafia-linked stock fraud scheme. “Donald Trump tapped a man to be a senior business adviser to his real-estate empire even after the man’s past involvement in a major mafia-linked stock fraud scheme had become publicly known, according to Associated Press interviews and a review of court records.”

If there is anyone who is corrupt, it is Donald Trump. This is the man who rented his land to the infamous, terror-supporting dictator Mummar al-Qaddafi and wanted a meeting with this dictator to discuss other business opportunities. Throughout his career, he has had friends and business associates who were suspected money launderers, associated with the mafia and indicted on charges of drug trafficking.

Trump’s campaign is in a tailspin, and he’s lied about Clinton so many times it is hard to keep track. He is trying to distract from the mess in his own backyard. This man is a fraud who stops at nothing—not even trying to do business with a terrorist-supporting dictator—to enrich himself. Nothing he says today, tomorrow, or in the months to come can change that fact.

Interested Parties,

Stories out today from Politico and Buzzfeed on Crisis of Character, the latest book from the right wing attempting to smear Bill and Hillary Clinton, outline its total lack of credibility. The author, Gary Byrne, is a former Secret Service agent who worked at the White House during Bill Clinton’s presidency. While he claims he was “the last barrier before anyone saw Bill Clinton,” in fact, he had little to no access to the Clintons.

Byrne could not have seen what he claims he saw. As a member of the Uniformed Division, he would not have had access to the President and First Lady as he claims in his book. In fact, those who are familiar with Secret Service presidential detail “laugh[ed]” at his claims of walking in on Bill Clinton. Further undermining his credibility, in prior sworn testimony, Byrne said he had no direct knowledge of the things he is pretending to know now. This book is recycled gossip and presents nothing new.

Below are eight things you should know about Crisis of Character.

David Brock
Founder, Correct The Record

EIGHT THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT CRISIS OF CHARACTER

“As far as I was concerned, Secret Service meant secret, dammit. We were not in the business of telling anyone what we saw while on the job.”

–Gary Byrne, “Crisis of Character”

1. Gary Byrne was Not Charged with Directly Protecting the President, Which Makes the Claims of What He Saw Highly Suspect

Gary Byrne proudly declared in the introduction to his book that he fulfilled his dream of being in the Secret Service’s Uniformed Division and that he was, “The last barrier before anyone saw Bill Clinton.” The problem with Byrne’s claim about his proximity to the President is that it does not match his job description. The Presidential Protective Division (PPD) is tasked with protecting the President and their immediate family, not the Uniformed Division (UD). UD officers stand at static posts to protect buildings, while the PPD travels with the principals and protects people.This makes Byrne’s “Crisis of Character” all the more suspect.

Gary Byrne Highlighted his Close Proximity to the Clintons While he was in the Secret Service…

Gary Byrne said he witnessed firsthand the Clintons’ personal lives. “I witnessed firsthand the Clintons’ personal and professional dysfunction: So consumed were they by scandal, so intent on destroying their real or imagined enemies, that governing became an afterthought.” [Gary Byrne, Crisis of Character, p. XI]

Gary Byrne said people “didn’t hear and see what we did around the Executive Mansion.”“Nobody knew everything that was going on at the Clinton White House. Not even President Clinton’s press guru, George Stephanopoulos. He wasn’t there at night, and some of the best (or worst) moments happened after hours. People like George didn’t hear and see what we did around the Executive Mansion, so my guess is they didn’t know how Hillary battled her husband in the West Wing.” [Gary Byrne, Crisis of Character, p. 1]

But Gary Byrne was a Rank and File Member of the Uniformed Division…

Gary Byrne said he was a member of the Secret Service Uniformed Division. “I dreamed of becoming an elite White House Secret Service officer, a member of its Uniformed Division. Nothing more — and certainly nothing less. My dream came true. I stood guard, a pistol at my hip, outside the Oval Office, the last barrier before anyone saw Bill Clinton.” [Gary Byrne, Crisis of Character, p. IX]

Gary Byrne was posted at Secret Service Post E-6, which was outside the Oval Office. “One morning in late summer 1995, I entered the White House to assume my post just outside the Oval Office – officially Secret Service Post E-6. Things were stirring, and I wanted to know why. Everyone on post that night, Secret Service agents (SAs), Secret Service Uniformed Division officers like myself…” [Gary Byrne, Crisis of Character, p. IX]

And the Uniformed Division Did not Protect the President Directly

The Secret Service’s Office of Protection Operations included the Presidential Protective Division and the Uniformed Division. “Office of Protection Operations (OPO): The Office of Protective Operations plans, directs, coordinates, and implements protective policies, programs, and operations of the Secret Service. The OPO ensures that all protected persons, places, and events receive the most appropriate level of protection, based upon a thorough assessment of associated threats and vulnerabilities, to reduce the risk of harm to the protectee and includes the following divisions: Presidential Protective Division (PPD) […] [and] Uniformed Division (UD).”

• Presidential Protective Division protected the President and members of the immediate family. “Presidential Protective Division (PPD): This division protects the President of the United States and members of his immediate family at all times; conducts protective security surveys and performs numerous special projects pertinent to Presidential and First Family protection.”

• Former supervisor of the Presidential Protective Division said the inner perimeter was “100 percent” controlled by the PPD. “‘The inner perimeter is 100 percent controlled by the presidential protective division,’ said a former supervisor of the presidential protective division, who asked not to be identified by name.”

• Uniformed Division protected the White House complex, foreign embassies, and consulates. “Uniformed Division (UD): This division is responsible for protecting the White House Complex and foreign embassies and consulates in and around the Washington, D.C. area.”

Secret Service veterans took issue with Gary Byrne inflating his role, who as a uniformed officer was “the lowest level of protection within the White House.” “The book has rankled current and former members of the Secret Service, who don’t like anyone airing business in public — but who also take issue with Byrne inflating his role. Byrne was a uniformed officer in Bill Clinton’s White House. But that’s the lowest level of protection within the White House and around their the president.”

Gary Byrne claims to have walked in on Bill Clinton in the Map Room with Eleanor Mondale. Gary Byrne would have been stopped by the Secret Service presidential detail if he had tried to get near the door. “People familiar with West Wing security laugh at the idea that Byrne or any uniformed officer ever would have walked in on Bill Clinton anywhere, whether in a meeting or, as a New York Post article over the weekend claims, in the middle of a make-out session in the Map Room with the late daughter of former Vice President Walter Mondale. The Secret Service presidential detail would have stopped him. (That affair was a well-worn rumor during the Clinton years, though strongly denied by Eleanor Mondale, who died of brain cancer in 2011.)”

Association of Former Agents of the United States Secret Service president said some of Gary Byrne’s statements do not coincide with the Secret Service operational plan. ‘“Operationally, one who has the working knowledge of how things are done there would realize that certain of those statements do not coincide with the operational plan,’ said Jan Gilhooly, AFAUSSS president and a 29-year Secret Service veteran.”

Secret Service veterans said before word of Gary Byrne’s book, they had never heard of him.“Gilhooly said he doesn’t remember ever meeting Byrne, or knowing who he was before word of the book started circulating. The former supervisor of the presidential protective division also said Byrne didn’t ring a bell.”

2. Secret Service Veterans Blasted Gary Byrne for Having “Underlying Motives”

Gary Byrne’s “Crisis of Character” is a hit piece short on facts that attempts to smear the Clintons. And you don’t even need to take our word for it. Secret Service veterans said Gary Byrne’s book had an “underlying motive” and said there was “no way” he saw the events the way he claimed he saw them. These concerning characterizations further prove that Gary Byrne is not a trustworthy source and his book should be discarded like the Clinton hit pieces that came before it.

Secret Service Veterans Denounced “Crisis of Character”

The nonpartisan Association of Former Agents of the United States Secret Service (AFAUSSS) issued a rare statement strongly denouncing “Crisis of Character.” “On Tuesday, AFAUSSS, which is strictly nonpartisan, is set to release a statement blasting Gary Byrne author of ‘Crisis in Character,’ saying members ‘strongly denounce’ the book, which they add has made security harder by eroding the trust between agents and the people they protect. […] AFAUSSS rarely issues public statements of any kind.”

AFAUSSS said Gary Byrne’s “Crisis of Character” had an “underlying motive.” “‘There is no place for any self-moralizing narratives, particularly those with an underlying motive,’ reads the statement from the group’s board of directors, which says Byrne has politics and profit on his mind.”

AFAUSSS questioned the “veracity and content” of “Crisis of Character.” “The group’s statement, which POLITICO obtained in advance of its release, very carefully calls Byrne a liar. ‘One must question the veracity and content of any book which implies that its author played such an integral part of so many [claimed] incidents. Any critique of management by one who has never managed personnel or programs resounds hollow. Additionally, why would an employee wait in excess of ten years after terminating his employment with the Service to make his allegations public?’ it reads.”

Secret Service Veterans said There was “No Way” Gary Byrne saw Events The Way he Claimed he Saw Them

Former supervisor of the Presidential Protective Division said there was “no way” Gary Byrne saw events the way he’s purporting to have seen it. “The former supervisor of the presidential protective division said that at best Byrne is working from office rumors that he’s cinematically written himself into. People spend decades on presidential details and don’t rack up the number of amazing scenes Byrne claims to have witnessed in just a few years as a uniformed officer. ‘Did Gary Byrne hear an anecdotal story being told by a couple of agents? Maybe. But did Gary Byrne see it the way he’s purporting to have seen it? No way. That’s a lifetime worth of events this individual saw in a very short amount of time,” the former supervisor said.”

Secret Service veterans said Gary Byrne did not have the intimate access needed to see what he claimed he saw. “The closest contact that Byrne could have had, according to Gilhooly and others, is seeing the president or the first lady pass in the hallway — far from the intimate access he would have needed to catch Bill Clinton in the act or see Hillary Clinton fly into the cursing rages he now writes have convinced him that she doesn’t have the ‘integrity and temperament’ to be president.”

If any uniformed officer, like Gary Byrne, had been posted near a room Bill Clinton entered, he would have been moved. “And if Byrne or any uniformed officer had been posted near a room the president entered, he would have been moved at least 15 yards away, to the outer edges of the security bubble — not quite what Byrne describes in his book: ‘I stood guard, pistol at my hip, outside the Oval Office, the last barrier before anyone saw Bill Clinton,’ according to the Post, which has been teasing excerpts of the book.”

3. Conservatives with No Credibility Created “Crisis of Character”

Gary Byrne’s “Crisis of Character” is like a who’s who of conservative backers. From the ghostwriter’s anti-Hillary bias, to help from a conservative historian who wanted to hear more about Benghazi, to Ted Cruz’s literary agent, this hit piece should be discarded and put in the fantasy section next to Ed Klein’s “novels.”

Ghostwriter Grant Schmidt shared video titled “Hillary Clinton: A Career Criminal” on Facebook.

In “Crisis of Character” Acknowledgements, Gary Byrne thanked conservative historian David Pietrusza who criticized moderators of a Democratic presidential debate for failing to bring up Benghazi.  “This book would not be possible without others whose memory and example of heroism and sacrifice to country continues to inspire. A special thank you to Grand Schmidt of Film Films LLC, David Pietrusza, and the unnamed couple without whom this project would not have been possible.” “Historian David Pietrusza, author of the much-acclaimed book ‘1932’ on the presidential election that year, agreed. ‘Following the Sanders-Clinton data breech exchange,’ he told me, ‘O’Malley stole Chris Christie’s patented act of decrying ‘political exchanges’ that ‘no one cares about.’ […] ‘But while ABC’s moderators performed quite well concerning the topics under discussion, any number of issues were simply ignored: how to balance the budget, how to grow jobs, Benghazi, or the Clinton servers and Clinton Foundation controversies.”

Gary Byrne’s literary agent Javelin Group published books by Ted Cruz and Lou Dobbs. “Latimer and Urbahn had made their bones, and Washington was taking note. A string of high-profile projects followed—a big book by Fox’s Lou Dobbs, another by Washington private investigator Terry Lenzner. In April, Javelin took a memoir by Texas senator Ted Cruz to auction in New York, reportedly winning an advance of about $1.5 million. (Urbahn says it was ‘not [Javelin’s] place’ to discuss specific advance amounts.)”

Gary Byrne’s publisher Center Street has published books from Jim DeMint, Dana Loesch, and Bret Baier. According to Centerstreet.com, Center Street’s authors include James Rosebush, author of “True Reagan,” Bret Baier, author of “Special Heart,” Dana Loesch, author of “Hands Off My Gun,” Michael Savage, author of “Stop the Coming Civil War,” and Jim DeMint, author of “Now or Never. “

4. Gary Byrne’s Suspect Credibility Called Into Question as he Contradicts Sworn Testimony That Also Included Gossip and Rumors

Gary Byrne is hardly a credibly character. His testimony from the 1990s is full of gossip, rumors, and inconsistencies. “Crisis of Character” even contradicts some of his sworn testimony. The book reads more like a gossip column and should be taken as seriously as the latest edition of the National Enquirer.

Gary Byrne’s Testimony Included Innuendos and “Little Tidbit Rumors”

Gary Byrne admitted his testimony to Ken Starr’s independent investigation involved, “innuendoes and accusations, little tidbit rumors.”  “The testimony of Secret Service officers primarily involved gossip and rumor. Starr called 31 different officers and agents to the grand jury. […] The testimony seemed to focus on what officers had heard about or talked about. This rumor mill in the White House seemed to be a focus of the investigation. Questioning Secret Service officer about details of Clinton and Lewinsky’s relationship, the officer felt compelled to remind the prosecutors that he was merely relaying gossip he had heard. ‘It was based on other, other innuendoes and accusations, little tidbit rumors, that kind of stuff.’  said the officer, Gary Byrne.” [Associated Press, 10/3/98]

Gary Byrne testified that he may have incorporated gossip into his testimony because it had been almost 3 years since the incident.  “Q: Is it possible that some of this gossip has been incorporated by you into the original story that you heard from John Muskett? A I would say it’s possible, but, like I said, I don’t really recall it that way. I guess it is possible. Sure. You’re talking, like you said, two and a half, almost three years. But to the best of my recollection, that’s the way I remember it.”

Gary Byrne’s accounts “varied in different tellings.” “Officer Gary Byrne also testified about having seen Ms. Lewinsky in the Oval Office with the President, though some details of his account varied in different tellings.”

Gary Byrne’s testimony disputed by fellow Secret Service agent. “Byrne testified that agent John Muskett told him of discovering Clinton and Lewinsky in a compromising moment. Muskett denies it.”

Gary Byrne’s “Crisis of Character” Contradicted His Sworn Testimony

Gary Byrne claimed he told steward Bayani Nelvis that he would throw out the lipstick-stained towels himself. “I calmed Nel, reassuring him that I’d take care of this myself. Wouldn’t have to worry about it. He brought me the rest of the linens.  From a nearby trash can, under the liner, I knew there was a roll of more trash can liners. I grabbed a new one as I scanned the hallway, already preparing an excuse should another officer ask what I was doing. I placed the offending linens in the trash bag and hid them in a furniture drawer near my post. I didn’t let that drawer out of my sight until my very long day was done. Getting the trash bag to my gym bag to my car involved some risky moments, but I made it. In D.C. traffic I worried, Have I just illegally destroyed evidence?” [Gary Byrne, Crisis of Character, p. 115]

• Gary Byrne testified that he did not recall any conversation with White House steward Bayani Nelvis that “stands out.” “Q: What else do you remember about your discussions Mr. Nelvis about Ms. Lewinsky? A: I don’t remember anything that stands out, sir. I mean I don’t remember anything that really stands out. It’s not like we really discussed her a lot that I can recall. Nothing really that comes to mind, anything that’s significant, I mean, can even think of. Just give me a minute to get my thoughts together here.”

• Gary Byrne testified that he drew his own conclusions about the towels. “But in a deposition on June 25, 1998, Byrne described an encounter with the steward where little was discussed explicitly and he was left to draw his own conclusions. As he told it in the testimony, Byrne was not involved in disposing of the towels.”

• Gary Byrne testified that he could not see stains on the towels. “Q: And he had, you said, towels in his hand? Were they tissues or towels, or you—A: No. Terry-cloth. Q: Was there more than one? A: It’s hard for me to remember. I know there was one. Q: Are they white? A: Yes. A: Could you tell whether there was any stains on them? A: No, I couldn’t. I don’t recall.”

Gary Byrne claimed he saw Bill Clinton and Eleanor Mondale in a compromising position in the Map Room. “There before us was E! Network host Eleanor Mondale – former vice president Walter Mondale’s daughter—and President Clinton in a compromising position, that is, making out on the Map Room table.” [Gary Byrne, Crisis of Character, p. 112]

• Gary Byrne told investigators that the event was a rumor. “Another story Byrne tells in the book also contradicts what he told Starr’s team. Whereas he says in the book that he witnessed Bill Clinton kissing the E! Network host Eleanor Mondale with his own eyes, he told investigators that he had merely heard the event rumored.”

Gary Byrne claimed he heard an officer or staffer walked in on Eleanor Mondale and Bill Clinton in a movie theater. “I corroborated what I (among many others) had heard of how an officer or a staff person had walked in on Eleanor and the president in the White House movie theater.” [Gary Byrne, Crisis of Character, p. 161]

• Gary Byrne said his testimony about Eleanor Mondale in the movie theater with Bill Clinton was based on “other innuendos and accusations, little tidbit rumors, that kind of stuff.” “Q: Was it based on anything, or just a guess? A: It was based on other, other innuendos and accusations and, you know, little tidbit rumors, that kind of stuff.”

• Gary Byrne’s testimony said he heard the rumor in a group of Secret Service officers late at night. “By contrast, the notes from the May 1998 interview read, ‘Byrne advised that he had heard a rumor that the president had been seen by a staff employee in the West Wing movie theater, with a woman other than the first lady in a compromising position. Byrne believed that the woman mentioned was Eleanor Mondale. Byrne heard this rumor in a group of USSS officers late at night.”’

5. Recycles Old, Already Reported Material

“Crisis of Character” recycles old, already reported material and treats it like breaking news. These previously reported tales should be regarded as yawn-worthy old news that tells us nothing new.

6. Repeats Debunked and Discredited Allegations About the Clintons

Facts seem to be optional for Gary Byrne. Sound like someone else we know? Gary Byrne’s Donald Trump-esque attacks on the Clintons show that he values rumors and titillating tales over the truth.

Cynically Refers to Widely Debunked Conspiracy Theories About Vince Foster’s Tragic Suicide

Gary Byrne wondered if the Clintons had killed Vince Foster. “I saw firsthand how the First Couple had lied, demeaned, and manipulated in such an arrogant and gutless fashion. But could they actually be behind so many of the suspicious –or merely coincidental – deaths surrounding their activities? Had they really killed Vince Foster? Was it even possibly? It weighed on me.” [Gary Byrne, Crisis of Character, p. 153]

• Five official investigations deemed Vince Foster’s death a suicide, only a “fringe minority of people” question it. “Yes, there is a fringe minority of people who will believe in just about every conspiracy theory. There are hacks who believe that Foster died in the White House and that his body was moved. There was even a member of Congress who fired bullets into a cantaloupe (or was it a watermelon?) in an effort to prove that Foster was killed. But there were also five official investigations into Foster’s death, conducted by professional investigators, forensic experts, psychologists, doctors and independent prosecutors with unlimited resources.”

• Donald Trump earned Four Pinocchios for questioning Vince Foster’s death. “There is nothing fishy or mysterious about Foster’s tragic suicide. Anyone suggesting otherwise earns Four Pinocchios.”

• Vince Foster’s sister Sheila Foster Anthony said her brother’s “severe depression” caused him to commit suicide. “Five investigations, including by independent counsels Robert B. Fiske Jr. and Kenneth Starr, concluded that Vince suffered from severe depression that caused him to be unable to sleep, unable to work, unable to think straight, and finally to take his own life. I know this to be true because Vince lived with me when he came to Washington to serve as deputy counsel to the president.”

Gary Byrne called the Vince Foster suicide “spooky,” and cited carpet fibers found on his suit coat. “Foster eventually took his own life in Fort Marcy Park. […] But that, along with many other public details of the case (carpet fibers on his suit coat, etc.), made his case spooky.” [Gary Byrne, Crisis of Character, p. 66-7]

• The Washington Post Face Checker debunked the claim that carpet fibers found on Vince Foster showed nefarious activities. “Most of the many carpet fibers found on Foster’s clothing came from his home, office and his car, demonstrating that he had not been wrapped in a carpet and taken to the park, as some had claimed.”

Gary Byrne compared himself to Vince Foster. “Suddenly, I realized, This must be what Vince Foster felt like – no escape except one. I never felt as if I had no way out, nor did suicide ever cross my mind. But I was overcome by desperation.” [Gary Byrne, Crisis of Character, p. 150]

• Vince Foster’s sister Sheila Foster Anthony called it cruel for people to bring up her brother. “It is beyond contempt that a politician would use a family tragedy to further his candidacy, but such is the character of Donald Trump displayed in his recent comments to The Washington Post. In this interview, Trump cynically, crassly and recklessly insinuated that my brother, Vincent W. Foster Jr., may have been murdered because ‘he had intimate knowledge of what was going on’ and that Hillary Clinton may have somehow played a role in Vince’s death. How wrong. How irresponsible. How cruel.”

Repeats Discredited Claims About Bill Clinton

Gary Byrne said he saw Bill Clinton and Eleanor Mondale together. “Another complete lie. The gall! He was seeing Eleanor, the B-list media star. I’d surprised them in the Map Room and had testified about it!” [Gary Byrne, Crisis of Character, p. 186]

• Eleanor Mondale denied she had an affair with Bill Clinton. “THE daughter of former vice president Walter Mondale spent time with Bill in 1997 at the White House and in Los Angeles, where she miffed Barbra Streisand by taking up much of Bill’s time at a party in his presidential suite and then was seen jogging along the beach with him the next day! Eleanor denied any affair.” [National Enquirer, p. 26, 5/23/16]

• Gary Byrne was stationed outside the Oval Office, not the Map Room. “Gary Byrne, who was posted outside the Oval Office when Bill Clinton was president, portrays Hillary as too ‘erratic, uncontrollable and occasionally violent’ to become leader of the free world, according to advance promotional materials exclusively obtained by Page Six.”

• Former Secret Service inspector said he never once saw what he considered inappropriate behavior in the Clinton White House during his tenure. “Gilhooly, who served primarily in the details of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, was also an inspector within the Secret Service from 1995 through 1997. During that time, he said, he was constantly in contact with people in the White House, and often with Hillary Clinton — professionally, as well as through the former first lady writing a letter on his behalf to an insurance company with which he was having a dispute after the death of his wife in 1993. ‘I never once saw any kind of what I would have considered inappropriate behavior,’ Gilhooly said.”

Repeats Debunked Attacks on Whitewater

Gary Byrne tied the Clintons to Whitewater and described it as “a lot of money moving around in unethical ways.” “And then there was Whitewater, with a lot of money moving around in unethical ways. The Clintons had invested about $200,000 in Arkansas’s Whitewater Development Corporation losing $67,000 of it when the feds shuttered Whitewater for cooking its books and acting as a money-laundering front for local politicians and favor-seeking businesses. How the Clintons could invest so much money while wallowing in $50,000 of campaign debt still mystifies me.” [Gary Byrne, Crisis of Character, p. 80]

• 1995 report found no evidence that the Clintons participated in fraud on Whitewater.“A December 1995 report [on Whitewater] by the independent law firm Pillsbury, Madison & Sutro report found no evidence of the Clintons’ and particularly Hillary Clinton’s participation in fraud. Pillsbury’s task was to assess whether federal regulators could justify a lawsuit legally and cost-effectively. The report found that they couldn’t, but the report and its authors didn’t and still don’t view their findings as exoneration.”

Gary Byrne noted Jim McDougal’s mysterious death after the FBI expanded their investigation on Whitewater. “Tripp had the affidavit document proving conspiracy, and Starr had his carter blanche. Janet Reno signed off on the Justice Department and FBI expanding their investigations from the Whitewater scandal – in which their main witness, Jim McDougal, mysteriously died – into conspiracy and perjury in Paula Jones’s sexual harassment case regarding a government employee.” [Gary Byrne, Crisis of Character, p. 147]

• Jim McDougal died of cardiac arrest. “Mr. McDougal, who was 57 but looked much older because of chronic circulatory problems, died of cardiac arrest, the Justice Department said.”

7. Gary Byrne’s “Crisis of Character” Has Striking Similarities to Already Discredited Clinton Hit Pieces

There’s a whole cottage industry dedicated to attacking the Clintons, and it looks like Gary Byrne wants in. He can join the likes of Donald Trump super-fan and notorious Clinton hater Roger Stone, Ronald Kessler, and many more! “Crisis of Character” is full of similarities to these old, discredited reads and should be treated as nothing more than fantasy.

8. Gary Byrne Lives in Same Conspiracy Theory Fantasyland as Donald Trump

Gary Byrne shows his true colors as a Trumpian Clinton conspiracy theorist, and his tall tales show striking similarities to Donald Trump’s wildly inaccurate claims he’s made throughout his campaign. Donald Trump has made it known he plans to dredge up discredited conspiracy theories, and it looks like he’ll have some help from Gary Byrne’s Clinton fantasy novel.

May 26, 2016
An open letter to Donald J. Trump:

On behalf of the countless New York citizens and businesses who worked so hard to heal after the terrorist attacks of September 11th, 2001, I have a simple question:
When do you plan on returning the taxpayer money that was designated to ease the suffering of our city’s small business owners?

Many Americans may be surprised to learn that after 9/11, you deliberately sought and accepted money from a fund designed to help small business owners harmed by the attacks. Using one of your companies – 40 Wall Street LLC, through which you own a skyscraper in Manhattan – you obtained funds from the World Trade Center Business Recovery Grant program.

It’s been reported that on your grant application, you claimed 40 Wall Street LLC – which employed 28 people and had $26.8 million in annual revenues at the time – as a “small business.” Despite the federal definition of a small business as having less than $6 million in revenue, you accepted a $150,000 payout.

In grabbing that money with both fists, you took it out of the pockets of small business owners in New York who were truly hurting, and prevented them from taking full advantage of the relief so generously offered by their fellow citizens.

You claim to be one of the biggest, richest, most successful developers in the city – yet you took taxpayer money from a grant program designed to help the “little guys.” Do you really consider yourself a small businessman? You have staked your reputation and your campaign on being anything but.

Of course, without releasing your tax returns, the true size of your success will remain a mystery. But in the meantime, we must conclude that you eagerly helped yourself to money meant to comfort those who lost so much in one of the worst national tragedies in our history.

Moreover, we know you did not use that public money to rehabilitate the allegedly “small business” at 40 Wall Street. Shortly after the attacks, you told a TV reporter that none of your properties were affected by the attacks. If you don’t remember saying that, you can watch the video on YouTube. Later, in 2005, you valued that same property – 40 Wall Street – at $400 million.

So if your “small business” was never damaged, why did you take taxpayers’ money?

I speak for New York’s 10th Congressional District – which includes the site of the Twin Towers and your skyscraper at 40 Wall Street – and all of its citizens and business owners, and as one of the lead authors of the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act, helping the real victims and heroes who continue to suffer from those devastating attacks, when I make the following demand: Return the funds you received or donate them to a charitable organization dedicated to providing legitimate support for the victims of 9/11.

Throughout your campaign, you have cited your credentials as a New Yorker, and have said that “New York values were on display for all to see in the aftermath of 9/11.”

In those dark days, New York did show the nation our very best.  But your exploitation of our bravest and most generous citizens shows us all we need to know about what lies within your heart.  We should all expect better – especially from someone running to be our President.

Whatever the size of your business, we need no further proof that you are a small man.

With great respect for the people of New York,

Congressman Jerrold Nadler

The state of the Democratic race:

It’s only Tuesday, but Bernie Sanders has already had the worst week in Washington and the worst 48 hours of his campaign.  In fact, it’s been 48 hours from hell for the Senator who has managed in the course of just two days to have his judgment and temperament to be president called into serious question.  All this has occurred, mind you, as Hillary Clinton’s nearly insurmountable delegate lead has continued to grow.  Sanders’ situation has gotten so dire that his top political operative and adviser has all but thrown in the towel – holding out hope that Sanders would be considered as Hillary Clinton’s vice presidential pick.

This disastrous period in his campaign started with Sanders touting the endorsement of a corporate lobbyist, former Senator and member of the Keating 5 scandal Don Riegle, and his week has only gotten worse from there. Beginning with his visibly frustrated “excuse me, I’m talking” Lazio moment, Sunday’s debate was full of questionable explanations about troubling policy positions and capped off with his downright offensive comment that “when you’re white, you don’t know what it’s like to be living in a ghetto.  You don’t know what it’s like to be poor.”

And, if that wasn’t bad enough, yesterday afternoon Senator Sanders attempted to commemorate the anniversary of the “Bloody Sunday” voting rights march in Selma by tweeting out a photo. But instead of using a photo from the actual march, Sanders tweeted a picture from the movie “Selma,” effectively epitomizing his lack of vision or thoughtfulness on anything other than Wall Street or “millionaires and billionaires.”  [Sanders’ struggle to appreciate the concerns of various constituencies – most notably African Americans – should not be at all surprising given that Sanders believes that issues of race, gender, ethnicity and sexual orientation can all be corrected if the economic playing field was more level – ignoring discrimination and prejudices that have existed for centuries that have nothing to do with income inequality.]

Sanders’ defense of gun manufacturers in the debate and of his vote to provide them immunity – a vote that today will likely deprive the parents of the victims of the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre the opportunity to hold the manufacturer of the weapon used to kill small children accountable –  received the immediate approval of the National Rifle Association.  No, most Democrats are not looking to nominate a candidate for president who parrots NRA talking points and accuses those who want common sense laws to reduce gun violence, including allowing lawsuits against manufacturers, of being against the Second Amendment as Senator Sanders did on Sunday night.

And the bad news continued piling on for Sanders: he was named most partisan senator of 2015, which clearly indicates that he will put ideology over compromise and would get next to nothing done in the Oval Office.

And if receiving aid and comfort from the NRA wasn’t bad enough, Heritage Action and the Koch brothers endorsed Sanders’ opposition to the Export-Import Bank, which helps American businesses compete in the global market place and supports tens of thousands of American jobs.  And who else did Bernie Sanders stand with in opposing the Ex-Im Bank?  Ted Cruz.  Some progressive, huh?

Bernie Sanders’ week has been filled with missteps, temper tantrums, wacky defenses of dangerous policy positions, and tone-deafness on issues that are deeply important to voters. He is not ready to be the leader of the Democratic Party, let alone the leader of the free world, and his candidacy collapses when put under real scrutiny.

Sanders’ “Rick Lazio moment”:

Washington Post: What Bernie Sanders still doesn’t get about interrupting Hillary Clinton

Vox: Bernie Sanders awkwardly shushes Hillary Clinton during CNN’s Democratic debate

Salon: Sanders slips during debate: Bernie needed a good showing in Michigan, but instead came across as condescending and short-sighted

Yahoo: Bernie Sanders’ feisty debate: ‘Excuse me, I’m talking!’

CNN: Sanders to Clinton: ‘Excuse me, I’m talking’

Buzzfeed: Sanders Snaps At Clinton “Excuse Me, I’m Talking”

Sanders’ abysmal record on guns:

Connecticut Post: Sanders upsets families in wrongful-death gun lawsuit

Huffington Post: Bernie Sanders: Don’t Hold Gunmakers Accountable After Mass Shootings

POLITICO: Clinton puts Sanders on the defensive over gun votes

Washington Post: The NRA just praised Bernie Sanders — and did him no favors in doing so

The Hill: NRA tweets support for Bernie Sanders

Daily Caller: NRA Backs Bernie Sanders On Gun Manufacturer Liability 

New York Times: First Draft: N.R.A. Praises Bernie Sanders for Debate Comments on Gunmakers

New York Daily News: NRA praises Bernie Sanders for stance on not holding weapons manufacturers liable for gun violence

Talking Points Memo: NRA Praises Sanders’ Comments On Gun Manufacturer Liability 

NRA @NRA: Sen. Sanders was spot-on in his comments about gun manufacturer liability/PLCAA cnsnews.com/news/article/s…#DemDebate pic.twitter.com/jEScbMDFt4 [3/7/16, 10:11 a.m. EDT]

Igorvolsky  ‏@igorvolsky: igorvolsky Retweeted NRA
Sanders echoed @NRA‘s talking points at last night’s #DemDebate… and now @NRA is praising him [3/7/16, 10:53 a.m. EDT]

Cameron Joseph ‏@cam_joseph: Cameron Joseph Retweeted NRA
Welp, that’s about the least helpful praise in American political history… [3/7/16, 11:31 a.m. EDT]

Rebecca Leber‏@rebleber: Rebecca Leber Retweeted NRA
This is a headline Sanders didn’t want  [3/7/16, 10:31 a.m. EDT]

Gabriel Debenedetti‏@gdebenedetti: Gabriel Debenedetti Retweeted NRA
Not exactly what Sanders was going for…  [3/7/16, 10:16 a.m. EDT]

Tal Kopan‏@TalKopan: Tal Kopan Retweeted NRA
Can’t imagine Sanders likes this… [3/7/16, 11:27 a.m. EDT]

Matea Gold @mateagold: Not sure this is going to help Sanders.  [3/7/16, 10:36 a.m. EDT]

Sahil Kapur Verified account ‏@sahilkapur: Sahil Kapur Retweeted NRA
In which the @NRA praises @BernieSanders: [3/7/16, 11:24 a.m. EDT]

Sanders’ views on trade deals hurt American workers:

“In short, a Senator or congressman could not vote to rescue GM and Chrysler without voting to provide the money to keep the nation’s largest investment banks from failing. Sen. Clinton voted yes. Sen. Sanders voted no.” [Detroit Free Press, 3/7/16]

Seattlepi.com: State leaders slam Sanders for criticism of export bank

Politico: That time Bernie Sanders agreed with the Koch brothers

U.S. News Opinion: Bernie’s Bailout Cop-Out

Washington Post: Bernie Sanders’s two big lies about the global economy

Politifact: Sanders overshoots on NAFTA job losses 

Sanders’ claim, “When you’re white, you don’t know what it’s like to be living in a ghetto”

CNN: Mothers of slain men knock Sanders for ‘ghetto’ comment

“Never mind that most Americans in poverty are white, or that the word ‘ghetto’ sounded dated back when Elvis Presley sang about it. Sanders showed again that he equates ‘black’ with ‘poor’ and racism with economic inequality, and that’s not a message that’s winning over African American voters to date.” [The Nation, 3/7/16]

Washington Post Blog: Post Partisan:  ‘Excuse me!’ Bernie Sanders doesn’t know how to talk about black people

MSNBC: ‘Ghetto’ gaffe highlights Bernie Sanders campaign’s struggle with race

MLive.com: Bernie Sanders’ ghetto remark during Flint Democratic debate draws social media criticism

Washington Post: Bernie Sanders says white people don’t know what it’s like to live in a ‘ghetto.’ About that…

Sanders’ joke about mental illness in poor taste:

Vox: Sanders meant to insult Republicans. He insulted people with mental illness instead.

Washington Post: Mental health patients to Bernie Sanders: Don’t compare us to the GOP candidates

Huffington Post: No Bernie Sanders, Don’t Compare the Republican Debate to People With Mental Illness

Troubling Don Riegle endorsement

Ryan Lizza ‏@RyanLizza: Don‘t mean to be a jerk, but former Michigan Senator Donald W. Riegle, Jr., who is endorsing Bernie right now, is a corporate lobbyist. [3/6/16, 6:43 p.m. EDT]

Doug Adams ‏@DougNBC: Isn’t it problematic for Bernie Sanders that Don Riegle was one of the Keating Five? And that the Sen Ethics Cmte did find him guilty? [3/6/16, 7:16 p.m. EDT]

But Riegle’s statements and support of Sanders hit many in the media as unusual, considering Riegle is chairman of APCO Worldwide’s government relations team and was a member of the “Keating Five”—a group of Senators who were the subject of a lengthy Senate ethics investigation in 1991 for possibly intervening on behalf of a bank executive whose bank collapse cost taxpayers billions of dollars. [POLITICO, 3/6/16]

Tone-Deaf “Bloody Sunday” Commemoration

Jamil Smith ‏@JamilSmith: Jamil Smith Retweeted

This is a screenshot from the movie SELMA. And not from the “Bloody Sunday” part. https://twitter.com/berniesanders/status/706903864952356864 … [3/7/16, 1:31 p.m. EDT]

Al.com: Bloody Sunday anniversary: Bernie Sanders accidentally tweets scene from ‘Selma’ movie instead of actual incident 

POLITICO: Sanders deletes Selma tweet featuring movie image

Jezebel: Twitter Account for Bernie Sanders Confuses the Movie Selma for the Actual March on Selma 

Mashable: No, Bernie Sanders, that is NOT the real Selma in that photo 

Mediaite: Oops: Bernie Sanders Tweet Featured Photo from the Movie Selma, Not the Actual March

Most Partisan Senator Award 

Washington Post: And the most partisan senator of 2015 is … Bernie Sanders!

POLITICO: Sanders, Cruz top list of most partisan senators

TIME: Bernie Sanders and Ted Cruz Are the Most Partisan Senators, Report Says

Dear Senator Sanders,

I’m writing today to urge that you and your campaign immediately halt all negative campaigning against our party’s prospective candidate for the Presidency, Secretary Hillary Clinton.

After first pledging to wage a positive campaign for President, you and your campaign have for weeks now engaged in a relentlessly ugly barrage of false character attacks against Mrs. Clinton, including running negative TV advertising of the sort you promised you never would.

Following the Nevada caucuses, you had the opportunity to live up to the self-professed ideals of your own campaign by delivering an aspirational message of systemic change, but instead you chose to ramp up spurious negative attacks against the winner of those caucuses.

These attacks –- ranging from baseless insinuations that Mrs. Clinton is somehow compromised in her ability to support meaningful reform in the financial sector, when her record shows the opposite, to unfairly impugning her reputation as a true progressive, despite her 40 years of committed, passionate advocacy – must cease.

Your continued suggestions that Mrs. Clinton is untrustworthy and even corrupt – when nothing could be further from the truth – are a threat to our party’s standing, up and down the November ballot.

With Mrs. Clinton now universally recognized as the leading candidate for the Democratic Presidential nomination, at this juncture, by staying negative, all you are doing is helping Karl Rove and his ilk do their general election dirty work. In fact, Rove and his wealthy right-wing backers have already spent millions of dollars echoing the smears you and your campaign have unfortunately directed at Mrs. Clinton.

Senator Sanders, I speak for many Clinton supporters in applauding you for raising important issues in this campaign and for helping to engage a new generation of Democratic voters. You and Mrs. Clinton agree on many priorities and goals, and the comparing and contrasting of your respective policies and programs has spurred a robust, healthy debate about how to achieve those critical aims. You can play a constructive role in the party by continuing this substantive dialogue and staying positive for the duration of your campaign.

You and I both know that the stakes for our country are just too high this November – with the Presidency, and control of the Senate and the Supreme Court hanging in the balance – for you to continue to spend your energy and resources on destructive attacks that stand to hurt all Democrats.

Please stop.

Respectfully,

David Brock

“We’re running a clean campaign. We don’t need dirty tricks.” Bernie Sander’s campaign manager Jeff Weaver said that two months ago. This was in the midst of the Sanders campaign’s exploitation of a data breach to access Clinton voter data, and right before they began a stream of misleading endorsements.

These kinds of tactics may be damning, but they are nothing new for a Bernie Sanders campaign. The irony may have been lost on Weaver at the time, but we’re here to make sure you aren’t left out. Bernie Sanders has a long history of dirty tricks – we’re talking a troubling thirty years of campaign shenanigans.

Watch this video to see Bernie’s more recent dirty tricks, and see below for a brief history of Bernie’s shady campaign tactics.

A Brief History of Bernie Sanders’ Campaign Shenanigans

2016 Democratic Primary

Data Breach

Bernie Sanders staffers exploited a temporary glitch in the DNC’s voter database to save lists created by Hillary Clinton’s campaign.  [Bloomberg, 12/18/15]

LCVA & AARP

Bernie Sanders’s campaign distributed mailers in Iowa that included a photo of AARP members wearing shirts with the slogan of the group’s Social Security campaign. AARP’s Iowa chapter had to clarify publicly that it is not supporting Bernie Sanders. [Newsweek, 1/28/16]

Bernie Sanders’s campaign used the logo of the League of Conservation Voters on a mailer. The League of Conservation Voters later had to ask the Sanders campaign to stop using its logo.  [Newsweek, 1/28/16]

Nevada Culinary Union

Bernie Sanders campaign operatives wore culinary union pins to gain access to Nevada culinary workers dining rooms.  [Ralston Reports, 1/28/16]

Culinary Workers Union Local 226 confirmed and condemned “reports of Bernie Sanders’ campaign staffers attempting and gaining access to Employee Dining Rooms at Las Vegas Strip properties.”  [The Hill, 1/28/16]

2006

Push Polls

Sanders was accused of “running so-called ‘push polls,’ a tactic considered deceptive in which a partisan caller, masquerading as an independent pollster, asks a potential voter leading questions with the intention of spreading negative information about an opponent.” [U.S. News, 2/16/16]

Manipulated Democratic Primary Process to Prevent Democratic Challenger

Bernie Sanders worked with the Vermont Democratic Party to keep Democratic candidates off the ballot in the general election.  [‘Party shuns Vermont Democrats in race; Seeks to clear way for independent in US Senate bid,’ Boston Globe, 7/13/06]

Part of Backroom Political Deal? 

According to a UVM political scientist, Bernie Sanders made a deal with Democrats in 2006 that, in return for ensuring Progressives would not challenge Democrats for Vermont’s House seat, no Democrat would run against Sanders in the general.  [Seven Days, 9/9/15]

Sanders’ Democratic Primary Opponents Criticized this as a blatantly Unfair Process

One of Sanders’ Democratic primary opponents called the Vermont Democratic Party’s support of Sanders in the primary “highly unethical.” [“Party shuns Vermont Democrats in race; Seeks to clear way for independent in US Senate bid,” Boston Globe, 7/13/06]

One of Sanders’ Democratic primary opponents on Bernie Sanders’ collusion with the Vermont Democratic Party:  “This is against the legislative intent to have the voters pick the candidates in primaries, not the political machines.”  [Burlington Free Press, 9/5/06]

1990

Secret Deal with Democrats

Editorials in the Vermont Times accused Sanders of “backroom shenanigans in which Sanders struck a deal to run for Vermont’s U.S. House seat with just token Democratic opposition, in exchange for opting out of a run for governor.” [U.S. News, 2/16/16]

1986

Misleading Flyer

Bernie Sanders’ campaign was accused of “distributing a flyer that implied the endorsement of the Rutland Herald, and of sending a letter that suggested it had the support of the Vermont National Organization for Women.” [U.S. News, 2/16/16]

On this morning after the New Hampshire primary, while parsing the results of last night’s voting will be a major preoccupation of the news media, it’s considerably more important that attention be paid to the real debate happening in the Democratic Party – a debate about our country’s future and about which candidate’s plans can actually move America forward.

The truth is that few serious policy analysts, experts or commentators, take Senator Sanders’ sketchy policies seriously. His proposals, which are little more than a flurry of press releases and empty pronouncements, are not based in fact and empirical evidence, do not accurately describe the present-day economy, fail to account for the progress wrought by the Obama Administration (the Affordable Care Act, Dodd-Frank). And thus, they are not practical solutions to America’s most pressing priorities such as raising incomes and creating jobs, holding Wall Street accountable for its risky bets, or dealing with ISIS.  According to a veritable chorus of observers, there is almost no practical, real-world value behind Senator Sanders’ sloganeering. His policies are a Potemkin village.

Over the course of the coming weeks, it is Senator Sanders’ policies that should be evaluated and held to the same scrutiny that has been applied to Secretary Clinton in her public service career.

Attached are some of the headlines of the stories and analyses – many of which you all have written – that crystallize the contrasts between Secretary Clinton and Senator Sanders. On the critical issues facing Americans, Secretary Clinton is ready to lead on the first day in office and Senator Sanders is not.

[columns]

[column size=”half” last=”no”]

Secretary Hillary Clinton

“Hillary Clinton’s Bold Plan for Voting Rights.” [The Nation, 6/4/15]

“Clinton money-in-politics plan would benefit candidates like…Bernie Sanders.” [Center for Responsive Politics, 9/9/15]

“Clinton’s Bold Immigration Plan Leaves Republicans Nearly Speechless.” [NPR, 5/11/15]

“The Big, Bold Idea at the Heart of Hillary Clinton’s Plan to Make College Cheaper” [Slate, 8/10/15]

“Hillary Clinton Unveils Bold Plan to Power American Homes.” [NBC News, 6/27/15] 

 “Hillary Clinton to Offer Plan on Paying College Tuition Without Needing Loans.” [The New York Times, 8/10/15]

“Hillary’s $350 billion plan to kill college debt.” [Politico, 8/10/15]

 “What Hillary Clinton Gets (and Bernie Sanders Doesn’t) About Wall Street.” [The New Yorker, 12/10/15] 

“Hillary Clinton’s plan to tame big banks shows her at her wonkish best.” [Vox, 10/9/15]

“Hillary Clinton Takes on ISIS.” [The New York Times editorial, 11/20/15]

“Hillary Clinton Unveils Aggressive Gun Control Plan” [ThinkProgress, 10/5/15]

“Hillary Clinton Drug Plan Would Cap Consumer Costs, Mandate R&D Spending.” [Bloomberg, 9/22/15] 

“Hillary Clinton’s autism platform is transformational and empowering.” [The Guardian editorial, 1/6/16]

“Hillary Clinton’s Autism Plan Suggests Times Are Changing.” [Forbes, 1/7/16]

“4 Ways Hillary Clinton’s Autism Plan Will Improve American Education.” [The Seventy Four, 1/7/16]

“Hillary Clinton for the Democratic Nomination.” [The New York Times editorial, 1/30/16]

“Voters have the chance to choose one of the most broadly and deeply qualified presidential candidates in modern history.” [The New York Times editorial, 1/30/16]

“Hillary Clinton Deserves Democratic Nomination.” [The Boston Globe editorial, 1/24/16]

 “Endorsement: Hillary Clinton has needed knowledge, experience.” [Des Moines Register, 1/23/16]

“Editorial: Clinton is Democrats’ best choice.” [Concord Monitor editorial, 1/24/16]

“Endorsement: Clinton has record of getting things done.” [Iowa City Press-Citizen editorial, 1/29/16]

“We endorse Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination for president.” [Sentinel Source editorial, 1/28/16]

“LCV Action Fund Endorses Hillary Clinton for President.” [League of Conservation Voters, 11/9/15]

“Bricklayers Endorse Hillary Clinton for President.” [International Union of Bricklayers & Allied Craftworkers, 9/9/15]

“Iron Workers Endorse Hillary Clinton for President.” [International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers, 11/23/15]

“SEIU endorses Hillary Clinton for president.” [Service Employees International Union, 11/17/15]

“EXCLUSIVE: The U.S. Black Chambers Endorse Hillary Clinton.” [Black Enterprise, 1/15/16]

“American Federation of Teachers Endorses Hillary Clinton for President.” [American Federation of Teachers, 7/11/15]

“The South Carolina Education Association Recommends Hillary Clinton for President.” [Medium, 12/11/15]

“Brady Campaign to Endorse Hillary Clinton.” [Politico, 1/12/16]

“Human Rights Campaign Endorses Hillary Clinton for President.” [Human Rights Campaign, 1/19/16]

“5 Reasons Why NARAL Pro-Choice America Is Endorsing Hillary Clinton. Our Champion.” [Medium, 1/5/16]

[/column]
[column size=”half” last=”yes”]

Senator Bernie Sanders

“Bernie’s foreign policy deficit.” [Politico, 1/30/16]

“The loner: On foreign policy, Sanders may disappoint devotees.” [Newsweek, 2/1/16]

“Foreign Policy Questions Push Bernie Sanders Out of Comfort Zone.” [New York Times, 2/8/16]

“Sanders flunks on foreign policy.” [Boston Globe, 2/5/16]

“Bernie Sanders is wrong about this and Hillary Clinton is right.” [New York Times, 1/18/16]

“Bernie Sanders Is Promising Health Care Utopia, With No Way To Deliver.” [Huffington Post, 1/21/16]

“The false charms of Bernie Sanders’s single-payer plan.” [Washington Post, 2/7/15]

“Bernie Sanders Isn’t Serious About Governing.” [Roll Call, 1/21/16]

“Bernie Sanders is wrong about this and Hillary Clinton is right.” [New York Times, 1/18/16]

“I Get Sanders’ Appeal. But He’s Not a Credible President.” [Politico, 1/25/16]

“Bernie’s Single Payer Health Plan. Ain’t Gonna Happen.” [Newsweek, 1/26/16]

“Bernie Sanders’s single-payer plan isn’t a plan at all.” [Vox, 1/17/16]

“The Bernie Sanders Health Plan Is Too Good To Be True, Analyst Says.” [Huffington Post, 1/27/16]

“For Now, Bernie Sanders’s Health Plan Is More of a Tax Plan.” [New York Times, 1/19/16]

“Bernie Sanders doesn’t get how politics works.” [Boston Globe, 1/18/16]

“Bernie Sanders’s fiction-filled campaign.” [Washington Post editorial, 1/27/16]

“Study: Bernie Sanders’s single-payer plan is almost twice as expensive as he says.” [Vox, 1/28/16]

“Bernie Sanders’s Tax Increases Fall Short of Paying for Health Plan, Analysis Finds.” [Wall Street Journal, 2/2/16]

“The false charms of Bernie Sanders’s single-payer plan.” [Washington Post editorial, 2/7/16]

“Sanders’s Wall Street plan is a slogan.” [Vox, 1/18/16]

“AP Spin Meter: Sanders Says He’ll Quickly Break Up Big Banks.” [Associated Press, 1/30/16]

“Bernie Sanders’s questionable ‘revolution.’” [Washington Post editorial, 4/30/15]

“Bernie Sanders isn’t as progressive as you think.” [Washington Post editorial, 9/15/15]

“Sanders’s free tuition plan is half-baked.” [Vox, 1/18/16]

“On guns, Sanders has an authenticity problem” [Yahoo, 1/7/16]

“Bernie Sanders’ Plan to Fight Mass Incarceration Doesn’t Add Up.” [Mother Jones, 1/12/16]

“Sanders’ pledge illustrates how plans to curtail mass incarceration fall short” [Los Angeles Times, 11/25/15]

[/column]

[/columns]