WBEZ | Hillary Clinton http://www.wbez.org/tags/hillary-clinton Latest from WBEZ Chicago Public Radio en Chicago Mayor Emanuel Now Says He Welcomes Federal Investigation http://www.wbez.org/news/chicago-mayor-emanuel-now-says-he-welcomes-federal-investigation-114031 <p><div id="res458318015" previewtitle="Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, left, and Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy appear at a news conference Tuesday."><div data-crop-type=""><img alt="" class="image-original_image" src="http://www.wbez.org/system/files/styles/original_image/llo/insert-images/AP_396701442705%20%281%29.jpg" style="height: 297px; width: 310px; float: right; margin-left: 10px; margin-right: 10px;" title="Chicago Mayor, Rahm Emauel. (AP Photo/Charles Rex Arbogast)" />Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel appears to be reversing course and says he now &quot;welcomes&quot; a Justice Department investigation in &quot;systemic issues embedded&quot; in the city&#39;s police department.</div></div><p>The mayor&#39;s office Thursday morning released a statement seeking to &quot;clarify&quot; Emanuel&#39;s comments Wednesday, in which he suggested a federal civil rights pattern-and-practice investigation &quot;in my view, would be misguided.&quot;</p><p>Emanuel now says he is open to a longer-term review of the Chicago Police Department to improve accountability and restore public trust. The comments come a day after Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton called for an independent Department of Justice investigation.</p><p>&quot;Hillary Clinton is deeply troubled by the shooting of Laquan McDonald and the outstanding questions related to both the shooting and the video,&quot; Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon&nbsp;<a href="http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/clinton-faces-criminal-justice-test-chicago">said in a statement</a>. &quot;Mayor Emanuel&#39;s call for a task force to review practices of the Chicago Police Department is an important step, but given the gravity of this tragic situation, she supports a full review by the Department of Justice.&#39;&quot;</p><p>Emanuel&#39;s office said his comments Wednesday, that a new investigation would be misguided and that he doesn&#39;t want the feds &quot;hitting the reset button,&quot; refers to the ongoing federal investigation into the Laquan McDonald case only.</p><p>He again urged the U.S. Attorney in Chicago to finish that year-long investigation soon.</p><p>Here&#39;s his full statement:</p><blockquote><div><p><strong>MAYOR EMANUEL STATEMENT ON POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY REVIEWS</strong></p><p>&quot;Many things must happen to restore trust in the Chicago Police Department and I welcome efforts and ideas that can help us achieve that important goal. I want to clarify my comments from yesterday and I want to be clear that the City welcomes engagement by the Department of Justice when it comes to looking at the systemic issues embedded in CPD.</p><p>First and foremost, we need answers as to what happened in the Laquan McDonald case, which is why the United States Attorney should swiftly conclude his year-long investigation and shed light on what happened that night, and the actions of everyone involved.</p><p>As it relates to a longer-term review of our police department and efforts to improve police accountability, I am open to anything that will help give us answers and restore the trust that is critical to our public safety efforts. I trust the Department of Justice to make the right decision based on the facts and the law. Like every Chicagoan, I want to get to a place where we&#39;re permanently addressing the entrenched issues in our police department. Our residents deserve that, as do our police officers. Adherence to civil rights and effective crime fighting go hand in hand.&quot;</p><p><strong>Background:</strong></p><ul><li>On Tuesday, Mayor Emanuel announced that a six-member Police Accountability Task Force would immediately begin a top-to-bottom review of the system of oversight and accountability training and transparency that is currently in place at CPD.</li><li>In his speech, Mayor Emanuel said: &quot;Every day, we must ensure the checks and balances are in place to keep the confidence of Chicagoans ... There are systemic challenges that will require sustained reform. It is a work in progress as we continue to build confidence in our police force.&quot;</li><li>Additionally, on Wednesday during a discussion with Politico, Mayor Emanuel was asked a question of whether CPD violated the constitution and federal laws. He responded to that question in the context of the Laquan McDonald case. See the exchange below:</li></ul><p><strong>Q: Yesterday, the Illinois Attorney General requested the US Department of Justice Civil Rights Division investigation whether practices by the Chicago Police Department violate the constitution and federal laws. Do you worry that&#39;s the case?</strong></p><p>A:&nbsp;No. I want everybody to remember this. First, the city had a civil &ndash; there&#39;s kind of three legal tracks and three kinds of oversights. On February 27, the family came and approached the city. We reached a settlement in and around the civil case and then took it to the City Council. If you go and look back at what Steve Patton said in front of City Council, a lot of that was there and in public domain. Immediately after the incident, back in February 2014 &ndash; so 14 months ago, within weeks, I think two weeks &mdash; the U.S. attorney and the State&#39;s Attorney both opened up investigations with the FBI as an investigatory body. They had all materials, all the tapes, all the background. We settled &ndash; as I said &ndash; in April. But started in the discussions end of February when the family approached. As you now know, the State&#39;s attorney concluded her investigation. There&#39;s an ongoing investigation by the U.S. Attorney&#39;s Office here in Chicago with the FBI. My view is that given the period of time they&#39;ve had the information, like everybody else, I await their conclusion. They are looking into this situation and all the aspects around it. I think an additional layer prior to the completion of this, in my view, would be misguided. And if you notice, they are doing a thorough job, given that they had the information two weeks after, just immediately after the incident. They are doing a thorough job, and hitting the restart button on a whole new investigation does not get you to the conclusion in an expedited fashion.</p><p><strong>Q: But those are two different things. What she&#39;s looking at is a civil rights investigation. It would look at pattern and practice at the police department. It would be a more sweeping view. Other cities have done it &ndash; would you welcome that?</strong></p><p>A:&nbsp;Well, what I would first welcome is the conclusion of the existing investigation by the U.S. Attorneys right now that&#39;s present. I think that one of the reasons I asked the former head of the Civil Rights Division, Deval Patrick, to be an outside adviser and senior adviser to this working commission is because it&#39;s exactly the question he is familiar with and he has a different set of eye &mdash; I think is essential. Before the U.S. Justice Department would ask the local U.S. Attorney and FBI to take on additional work, I would them to complete the work &ndash; I understand these are very hard cases. And so they are taking on and look at all the perspectives around this case.</p></div></blockquote><p>&mdash;<em><a href="http://www.npr.org/2015/12/03/458309968/chicago-mayor-emanuel-now-says-he-welcomes-federal-investigation" target="_blank"> via NPR</a></em></p></p> Thu, 03 Dec 2015 11:01:00 -0600 http://www.wbez.org/news/chicago-mayor-emanuel-now-says-he-welcomes-federal-investigation-114031 Democratic candidates throw shade, but avoid calling each other out http://www.wbez.org/news/democratic-candidates-throw-shade-avoid-calling-each-other-out-113508 <p><div id="res451940046" previewtitle="Presidential candidates Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and Martin O'Malley appear with Iowa Democratic Party Chair Andy McGuire, second from left, at Saturday's Jefferson-Jackson Dinner in Des Moines."><div data-crop-type=""><div class="image-insert-image "><img alt="" class="image-original_image" src="http://www.wbez.org/system/files/styles/original_image/llo/insert-images/AP_301688215990.jpg" style="height: 464px; width: 620px;" title="Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Rodham Clinton, left, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., center, and former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley, talk backstage before the start of the Iowa Democratic Party's Jefferson-Jackson Dinner, Saturday, Oct. 24, 2015, in Des Moines, Iowa. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)" /></div></div><div><p>At a time when Republicans have&nbsp;<a href="http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/10/08/446889538/mccarthy-drops-out-of-speaker-race-throwing-gop-leadership-into-chaos">struggled to keep their party in order</a>&nbsp;in Congress, while more than a dozen presidential candidates are taking&nbsp;<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/10/25/donald-trump-no-apology-for-questioning-ben-carsons-seventh-day-adventist-faith/">primary shots</a>&nbsp;at each other, Democrats like to&nbsp;<a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/10/17/obama_touts_democratic_unity_in_16_race_128445.html">tout their relative unity</a>.</p></div></div><p>That was the message at the Iowa Democratic Party&#39;s Jefferson-Jackson Dinner on Saturday in Des Moines, where more than 6,000 party faithful were gathered.</p><p>But it is a primary season, and there can only be one nominee. The fundraising dinner is traditionally a critical chance for candidates to impress party activists, who can mobilize their social networks to turn out for the Iowa Caucuses on Feb. 1.</p><p><strong>Bernie Sanders: Taking the &quot;right road&quot;</strong></p><p>Without mentioning Hillary Clinton by name, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders listed issue after issue where critics have accused her of flip-flopping, and painted himself as a consistently progressive voice.</p><p>Regarding his vote against going to war with Iraq in 2002, Sanders said the pressure was on to support the invasion, but he said no: &quot;It gives me no joy to tell you that much of what I predicted about Iraq turned out to be right &ndash; it doesn&#39;t give me any joy at all. But that was a tough vote. I came to that fork in the road, and I took the right road, even though it was not popular at that time.&quot;</p><p>Hillary Clinton has called her vote to authorize the war a &quot;<a href="http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/hillary-clinton-iraq-war-vote-mistake-iowa-118109">mistake</a>.&quot;</p><p>On trade, Sanders took aim at the proposed Trans Pacific Partnership, a deal Clinton<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inrCiD0xQak">helped promote</a>&nbsp;as Secretary of State and once said she hoped would be a &quot;<a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/06/15/axelrod_people_will_have_a_fling_with_bernie_sanders_but_hillary_will_be_nominee_at_end_of_the_day.html">gold standard</a>&quot; for trade.</p><p>On Saturday, Sanders used Clinton&#39;s words to criticize the deal, which she&nbsp;<a href="http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/10/07/446672839/clinton-breaks-with-obama-to-oppose-trans-pacific-partnership">now opposes</a>. &quot;That agreement is not now, nor has it ever been, the &#39;gold standard&#39; of trade agreements. I do not support it today, I did not support it yesterday, and I will not support it tomorrow,&quot; Sanders said.</p><p><iframe frameborder="0" height="290" scrolling="no" src="http://www.npr.org/player/embed/451858179/451940901" title="NPR embedded audio player"></iframe><img alt="" class="image-original_image" src="http://www.wbez.org/system/files/styles/original_image/llo/insert-images/AP_896711932485.jpg" style="height: 199px; width: 300px; float: right; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 5px;" title="" /></p><p>On the Defense of Marriage Act,&nbsp;<a href="http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/usr/scotts/ftp/wpaf2mc/clinton.html">signed by President Bill Clinton</a>&nbsp;in 1996, Sanders said he was proud to be among the minority in Congress to oppose the now-defunct law restricting the federal definition of marriage to heterosexual couples.</p><p>&quot;Let us all remember that gay and lesbian rights were not popular then as they are today,&quot; Sanders reminded the crowd.</p><p>But some critics have&nbsp;<a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2015/10/05/bernie_sanders_on_marriage_equality_he_s_no_longtime_champion.html">pointed out</a>&nbsp;that Sanders doesn&#39;t have a perfect record of supporting LGBT rights.</p><p><strong>Hillary Clinton: &quot;I won&#39;t be silenced&quot;</strong></p><p>Clinton also avoided mentioning her rivals by name, but took aim at Sanders, an independent who is seeking the Democratic nomination, by highlighting her loyalty to the party.</p><p>&quot;I&#39;m not running for my husband&#39;s third term, and I&#39;m not running for Barack Obama&#39;s third term - I&#39;m running for my first term,&quot; Clinton said. &quot;And I&#39;m running as a proud Democrat.&quot;</p><p><iframe align="right" frameborder="0" height="290" scrolling="no" src="http://www.npr.org/player/embed/451858179/451940571" title="NPR embedded audio player"></iframe></p><div><p><img alt="" class="image-original_image" src="http://www.wbez.org/system/files/styles/original_image/llo/insert-images/AP_800779392860.jpg" style="height: 198px; width: 300px; float: left; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 5px;" title="Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks during the Iowa Democratic Party's Jefferson-Jackson fundraising dinner, Saturday, Oct. 24, 2015, in Des Moines, Iowa. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)" /></p><div>&nbsp;</div><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Clinton made repeated pleas for stricter gun control &ndash; an issue where Sanders, hailing from a rural state with a strong hunting culture, has been&nbsp;<a href="http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/06/24/417180805/bernie-sanders-walks-a-fine-line-on-gun-control">vulnerable to criticism</a>&nbsp;from the left.</p><p>As she has&nbsp;<a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-gun-control">done before</a>, Clinton took aim at politicians who, she said,&nbsp;</p><p>have told her to &quot;stop shouting&quot; about ending gun violence. That&#39;s an apparent reference to&nbsp;<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/10/25/hillary-clinton-takes-jab-at-bernie-sanderss-shouting-remark/">comments by Sanders</a>&nbsp;that people should &quot;stop shouting at each other&quot; about guns.</p><p>&quot;I haven&#39;t been shouting,&quot; Clinton said. &quot;Sometimes when a woman speaks out, some people think it&#39;s shouting. But I won&#39;t be silenced, and I hope you won&#39;t be, either. How many more people have to die before we take action?&quot;</p><p>Sanders, for his part, says his comments were&nbsp;<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/25/politics/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-gun-control-shouting/">not about gender</a>.</p><p><strong>Martin O&#39;Malley: &quot;Actually Getting Things Done&quot;</strong></p><p>Former Maryland Governor Martin O&#39;Malley, who has struggled to gain traction in the race, suggested that his rivals don&#39;t have the executive experience needed to be president.</p><p>&quot;While all of the candidates here tonight share progressive values, not all of us have a record of actually getting things done,&quot; O&#39;Malley said.</p><p>He said that&#39;s a skill he learned as a governor, and as the mayor of Baltimore &ndash; a record he&#39;s&nbsp;<a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/10/13/democratic_debate_2016_david_simon_s_devastating_assessment_of_martin_o.html">had to defend</a>&nbsp;in the past.</p><p>O&#39;Malley took an apparent jab at Clinton &ndash; the former Senator from New York &ndash; with a line attacking the financial industry.</p><p>&quot;I have never represented Wall Street, and I sure as hell won&#39;t be taking economic orders from Wall Street when I am working for you in your White House,&quot; he said.</p><p><iframe frameborder="0" height="290" scrolling="no" src="http://www.npr.org/player/embed/451858179/451941162" title="NPR embedded audio player"></iframe><img alt="" class="image-original_image" src="http://www.wbez.org/system/files/styles/original_image/llo/insert-images/AP_393332686987.jpg" style="height: 211px; width: 300px; margin-left: 5px; margin-right: 5px; float: right;" title="Democratic presidential candidate and former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley speaks during the Iowa Democratic Party's Jefferson-Jackson fundraising dinner, Saturday, Oct. 24, 2015, in Des Moines, Iowa. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)" /></p><p>With less than 100 days to go before the Iowa caucuses, expect the candidates to take more shots at each other in the coming weeks. They&#39;ll have another chance to do that when they meet November 14 for their second&nbsp;<a href="http://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2016-debate-schedule/2016-democratic-primary-debate-schedule/">debate</a>&nbsp;&ndash; this time&nbsp;<a href="http://news.drake.edu/2015/08/06/drake-scheduled-to-host-nationally-televised-dnc-debate/">at Dra<em>ke University</em></a><em>&nbsp;in Des Moines.</em></p><p><em>&mdash; <a href="http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/10/26/451858179/democratic-presidential-candidates-try-to-seal-the-deal-in-iowa?ft=nprml&amp;f=451858179" target="_blank">via NPR</a></em></p></div><p>&nbsp;</p></p> Mon, 26 Oct 2015 14:45:00 -0500 http://www.wbez.org/news/democratic-candidates-throw-shade-avoid-calling-each-other-out-113508 Live Blog: Clinton testifies before the House Benghazi Committee http://www.wbez.org/news/live-blog-clinton-testifies-house-benghazi-committee-113462 <img typeof="foaf:Image" src="http://llnw.wbez.org//main-images/AP_834504277719.jpg" alt="" /><p><div id="res450828233" previewtitle="Hillary Clinton arrives to testify before the House Select Committee on Benghazi on Thursday."><div data-crop-type=""><img alt="Hillary Clinton arrives to testify before the House Select Committee on Benghazi on Thursday." src="http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2015/10/22/gettyimages-493708382_wide-9dd5089fe29f1f6eafa92bc1c6e962dc90ee938b-s700-c85.jpg" style="height: 348px; width: 620px;" title="Hillary Clinton arrives to testify before the House Select Committee on Benghazi on Thursday. (Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images)" /></div><div><div><p>Today is one of the most important days of Hillary Clinton&#39;s political career, as the Democratic presidential candidate will face grilling for as much as eight hours potentially over the 2012 terror attack on the diplomatic outpost in Benghazi, Libya, that claimed the lives of four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens.</p></div></div></div><p>Questions about the attack and whether Clinton, as secretary of state, should have heeded warnings and provided more security for Americans there abroad have been fodder for GOP attacks for some time.</p><p>But the House Select Committee on Benghazi has come under even more political scrutiny lately. Some Republicans &mdash; including House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy &mdash; have said the committee succeeded in bringing down the Democratic presidential hopeful&#39;s poll numbers.</p><p>Now, more than ever, Select Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., will be under pressure to show the legitimacy of the committee&#39;s investigation and purpose.</p><p>Whatever Clinton says, along with how she acts and responds, will be heavily parsed and be even more material for GOP attack ads.</p><p>The committee consists of 12 members &mdash; seven Republicans and five Democrats. Following opening statements by Gowdy and Ranking Member Elijah Cummings, D-Md., Clinton will make her opening statements. Then, each member will get 10 minutes to ask questions, per round. But the testimony and questions could go several rounds, meaning that the proceedings may not wrap up until very late.</p><p>NPR&#39;s Tamara Keith has a full preview&nbsp;<a href="http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/10/22/450644975/why-the-stakes-are-so-high-for-hillary-clinton-and-the-benghazi-committee">here</a>. We&#39;ll be liveblogging the day&#39;s proceedings until 6 p.m. ET. You can watch the hearings live&nbsp;<a href="http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/10/22/450825144/watch-hillary-clinton-testify-before-house-select-committee-on-benghazi">here</a>.</p><p><strong>10 a.m.</strong>&nbsp;NPR&#39;s Tamara Keith, in the room for today&#39;s hearing, sends this video capturing the frenzy of this morning as Clinton arrives to testify.</p><div id="res450830171"><iframe allowtransparency="true" class="instagram-media instagram-media-rendered" data-instgrm-payload-id="instagram-media-payload-0" frameborder="0" height="755" id="instagram-embed-0" scrolling="no" src="https://instagram.com/p/9JITHEteK0/embed/captioned/?v=5" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 1px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; border-style: initial; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-size: inherit; line-height: inherit; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; max-width: 658px; width: calc(100% - 2px); border-radius: 4px; box-shadow: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.498039) 0px 0px 1px 0px, rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.14902) 0px 1px 10px 0px; display: block; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;"></iframe></div><p><strong>10:15 a.m.</strong>&nbsp;Chairman Gowdy&#39;s opening statement is largely trying to legitimize the committee&#39;s efforts, which have been under fire and damaged by the GOP suggestions that the committee&#39;s purpose is political.</p><p>Gowdy argues that even though many previous committees have investigated these attacks as well, theirs goes much deeper in scope and is far more comprehensive &mdash; largely because they have her emails from the State Department to peruse. Remember, this is how the scrutiny over Clinton&#39;s private server at State began.</p><p>Still, Gowdy tells Clinton &quot;let me assure you&quot; this investigation is not about her. &quot;This investigation is about four people who were killed representing our country on foreign soil. It is about what happened before, after and during the attacks that killed them. It is about what this country owes to risk their lives to serve it. And it is about the fundamental obligation for the government to tell the truth always to the people.&quot;</p><p>As for her emails, which Gowdy calls &quot;an unusual email arrangement,&quot; Gowdy again argues that &quot;not a single member of this committee signed up to investigate you or your email.&quot;</p><p>His closing: &quot;We are going to find the truth because there is no statute of limitations on the truth.&quot;</p><p><strong>10:30 a.m.&nbsp;</strong>As much as Gowdy&#39;s opening statement was about legitimizing the committee&#39;s efforts, Cummings&#39;s remarks are about de-legitimizing it. Very forcefully, the Democrat decries the committee&#39;s existence &mdash; &quot;with no rules, no deadline, and an unlimited budget....set loose on Secretary Clinton because she is running for president.&quot;</p><p>&quot;Clearly, it is possible to conduct a serious, bipartisan investigation. What is impossible is for any reasonable person to continue denying that Republicans are squandering millions of taxpayer dollars on this abusive effort to derail Secretary Clinton&#39;s presidential campaign,&quot; said Cummings.</p><p>He concludes that none of her emails or documents &quot;show any nefarious activity.</p><p>In fact, it&#39;s just the opposite. The new information we have obtained confirms and corroborates the core facts we already knew from the eight previous investigations. They provide more detail, but they do not change the basic conclusions.&quot;</p><p><strong>10:45 a.m.</strong>&nbsp;The biggest difference between Clinton&#39;s opening statement and the fiery rhetoric and verbal barbs of Gowdy and Cummings &mdash; tone. Clinton begins her testimony very reserved and soft, striking a very reverent when talking about what happened and those who were killed.</p><p>&quot;I am here to honor the service of those four men...and the work their colleagues do every single day all over the world,&quot; she says.</p><p>She defends the work that Stevens and other did in Libya, and the dangers that foreign service officers encounter every day: &quot;America must lead in a dangerous world, and our diplomats must continue representing us in dangerous places....Retreat from the world is not an option. America cannot shrink from our responsibility to lead.&quot;</p><p>She also pivots to other attacks that took American lives &mdash; most notably, on 9/11. &quot;Part of America&#39;s strength is we learn, we adapt and we get stronger.&quot;</p><p>She also notes that recommendations from the Accountability Review Boards are being implemented after Benghazi &mdash; but that those for more training facilities before going into the field are being held up by Congress.</p><p>And a nod to her own White House hopes, perhaps: &quot;We need leadership at home to match our leadership abroad....We should resist denigrating the patriotism or loyalty with whom we disagree. So I am here.&quot;</p><p><strong>10:55 a.m.</strong>&nbsp;Rep. Peter Roskam, R-Ill., presses Clinton on whether the U.S.&#39;s Libya policy was driven by her. &quot;Our Libya policy couldn&#39;t have happened without you, because you were its chief architect,&quot; he tells her. She turns it back to pointing out it is the White House, not her, that drove foreign policy.</p><p>But the most notable, and most memorable, exchange between the two is when Roskam, twice, lectures her for looking at her notes. &quot;I can pause while you&#39;re reading your notes,&quot; he tries to chastise her. Clinton&#39;s retort: &quot;I can do to things at once.&quot;</p><p><strong>11:05 a.m.</strong>&nbsp;Cummings again largely gives Clinton cover, asking her about the process for security and pointing to other partisan attacks on Clinton over Benghazi, like hearings led by former House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa, R-Calif. Cummings: &quot;The problem is that Republicans keep asking the same question over and over again and pretend they don&#39;t know the answer.&quot;</p><p><strong>11:15 a.m.</strong>&nbsp;NPR&#39;s Will Huntsberry, also in the room for the hearings, notes this exchange, about Ambassador Stevens: &quot;Clinton says Chris Stevens volunteered for his mission and was anxious to undertake it. He was using 19th-century diplomatic techniques more than those of current day, she says. Before more sophisticated communication systems were available, Clinton says diplomats would often operate for months at a time without having communication with State Department. During uprising in Libya, internet and communications were spotty, she says. Stevens would meet with local leaders and make decisions on the ground about how much he could accomplish. His length of stay would be uncertain and based on his own assessment of capabilities on the ground. It was &#39;hard-nosed&#39; diplomacy, based on building relationships and gathering information, says Clinton. &#39;We all knew this was risky undertaking.&#39;&quot;</p><p><strong>11:25 a.m.</strong>&nbsp;Rep. Susan Brooks, R-Ind., focuses on Clinton&#39;s email habits at state, and brings a prop &mdash; showing the large number of emails Clinton sent about Libya and Benghazi after the attacks versus the much smaller pile she sent before.</p><p>Clinton underscores again that she didn&#39;t receive classified material &mdash; or things that were then classified, some have been classified retroactively &mdash; on her email server. &quot;Most of my work was not done on emails,&quot; she says, also noting that she &quot;did not email during the day&quot; except on rare occasions, because she was busy and didn&#39;t have a computer in her office.</p><p><strong>11:30 a.m.</strong>&nbsp;The Benghazi hearing are also the hottest ticket in the Capitol it seems &mdash; with very limited space. NPR&#39;s Tamara Keith notes that members of Congress from both parties keep coming in to monitor the hearing. But there&#39;s not enough room for them at the reserved members table, so they are sitting in open seats in the public seating area. Issa, the former Oversight committee chairman, was just here, then bailed out &mdash; the seats in the room are pretty uncomfortable and cramped.</p><p><strong>11:35 a.m.</strong>&nbsp;Rep. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., is the only military veteran to question Clinton so far &mdash; she lost both her legs in Iraq when a helicopter she was piloting was downed. She&#39;s also running for Senate this year in one of the top competitive races. Her questioning mainly focuses on the logistics of security and military forces on the ground.</p><p><strong>11:45 a.m.&nbsp;</strong>Rep. Martha Roby&#39;s, R-Ala., line of questioning seemed primed to try to paint Clinton as disengaged, even seeming to suggest Clinton didn&#39;t know about the extent of the U.S. presence there. &quot;Of course I knew we had a presence in Benghazi,&quot; she tells her. She defends the amount of security on the ground, saying it was Stevens&#39;s decision to go to Benghazi and that he had the requisite five members of security, but that &quot;the kind of attack that took place would have been very hard to repel.&quot;</p><p><strong>11:55 a.m.&nbsp;</strong>Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., again gives Clinton cover from Republican attacks, decrying the partisan nature of the committee, which he says has &quot;an obsession&quot; with her emails, per NPR&#39;s Amita Kelly. &quot;Why have we spent the $4.7 million we&#39;ve spent? This committee is simply not doing its job,&quot; noting &quot;we&#39;ve learned nothing we didn&#39;t know already.&quot; When he yields back his time, Chairman Gowdy takes a swing at him, saying he can refer him back to his opening statement detailing their findings.</p><p><strong>12:10 p.m.&nbsp;</strong>Rep. Lynn Westmoreland, R-Ga., peppers Clinton with questions about Stevens&#39;s requests for more security. While he did not have her personal email, he did correspond with other members of her staff, she says. &quot;Yes, he and the people working for him asked for more security. Some of those were approved, others were not. We&#39;re obviously looking to learn what more we could do, because it was not only about Bengahzi but it was about the embassy in Tripoli,&quot; Clinton says.</p><p><strong>12:20 p.m.</strong>&nbsp;Rep. Mike Pompeo, R-Kan., continues a tough line of questioning about why more security wasn&#39;t provided per Stevens&#39;s request. He also focuses on why no one was held accountable for the intelligence failures. She says that in the review, no breach of duty was found in the review.</p><p>He also focuses in on the role of &quot;frequent emailer&quot; Sidney Blumenthal &mdash; a longtime adviser to the Clintons. She says he was just passing along information, but Republicans are trying to make him the bogeyman of hearings and show Clinton was relying on political advisers, not foreign policy advisers.</p><p>Rep. Linda Sanchez, D-Calif., picks up the questioning next and gives a lot of cover to Clinton, throwing her softball questions to let her &quot;debunk myths&quot; on the Blumenthal allegations, saying she received intelligence from many people, including Stevens himself. She also plays a clip of this past weekend&#39;s &quot;Meet the Press&quot; on NBC, when Pompeo repeated his allegations that Blumenthal was her primary source on Libya. Andrea Mitchell jumps in, telling him she covers the State Department day in and day out, and that is factually inaccurate. It&#39;s something the Washington Post&#39;s fact-checker (who&#39;s getting a lot of love from Democrats today) also&nbsp;<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/10/20/the-false-claim-that-clinton-relied-on-sid-blumenthal-for-most-of-her-intelligence-on-libya/">debunked</a>, giving it four Pinocchios.</p><p><strong>12:45 p.m.&nbsp;</strong>Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, has perhaps the toughest line of questioning of Clinton so far &mdash; pressing her on why she and other administration officials at first insinuated the attack in Benghazi was spurred by an offensive video instead of being a terrorist attack. She answers that her mention of the video at first was trying to quell attacks in other places that were being influenced by the video. Clinton also pushes back that her moves were designed to help the president, with these attacks coming less than two months before the 2012 election.</p><p>Bloomberg&#39;s Josh Rogin notes that this exchange gives us two new bits of information about the timeline over the video in the immediate aftermath &mdash; she had&nbsp;<a href="https://twitter.com/joshrogin/status/657235227111247873">told</a>&nbsp;the Egyptian Prime Minister the day after that the attacks had nothing to do with the video, but was a &quot;planned attack,&quot; per her emails, and also that she had&nbsp;<a href="https://twitter.com/joshrogin/status/657235703412236288">emailed</a>&nbsp;her family that night, telling them that the attackers were from a group similar to al-Quaeda.</p><p><strong>1 p.m.&nbsp;</strong>Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., the final questioner in this first round, again attacks Republicans for making the committee a political one, saying the only reason Clinton is even here because a Stop Hillary PAC pressed for her to appear.</p><p>His questioning of her gives her a chance to have perhaps her most memorable moment so far. When asked if the allegations are painful to her, Clinton becomes very quiet and thoughtful. &quot;I would imagine I&#39;ve thought more about what happened than all of you put together,&quot; she tells the committee. &quot;I&#39;ve lost more sleep than all of you put together. I&#39;ve been racking my brain about what more could have been done or should have been done.&quot;</p><p><strong>1:05 p.m.</strong>&nbsp;Rounding out the first round, Chairman Benghazi snips back at Schiff&#39;s allegations that Republicans are prosecuting her. He underscores there are many more witnesses to hear and no one has reached any conclusions again. He also brings back up Blumenthal, trying to show how influential he was to Clinton given his many emails, and also noting that he worked for liberal groups like Media Matters and Correct the Record, a group supporting Clinton. She says many of the emails were unsolicited, and she passed along some of those emails, and others she did not.</p><p><strong>1:15 p.m.&nbsp;</strong>The biggest fireworks of the day so far aren&#39;t between Clinton and any committee member &mdash; Gowdy vs. Cummings that got very heated, very quickly. The two are arguing again over Blumenthal &mdash; Cummings is insisting that his testimony before the committee be released and says, per a parliamentary maneuver, he can move for it to be done right now; Gowdy disagrees. It&#39;s clear that Blumenthal has become the biggest flashpoint &mdash; and before Gowdy abruptly breaks he says there will be much more about him during the next round. They weren&#39;t even questioning Clinton at the end &mdash; and per people in the room on social media, Clinton looked perfectly gleeful that the whole affair had devolved into screaming and mudslinging.</p><p>And with that, we&#39;re on a lunch break. We&#39;ll return with the next round of questioning soon.</p><p><strong>2:15 p.m.</strong>&nbsp;Testimony is about to resume, but during the break NPR&#39;s Will Huntsberry sends over this tidbit: &quot;When the hearing took its first break, Clinton shook hands with some congressmen and well-wishers among the crowd. Speaking to one person she said, &#39;I tried to meditate during the breaks,&#39; presumably referring to long stretches where committee members were talking.&quot;</p><p><strong>2:21 p.m.</strong>&nbsp;Round 2 is off. First act: They vote on whether to release the transcripts of Sidney Blumenthal&#39;s testimony &mdash; what the tiff between Gowdy and Cummings was just before the break. It&#39;s shot down along party lines, 7-5, but not before a near miss. Westmoreland, R-Ga., at first votes yes before Gowdy nudges him that it&#39;s supposed to be a no vote.</p><p><strong>2:35 p.m.&nbsp;</strong>Gowdy opens the second round by, as promised, peppering Clinton with more questions about her emails from Sidney Blumenthal. His, and other GOP, objections, boil down to this &mdash; Blumenthal could reach Clinton on her personal email while Ambassador Stevens could not. Gowdy characterizes his correspondence as &quot;meaningless political advice&quot; and &quot;insults of people you worked with.&quot; Clinton again underscores that he was not an adviser. Stevens&#39; security concerns were channeled through the appropriate people, she says. During questioning later from Democratic Rep. Sanchez, she notes that Stevens never asked her for her personal email &mdash; but if he had, she would have given it to him.</p><p><strong>2:40 p.m.&nbsp;</strong>Former Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul tweets this, seemingly bolstering Clinton&#39;s claims. Democratic Rep. Smith brings it up later in his testimony.</p><p><strong>3:05 p.m.</strong>&nbsp;Republican Rep. Brooks points out that the committee still doesn&#39;t have a full picture of Stevens via his emails, because they only have copies of hers and ones of his forwarded to her. Democratic Rep. Smith turns back to the Democratic chorus: this is a partisan prosecution, seemingly apologizing to her for it, saying there will be plenty of time to do that in the coming presidential campaign. &quot;Right now this committee is not doing a service to the four people who died or their families.&quot;</p><div id="res450906053"><iframe allowfullscreen="true" allowtransparency="true" class="twitter-tweet twitter-tweet-rendered" data-tweet-id="657264938210185216" frameborder="0" id="twitter-widget-0" scrolling="no" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 10px 0px; padding: 0px; border-style: none; border-width: initial; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-size: inherit; line-height: inherit; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; width: 500px; position: static; visibility: visible; display: block; height: 203.766px; max-width: 500px; min-width: 220px;" title="Twitter Tweet"></iframe></div><p><strong>3:15 p.m</strong>.&nbsp;Clinton is now describing, in pretty stark detail, about the night of Sept. 11, 2012, and how Stevens and diplomat Sean Smith died. Despite retreating to a safe room in the nearby CIA annex, they still were not safe from the attack because they eventually died from smoke inhalation. &quot;This was the fog of war,&quot; Clinton says.</p><p><strong>3:25 p.m.</strong>&nbsp;GOP Rep. Pompeo back to questioning, trying to establish the close relationship Clinton had with Blumenthal as compared to Stevens. &quot;Did he have your cell number? Your home address? Your fax?&quot; he asks her. The answer to all, no.</p><p><strong>3:35 p.m.&nbsp;</strong>A good point from CNN&#39;s Manu Raju on Democratic Rep. Duckworth&#39;s questions so far &mdash; Democrats are making partisan jabs at every turn, but she has focused on facts and asked specifics. She&#39;s also the only one who is running in a tough Senate race next year.</p><p><strong>3:50 p.m.&nbsp;</strong>Just before a break for votes, much of GOP Rep. Roskam&#39;s questions focused on an&nbsp;<a href="http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/242982-email-calls-clinton-public-face-of-us-effort-in-libya">April 2012 memo</a>&nbsp;that her top aide Jake Sullivan had drafted &mdash; before the Benghazi tragedy &mdash; calling Clinton &quot;the public face of the U.S. effort in Libya&quot; and points to the appointment of Stevens along with her role in removing dictator Moammar Gadhafi. Roskam accuses her of trying to milk the situation for political gain and to get favorable press &mdash; which is pretty much what every politician&#39;s press office does, and memos like this are routine. She says it was drafted to aid an article a reporter was writing. But Roskam says it&#39;s the personification of what he calls the Clinton Doctrine: Seizing an opportunity &quot;to turn progress in Libya into a political win for Hillary, and at the precise moment things look good to take a victory lap.&quot;</p><div id="res450924939"><iframe allowfullscreen="true" allowtransparency="true" class="twitter-tweet twitter-tweet-rendered" data-tweet-id="657278464005963776" frameborder="0" id="twitter-widget-1" scrolling="no" style="box-sizing: border-box; margin: 10px 0px; padding: 0px; border-style: none; border-width: initial; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-size: inherit; line-height: inherit; font-family: inherit; vertical-align: baseline; width: 500px; position: static; visibility: visible; display: block; height: 203.766px; max-width: 500px; min-width: 220px;" title="Twitter Tweet"></iframe></div><p>The committee has now taken a brief recess for House votes, and is expected to return around 4:30 p.m. We&#39;ll be back then.</p><p><strong>5:15 p.m.&nbsp;</strong>Votes took a bit longer than expected and didn&#39;t resume until just after 5 p.m. From there, GOP Rep. Roby picked back up the questioning, asking Clinton about $20 million designated for Libyan security, and why that wasn&#39;t used to provide more diplomatic security, if Stevens and others had indicated it was needed. Clinton said they asked Congress for additional money but that request was not fulfilled; Congress, she says, has since provided more.</p><p><strong>5:25 p.m.&nbsp;</strong>Ranking member Cummings is next, and he again uses his time to hammer home that the committee is political and unnecessary. He shows a clip to his old nemesis, former Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa.</p><p>Also, Clinton is talking again about a controversial anti-Muslim video that, at first report, seemed to be the cause for the protests in Benghazi. Asked why she didn&#39;t correct it elsewhere, she underscores that the video was still spurring protests in other places and still provided a security threat and needed to be disproved.</p><p><strong>5:35 p.m.</strong>&nbsp;GOP Rep. Westmoreland asks, as to Clinton&#39;s earlier statement that she&#39;s been kept up at night as to what she could have done differently to prevent the Benghazi attacks. Her answer: militia engaged by CIA &amp; State Dept. could have been more reliable.</p><p><strong>5:45 p.m.</strong>&nbsp;Republicans voted down earlier allowing the testimony of the much-discussed Sidney Blumenthal into the public record, but Democratic Rep. Schiff tries to find a way around that by characterizing the types of questions the committee asked him.</p><p>Per his recounting: Republicans asked him 50 questions about the Clinton foundation, but only four about security in Benghazi; there were 270 questions about his business interests in Libya; and 40 questions about Media Matters/Clinton ally David Brock but none about Ambassador Stevens and other U.S. personnel in Libya.</p><p>With the time spent on Blumenthal, Schiff says, &quot;you&#39;d think he was in Benghazi, manning the barricades.&quot;</p></p> Thu, 22 Oct 2015 10:44:00 -0500 http://www.wbez.org/news/live-blog-clinton-testifies-house-benghazi-committee-113462 Break it Down: Democrats on guns and Wall Street http://www.wbez.org/news/break-it-down-democrats-guns-and-wall-street-113334 <img typeof="foaf:Image" src="http://llnw.wbez.org//main-images/hilary debate.jpg" alt="" /><p><div id="res448462171" previewtitle="Democrats Bernie Sanders (from left), Hillary Clinton and Martin O'Malley debate in Las Vegas."><div data-crop-type="" style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Democrats Bernie Sanders (from left), Hillary Clinton and Martin O'Malley debate in Las Vegas." src="http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2015/10/14/gettyimages-4925314301_wide-97b970dbdaa506beb9a237782692a0317ffe304e-s600-c85.jpg" style="height: 348px; width: 620px;" title="From left, Democrats Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton and Martin O'Malley debate in Las Vegas. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)" /></div><div><div><p>Democratic presidential hopefuls sparred over gun control policy and financial regulation during their first presidential debate.</p></div></div></div><p>Here&#39;s a closer look at what the candidates were debating in Las Vegas.</p><p><strong>Gun Control</strong></p><blockquote><div><p><em>Hillary Clinton: &quot;We have to look at the fact that we lose 90 people a day from gun violence. This has gone on too long, and it&#39;s time the entire country stood up against the NRA.&quot;</em></p></div></blockquote><p>Clinton was criticizing Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders for his opposition to past gun control bills in Congress. Sanders insists he&#39;s not carrying water for the National Rifle Association and actually gets a D-minus on the gun lobby&#39;s legislative scorecard. Sanders argued that he supports some gun safety measures (a ban on assault-style weapons and requiring background checks for purchasers at gun shows). Moreover, Sanders argued that his past votes accurately represented his constituents&#39; views.</p><blockquote><div><p><em>Sanders: &quot;I come from a rural state. And the views on gun control in rural states are different than in urban states, whether we like it or not.&quot;</em></p></div></blockquote><p>Gun control is a polarizing issue. Nearly 3/4 of Democrats come down in support of gun control, while Republicans are much more likely to focus on gun rights. So Clinton&#39;s support for tighter rules on guns puts her on solid ground in the Democratic primary.</p><p>But it could be a different story in the general election. Historically, Democratic White House hopefuls &mdash; including Barack Obama &mdash; have not campaigned aggressively on gun control for fear of losing rural votes. The question is whether the party is now effectively writing off those areas, so Clinton has little to lose by deliberately courting pro-gun control voters.</p><p><strong>Financial Regulation</strong></p><p>Another issue where there is some daylight between the Democrats is bank regulation. Former Maryland Gov. Martin O&#39;Malley, who has struggled to make much of an impression with primary voters so far, tried to capitalize on the issue with a proposal to break up big banks.</p><blockquote><div><p><em>O&#39;Malley: &quot;We need to separate the casino, speculative, mega-bank gambling that we have to insure with our money from the commercial banking. Namely, reinstating Glass-Steagall.&quot;</em></p></div></blockquote><p>O&#39;Malley&#39;s proposal would restore a Depression-era firewall between commercial banking &mdash; where ordinary people put their savings accounts and maybe get a home loan &mdash; and potentially riskier investment banking.</p><p>Breaking up big banks is an article of faith with many progressive voters in the Democratic Party. They fear that many banks have become too big and too risky and will trigger another financial crisis. But none of the institutions that helped trigger the 2008 crisis &mdash; Lehman Brothers, AIG, Countrywide &mdash;combined investment and commercial banking.</p><p>Clinton disagreed with O&#39;Malley on this point. Like Sanders&#39; record on gun control, Clinton&#39;s position may be rooted in her parochial interests as a former senator from New York, where many big banks are headquartered. Clinton has proposed a tax on the biggest banks, which could encourage some downsizing. President Obama has been pushing a similar tax for a number of years now, and so far it hasn&#39;t gone anywhere.</p><p>&mdash; <a href="http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/10/14/448461864/break-it-down-democrats-on-guns-and-wall-street?ft=nprml&amp;f=448461864" target="_blank"><em>via NPR</em></a></p></p> Wed, 14 Oct 2015 11:00:00 -0500 http://www.wbez.org/news/break-it-down-democrats-guns-and-wall-street-113334 Sanders speaks up for guns, Trump gets Hispanic support http://www.wbez.org/programs/here-and-now/2015-10-09/sanders-speaks-guns-trump-gets-hispanic-support-113270 <img typeof="foaf:Image" src="http://llnw.wbez.org//main-images/1009_sanders-roundtable-624x472.jpg" alt="" /><p><p>The news of the week in Washington may be House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy&rsquo;s dropped speakership bid, but he is not the only one turning heads.</p><p>Ben Carson, the neurosurgeon seeking the Republican nomination for president, made some highly-publicized comments when it came to&nbsp;<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/10/06/ben-carson-says-he-would-have-been-more-aggressive-against-oregon-gunman/" target="_blank">gun control</a>,&nbsp;<a href="http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2015/10/08/ben-carson-gun-control-nazi-germany-intvw-wolf.cnn" target="_blank">Nazi Germany</a>&nbsp;and the&nbsp;<a href="http://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/ben-carson-debt-ceiling-marketplace-interview-214547" target="_blank">debt ceiling</a>.&nbsp;Donald Trump, who had claimed for months that &ldquo;the Hispanics love me,&rdquo;&nbsp;<a href="http://onpolitics.usatoday.com/2015/10/08/woman-invited-onstage-im-hispanic-and-i-vote-for-mr-trump/" target="_blank">got some proof</a>&nbsp;at a Thursday night campaign rally in Las Vegas.</p><p>On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton&nbsp;<a href="http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/10/07/446672839/clinton-breaks-with-obama-to-oppose-trans-pacific-partnership" target="_blank">tried to put some distance</a>&nbsp;between herself and President Obama&rsquo;s Trans-Pacific Partnership.&nbsp;And Bernie Sanders&nbsp;<a href="http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/sanders--i-differ-with-clinton-in-many-areas-539823171839" target="_blank">tried to highlight</a>&nbsp;his D-minus rating from the National Rifle Association.</p><p><em>Here &amp; Now&rsquo;s</em> Jeremy Hobson and Robin Young speak with&nbsp;Jeanne Cummings&nbsp;of The Wall Street Journal and&nbsp;Jesse Holland&nbsp;of the Associated Press for a closer look at the week&rsquo;s news in the race for 2016.</p><p>&mdash;<a href="http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2015/10/09/sanders-trump-carson-clinton" target="_blank"><em> via Here &amp; Now</em></a></p></p> Fri, 09 Oct 2015 15:03:00 -0500 http://www.wbez.org/programs/here-and-now/2015-10-09/sanders-speaks-guns-trump-gets-hispanic-support-113270 FACT CHECK: Are gun-makers 'totally free of liability for their behavior'? http://www.wbez.org/news/fact-check-are-gun-makers-totally-free-liability-their-behavior-113210 <img typeof="foaf:Image" src="http://llnw.wbez.org//main-images/HClinton.jpg" alt="" /><p><div id="res446351509" previewtitle="Clinton wants gun manufacturers to be held more liable for crimes committed with their weapons."><div data-crop-type="" style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Clinton wants gun manufacturers to be held more liable for crimes committed with their weapons." src="http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2015/10/06/gettyimages-491432442-7e74440f9dcb742e7877d42644dbb8ebd17952bf-s800-c85.jpg" style="height: 449px; width: 600px;" title="Clinton wants gun manufacturers to be held more liable for crimes committed with their weapons. (Darren McCollester/Getty Images)" /></div><div><p>We want to cut through the spin with a new feature we&#39;re calling &quot;Break It Down.&quot;</p></div></div><p>Break It Down is going to be a regular part of our campaign coverage. We&#39;re going to try some new things. It might read a little differently from time to time. But our goal is to zoom in on what the candidates are saying, and give you the factual breakdown you need to make a sound judgment.</p><div><hr /></div><p>Hillary Clinton seemed to be barely holding back tears at a&nbsp;<a href="http://www.c-span.org/video/?328577-1/hillary-clinton-remarks-gun-violence">town hall in New Hampshire on Monday</a>. Speaking in the aftermath of another tragic mass shooting, this time at an Oregon community college, the Democratic presidential candidate pitched her gun control proposals.</p><p>In the middle of her remarks, she made a big claim: She said that gun-makers and sellers are &quot;the only business in America that is totally free of liability for their behavior.&quot; We decided to see what she was talking about &mdash; and whether she&#39;s right.</p><p><span style="font-size:20px;"><strong>Let&#39;s Break It Down.</strong></span></p><p><strong>The Claim:</strong></p><blockquote><div><p><em>&quot;So far as I know, the gun industry and gun sellers are the only business in America that is totally free of liability for their behavior. Nobody else is given that immunity. And that just illustrates the extremism that has taken over this debate.&quot;</em></p></div></blockquote><p><strong>The Big Question:</strong></p><p>Is Clinton right that the gun industry enjoys legal protections that other industries don&#39;t?</p><p><strong>The Long Answer:</strong></p><p>Clinton is wrong that gun companies have zero liability for their goods, but they do have special legal protections against liability that very few other industries enjoy.</p><p>To see what she&#39;s getting at, you have to back up 10 years. Clinton is talking about a 2005 law called the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, or PLCAA &mdash; a law she wants to repeal as part of her gun control proposals.</p><p>Lawmakers passed that law in response to a spate of lawsuits that cities filed against the gun industry in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Those lawsuits often claimed gun-makers or sellers were engaging in &quot;negligent marketing&quot; or creating a &quot;public nuisance.&quot;</p><p>In 2000, for example,&nbsp;<a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2000/jun/20/news/mn-42954">New York City joined 30 counties and cities</a>in suing gun manufacturers, saying manufacturers should have been making their products safer and also better tracking where their products were sold. Manufacturers, one argument at the time went, should stop supplying stores that sell a lot of guns that end up being used in crimes.</p><p>In response to these lawsuits, the NRA pushed for the law, which passed in 2005 with support from both Republicans and Democrats. Then-Sen. Clinton&nbsp;<a href="https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/109-2005/s219">voted against it</a>; her current Democratic opponent,&nbsp;<a href="http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2015/05/bernie_sanders_on_guns_vermont_independent_voted_against_gun_control_for.html">Bernie Sanders</a>, voted for it.</p><p>The law, however, allows for&nbsp;<a href="https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42871.pdf">specific cases</a>&nbsp;in which dealers and manufacturers can be held responsible. So that makes Clinton&#39;s statement technically incorrect.</p><p>&quot;[Clinton&#39;s statement] doesn&#39;t appear to be completely accurate,&quot; said Adam Winkler, professor of law at UCLA and author ofGunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America,&nbsp;in an email to NPR. &quot;The 2005 law does not prevent gun makers from being held liable for defects in their design. Like car makers, gun makers can be sued for selling a defective product. The problem is that gun violence victims often want to hold gun makers liable for the criminal misuse of a properly functioning product.&quot;</p><p>In other words: If you aim and fire a gun at an attacker, it&#39;s doing what it was intended to do. If it explodes while you shoot and hurts you, though, then you can sue the manufacturer. Likewise, if you had told the gun-store owner you planned to commit a crime with that gun, your victim could potentially sue.</p><p>However, Clinton &quot;is not totally off base,&quot; said John Goldberg, a professor at Harvard Law School and specialist in tort law. He said Congress was particularly &quot;aggressive&quot; in granting the gun industry this legal shield.</p><p>&quot;Congress has rarely acted to bar the adoption by courts of particular theories of liability against a particular class of potential defendants, especially when that form of liability has not yet been recognized by the courts,&quot; he said.</p><p>At the time that the law passed, the NRA argued that the industry needed the protection, because &mdash; unlike carmakers, for example &mdash; it did not have the &quot;deep pockets&quot; necessary to fight a slew of lawsuits, as the&nbsp;<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/21/politics/congress-passes-new-legal-shield-for-gun-industry.html?_r=0">New York Times reported</a>.</p><p>Gun-rights advocates&nbsp;<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/nra-backed-federal-limits-on-gun-lawsuits-frustrate-victims-their-attorneys/2013/01/31/a4f101da-69b3-11e2-95b3-272d604a10a3_story.html">have also argued</a>&nbsp;that suing a gun company for crimes committed with its products is akin to suing a car company for drunken-driving fatalities.</p><p>But the issues at hand are more complex, say some legal scholars.</p><p>&quot;It&#39;s more like &mdash; are you a bartender and do you keep on pouring drinks for someone?&quot; as Fordham University law professor Saul Cornell told NPR. That might be a better way to think about whether manufacturers shouldn&#39;t supply certain stores, he says.</p><p>For an example of how this plays out, look at&nbsp;Adames v. Beretta. In this case, a 13-year-old boy removed the clip from his father&#39;s Beretta handgun, believing that made the gun safe, and then accidentally shot his 13-year-old friend. The victim&#39;s family sued Beretta, saying the company could have made the pistol safer and provided more warnings, according to SCOTUSBlog. Citing the PLCAA, the Illinois Supreme Court&nbsp;<a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/2009/08/tracking-new-cases-suing-gun-makers/">dismissed Adames&#39; claims</a>, and the&nbsp;<a href="http://www.law360.com/articles/139230/supreme-court-rejects-gun-liability-case">U.S. Supreme Court</a>&nbsp;ultimately refused to hear the case.</p><p>Victims of gun crimes like the Adames family may or may not have good cases, but&nbsp;<a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/12/one-quick-answer-to-sandy-hook-repeal-the-2005-arms-act/266371/">PLCAA opponents</a>&nbsp;say plaintiffs should at least be heard in court.</p><p><strong>The Broader Context:</strong></p><p>Clinton wants to repeal PLCAA as part of her broader gun control agenda, which also includes proposals to close the &quot;gun-show loophole&quot; and prevent domestic abusers from obtaining guns.</p><p>The law is one of several recent NRA legislative victories that gun control advocates would like to roll back. Recent laws have also stopped Centers for Disease Control and Prevention research on firearms, and they&#39;ve also stopped researchers from accessing gun trace information, as NPR&#39;s&nbsp;<a href="http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2013/01/14/169164414/lack-of-up-to-date-research-complicates-gun-debate">Carrie Johnson</a>&nbsp;has reported. Gun-rights advocates say withholding that trace information is about maintaining gun owners&#39; privacy.</p><p>At first glance, taking a stand one way or the other on gun control means alienating a big chunk of voters. Democrats have steadily, overwhelmingly, favored gun control over the years, while Republicans have grown increasingly in favor of gun rights in the past decade or so, according to the&nbsp;<a href="http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/01/09/a-public-opinion-trend-that-matters-priorities-for-gun-policy/">Pew Research Center</a>.</p><p>But then again, getting specific on gun policy might be good for Clinton in two ways. One is that it could endear her to pro-gun-control Democrats (this is one of the few areas where she is to the left of Sanders, her closest Democratic competition), particularly as calls for tougher gun control have grown louder after a long string of mass shootings.</p><p>Two,&nbsp;<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/06/03/support-for-gun-control-isnt-dead-new-poll-shows-it-just-matters-how-you-frame-the-question/">research has also shown</a>&nbsp;that while Americans tend to be in favor of &quot;gun rights&quot; broadly, they also tend to favor specific potential gun control regulations, like background checks or assault weapon bans.</p><p><strong>The Short Answer:</strong></p><p>Clinton is wrong that gun manufacturers have&nbsp;no&nbsp;liability for their products, but she&#39;s right that they have unique protections from lawsuits that most other businesses &mdash; and particularly consumer product-makers &mdash; do not.</p><p>Sources:</p><ul><li><a href="http://www.c-span.org/video/?328577-1/hillary-clinton-remarks-gun-violence">C-SPAN video</a>: Clinton&#39;s remarks on gun violence</li><li><a href="https://www.nraila.org/articles/20100401/protection-of-lawful-commerce-in-arms">NRA Fact Sheet</a>&nbsp;on PLCAA</li><li>Email interview with John Goldberg, professor of law, Harvard Law School</li><li>Phone interview with Saul Cornell, professor of law, Fordham University Law School</li><li>Email interview with Adam Winkler, professor of law, UCLA Law School</li><li>Phone interview with Nelson Lund, law professor at George Mason University</li><li>Carrie Johnson&#39;s&nbsp;<a href="http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2013/01/14/169164414/lack-of-up-to-date-research-complicates-gun-debate">2013 NPR article</a>&nbsp;on gun research restrictions</li><li><a href="http://www.scotusblog.com/2009/08/tracking-new-cases-suing-gun-makers/">SCOTUSBlog summary</a>&nbsp;of&nbsp;Adames v. Beretta</li><li><a href="http://www.law360.com/articles/139230/supreme-court-rejects-gun-liability-case">Law360 summary</a>&nbsp;of&nbsp;Adames v. Beretta</li><li>Congressional Research Service&nbsp;<a href="https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42871.pdf">2012 report</a>&nbsp;on PLCAA</li><li><a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2000/jun/20/news/mn-42954">LA Times article</a>&nbsp;on New York City&#39;s 2000 suit against gun manufacturers</li><li><a href="https://www.press.umich.edu/pdf/0472115103-intro.pdf">Suing the Gun Industry</a>&nbsp;by Timothy Lytton (Introduction)</li></ul><p>&mdash;<a href="http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/10/06/446348616/fact-check-are-gun-makers-totally-free-of-liability-for-their-behavior" target="_blank"><em> via NPR</em></a></p></p> Tue, 06 Oct 2015 16:09:00 -0500 http://www.wbez.org/news/fact-check-are-gun-makers-totally-free-liability-their-behavior-113210 From FUBAR to Russian phishing: the latest from Hillary Clinton's emails http://www.wbez.org/news/fubar-russian-phishing-latest-hillary-clintons-emails-113136 <p><div id="res444999146" previewtitle="Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton speaks during a community forum on health care at Moulton Elementary School in Des Moines, Iowa."><div><div><div class="image-insert-image " style="text-align: center;"><img alt="" class="image-original_image" src="http://www.wbez.org/system/files/styles/original_image/llo/insert-images/Hillary%20Rodham%20Clinton%20hands%20off%20her%20mobile%20phone.jpg" title="In this Dec. 8, 2011, file photo, then-U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton hands off her mobile phone after arriving to meet with Dutch Foreign Minister Uri Rosenthal at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in The Hague, Netherlands. Clinton emailed her staff on an iPad as well as a BlackBerry while secretary of state, despite her explanation that she exclusively used a personal email address on a homebrew server so she could carry a single device, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, Pool/File)" /></div></div></div></div><p>The latest release of more than 3,800 emails totaling more than 6,000 pages from Hillary Clinton&#39;s time at the State Department contained revelations into both the security of her controversial personal server, her dealings with her aides and top officials, and, of course, some humorous insights into the now-Democratic candidate for president.</p><p>While Clinton maintains she never used the personal server to send or receive classified information, a number have been deemed classified retroactively in the new bunch. According to Politico, the latest release brings the number of classified emails up to 400, while the new bunch contains 215 marked &quot;SECRET,&quot; the midlevel classified designation.</p><p>Here are the most consequential &mdash; and humorous &mdash; revelations in the latest monthly release of emails:</p><p><strong>Clinton gets phishing spam, too &mdash; from Russian hackers</strong></p><p>In August 2011, Clinton received five emails notifying her she had received a &quot;uniform traffic ticket&quot; from the New York department of motor vehicles. Clinton, of course, hasn&#39;t driven herself since the 1990s, and these emails ended up being a phishing attempt &mdash; the kind of hoax emails we&#39;ve all gotten saying you&#39;ve won a lot of money, and if you click here, you can receive it. Of course, once you click, hackers can access all your computer data.</p><p>These emails appeared to be phishing attempts from Russian hackers, according to the&nbsp;<a href="http://www.therepublic.com/view/story/9160a25f39e14507ab90c977d300dc8b/US%E2%80%94Clinton-Emails">Associated Press</a>. Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill said: &quot;We have no evidence to suggest she replied to this email or that she opened the attachment. As we have said before, there is no evidence that the system was ever breached. All these emails show is that, like millions of other Americans, she received spam.&quot;</p><div id="res444996743" previewtitle="But I don't even drive...."><div data-crop-type="" style="text-align: center;"><img alt="But I don't even drive...." src="http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2015/10/01/phishing-traffic-ticket_custom-db91e7fe6a1a5246995aeaae79fa6c909f03e3a1-s800-c85.png" style="height: 433px; width: 600px;" title="But I don't even drive.... (Source: State Department)" /></div><div><div><p><strong>Security concerns about State Department computers</strong></p></div></div></div><p>One email appears to bolster Clinton&#39;s explanation for why she used a personal server &mdash; because the ones at the State Department were so outdated. After a Google hacking, aide Anne-Marie Slaughter emailed saying this could be an opening to ask Congress for more money to update their systems, and that the current ones were so slow that many employees did work on their personal emails. Clinton chief of staff Cheryl Mills wrote back that she, too, had been the victim of an attempted hacker, but expressed concerns about admitting how much work was done off the government servers so as to not encourage more hacking attempts. In a later email, Clinton suggested writing an op-ed publicizing their security concerns.</p><div id="res444996626" previewtitle="Others were using home email and computers."><div data-crop-type="" style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Others were using home email and computers." src="http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2015/10/01/antiquated-emails_custom-dbc2b9bb70d59201333c999e9f02cdf8c0910993-s800-c85.png" style="height: 414px; width: 600px;" title="Others were using home email and computers. (Source: State Department)" /></div><div><div><p><strong>No, this isn&#39;t a prank call</strong></p></div></div></div><p>One of the funniest exchanges may be when Clinton recounts how she tried to place a call to the White House, only to have one of the operators refuse to believe it was indeed her. Much frustration ensues, and it&#39;s a situation you could imagine President Selina Meyer on HBO&#39;s&nbsp;Veep&nbsp;finding herself in as well.</p><div id="res444996501" previewtitle="It's me. It's really, really me."><div data-crop-type="" style="text-align: center;"><img alt="It's me. It's really, really me." src="http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2015/10/01/veep_custom-b84bd821e7cb6a1fe96601b7f1761c8cd7b4dbb7-s800-c85.png" style="height: 224px; width: 600px;" title="It's me. It's really, really me. (Source: State Department)" /></div><div><div><p><strong>The tables have turned</strong></p></div></div></div><p>Although another email between her staffers throws cold water on rumors rampant before the 2012 election that Clinton was preparing a primary challenge to President Obama, Clinton received this email about a story showing her rising approval had prompted some &quot;buyer&#39;s remorse&quot; over the current occupant of the White House.</p><div id="res444996408" previewtitle="File this away for future political ideas."><div data-crop-type="" style="text-align: center;"><img alt="File this away for future political ideas." src="http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2015/10/01/buyer-s-remorse_custom-0d6cd01a2621ee3c0e193ce33d242c8dad9883ec-s800-c85.png" style="height: 422px; width: 600px;" title="File this away for future political ideas. (Source: State Department)" /></div><div><div><p><strong>NPR has an app for that!</strong></p></div></div></div><p>In one exchange, Clinton emails her aides frustrated that they haven&#39;t responded to her questions about what the NPR station is in Long Island after she lost the feed from WNYC. For future reference, it&#39;s member station WPPB, but you can access your local NPR station at any time on the&nbsp;<a href="http://www.npr.org/services/mobile/npr-news.php">NPR News app</a>&nbsp;or listen to NPR content specialized to your tastes with the&nbsp;<a href="http://www.npr.org/about/products/npr-one/">NPR One</a>&nbsp;app. We&#39;d be frustrated, too, if we couldn&#39;t find our local NPR station.</p><div id="res444995561" previewtitle="We'd be sad if we couldn't find our NPR station too."><div data-crop-type="" style="text-align: center;"><img alt="We'd be sad if we couldn't find our NPR station too." src="http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2015/10/01/hillary-loves-npr_custom-2cfe6e93f574816d8b1cd43164412dbad1ca57bc-s800-c85.png" style="height: 319px; width: 600px;" title="We'd be sad if we couldn't find our NPR station too. (Source: State Department)" /></div><div><div><p><strong>Clinton apparently wasn&#39;t making it work</strong></p></div></div></div><p>After Project Runway host Tim Gunn made comments that Clinton&#39;s wardrobe made it look like she was &quot;confused about her gender,&quot; Mills sent Clinton several articles defending her outfit choices and panning Gunn&#39;s comments.</p><div id="res444995398" previewtitle="Clinton wasn't on the &quot;best dressed&quot; list."><div data-crop-type="" style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Clinton wasn't on the &quot;best dressed&quot; list." src="http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2015/10/01/tim-gunn_custom-0d428cebf60b268f327a80a2a11227c9142da191-s800-c85.png" style="height: 438px; width: 600px;" title="Clinton wasn't on the &quot;best dressed&quot; list. (Source: State Department)" /></div><div><div><p><strong>Explaining FUBAR</strong></p></div></div></div><p>In one email, Clinton emails Mills asking what &quot;fubar&quot; meant, and she responds saying it&#39;s &quot;unprintable on civil email.&quot; In case you didn&#39;t know, it means F***** up beyond recognition.</p><div id="res444994651" previewtitle="Things you can't say over email."><div data-crop-type="" style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Things you can't say over email." src="http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2015/10/01/fubar_custom-b361d761c862e3995d872a023917243cb1f7602a-s800-c85.png" style="height: 393px; width: 600px;" title="Things you can't say over email. (Source: State Department)" /></div><div><div><p><strong>Crap</strong></p></div></div></div><p>Here was aide Jake Sullivan&#39;s one word response to the news that Turkey&#39;s Prime Minister Erdogan was planning a visit to the Gaza Strip.</p><div id="res444992285" previewtitle="Not a welcome development."><div data-crop-type="" style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Not a welcome development." src="http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2015/10/01/crap_custom-35c8f408a742b5150159e4eee6c9f38832759741-s800-c85.png" style="height: 405px; width: 600px;" title="Not a welcome development. (Source: State Department)" /></div><div><div><p><strong>Shop till you drop</strong></p></div></div></div><p>Here&#39;s lots of recommendations for Hong Kong shopping, if you find yourself out that way.</p><div id="res444990013" previewtitle="Shop 'til you drop."><div data-crop-type="" style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Shop 'til you drop." src="http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2015/10/01/hong-kong-shopping_custom-f373708cd071989d286384148c6daa40a148e252-s800-c85.png" style="height: 690px; width: 600px;" title="Shop 'til you drop. (Source: State Department)" /></div><div><div><p><strong>Just in case ...</strong></p></div></div></div><p>Another email sent Clinton talking points about HIV/AIDS research, just in case she ran into talk show host Ellen DeGeneres.</p><div id="res444988278" previewtitle="Ellen can always help."><div data-crop-type="" style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Ellen can always help." src="http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2015/10/01/ellen_custom-2ba82df8f2ce4d919b90ad9d0fc049bdf83f19e3-s800-c85.png" style="height: 481px; width: 600px;" title="Ellen can always help. (Source: State Department)" /></div><div><p><strong>Rising approval</strong></p></div></div><p>And you thought politicians did those fluffy profiles for fun.</p><div id="res444986585" previewtitle="All press can be good press."><div data-crop-type="" style="text-align: center;"><img alt="All press can be good press." src="http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2015/10/01/profiles_custom-74f0e0ef8ed556bc8531ceee19a394ed33461c6c-s800-c85.png" style="height: 381px; width: 600px;" title="All press can be good press. (Source: State Department)" /></div><div><p><strong>Gender-neutral walk-back</strong></p></div></div><p>Clinton expressed frustration after a decision &mdash; without her approval &mdash; was made to shift how overseas births were reported. Instead of asking to list the mother and father, forms would ask for parent 1 and parent 2. Clinton said she wasn&#39;t defending this decision and predicted it would lead to a firestorm from social conservatives. The State Department eventually decided to list both terms on forms.</p><div id="res444978282" previewtitle="Social conservatives were, indeed, outraged."><div data-crop-type="" style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Social conservatives were, indeed, outraged." src="http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2015/10/01/passports_custom-23abe86e3ad836699d16285aa1425359e2bd7d4f-s800-c85.png" style="height: 332px; width: 600px;" title="Social conservatives were, indeed, outraged. (Source: State Department)" /></div><div data-crop-type=""><strong>Some senators do look alike ...</strong></div></div><p>Delaware Democratic Sen. Chris Coons&#39; feelings were hurt a bit when Clinton didn&#39;t recognize him among some other senators &mdash; he helpfully noted he was the one who had beaten &quot;the witch,&quot; aka Christine O&#39;Donnell in the 2010 elections. Coons, now, has said he would back his predecessor, Vice President Biden, for president over Clinton if he runs.</p><div id="res444978225" previewtitle="Nice to meet you, Madam Secretary."><div data-crop-type="" style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Nice to meet you, Madam Secretary." src="http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2015/10/01/chris-coons_custom-fed4e1c5965e0c688cbde9e8051fe1bbdde9a4ce-s800-c85.png" style="height: 348px; width: 600px;" title="Nice to meet you, Madam Secretary. (Source: State Department)" /></div><div><p>__ <em><a href="http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/10/01/444966475/from-fubar-to-russian-phishing-the-latest-from-hillary-clintons-emails?ft=nprml&amp;f=444966475" target="_blank">via NPR&#39;s </a></em><em><a href="http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/10/01/444966475/from-fubar-to-russian-phishing-the-latest-from-hillary-clintons-emails?ft=nprml&amp;f=444966475" target="_blank">It&#39;s</a></em><em><a href="http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/10/01/444966475/from-fubar-to-russian-phishing-the-latest-from-hillary-clintons-emails?ft=nprml&amp;f=444966475" target="_blank"> All Politics</a></em></p></div></div><p>&nbsp;</p></p> Thu, 01 Oct 2015 11:43:00 -0500 http://www.wbez.org/news/fubar-russian-phishing-latest-hillary-clintons-emails-113136 A drug that used to cost $13.50 per tablet now costs $750. Can that be justified? http://www.wbez.org/programs/world/2015-09-22/drug-used-cost-1350-tablet-now-costs-750-can-be-justified-113032 <img typeof="foaf:Image" src="http://llnw.wbez.org//main-images/MartinShkreli Twitter photo Augst 12 2015.jpg" alt="" /><p><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p dir="ltr" lang="en">I guess some people think Daraprim access will decline instead of increase. I guarantee better access at lower prices to patients than ever.</p>&mdash; Martin Shkreli (@MartinShkreli) <a href="https://twitter.com/MartinShkreli/status/646105385544339461">September 21, 2015</a></blockquote><p>Hillary Clinton calls it &lsquo;price gouging&rsquo; by the pharmaceutical industry.</p><p>But the 32-year-old CEO of Turing Pharmaceuticals, Martin Shkreli, sees nothing wrong with what his company just did. It took a drug that treats a deadly disease &mdash; and hiked its price by 5500 percent.</p><p>&quot;Well, you know we needed to turn a profit on the drug,&rdquo; Shkreli told Bloomberg news. &ldquo;The companies before us were pretty much just giving it away.&quot;</p><p>The drug is called Daraprim, and since 1953 it&#39;s been a mainstay in the fight against the deadly parasitic disease, toxoplasmosis.&nbsp;Now&nbsp;the cost per pill has jumped from $13.50 to $750.</p><p>Shkreli though is unrepentant. &ldquo;The spotlight on me is an interesting thing. I&#39;m not thinking too hard about it, because I know we&#39;re doing the right thing.&quot;</p><p>In that interview with Bloomberg News, Shkreli defended the price hike in terms of needing to fund research and development into new treatments for toxoplasmosis.</p><p>&quot;Remember, no-one has cared about this illness for a long time, from the pharmaceutical perspective,&rdquo; Shkreli told Bloomberg. &ldquo;And that&rsquo;s a terrible thing if you&rsquo;re suffering from toxoplasmosis. Now you have a powerful ally in our company that is looking to make new drugs for you.&rdquo;</p><p><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/09/21/how-an-obscure-drugs-4000-price-increase-might-finally-spur-action-on-soaring-health-care-costs/" target="_blank">Carloyn Johnson of the Washington Post</a>&nbsp;says it&rsquo;s not clear how much Shkreli&#39;s company is spending in this area;&nbsp;it&rsquo;s not a publicly traded company.</p><p>Clinton, a Democratic presidential hopeful,&nbsp;calls this price gouging by the pharmaceutical industry, and has promised caps on costs. That&#39;s rattled investors, with stock prices of several&nbsp;companies tumbling.</p><p>Clinton on Tuesday presented a comprehensive plan aimed at containing high drug prices. It includes things like a cap on out-of-pocket expenses and it would also allow the government to use its bargaining power to bring down prices. &nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p>&ldquo;It&rsquo;s kind of up for debate how much, or how, these would be implemented,&rdquo; says Johnson. &ldquo;Some of the ideas have been tried in the past and not gotten enough political backing.&rdquo;</p><p>Johnson says that could be changing. &ldquo;[The issue]&nbsp;does seem to finally have garnered political attention, perhaps because this case has just hit so many nerves.&rdquo;</p><p>&mdash; <em><a href="http://www.pri.org/stories/2015-09-22/drug-used-cost-1350-tablet-now-costs-750-can-be-justified" target="_blank">via PRI&#39;s The World</a></em></p></p> Tue, 22 Sep 2015 16:39:00 -0500 http://www.wbez.org/programs/world/2015-09-22/drug-used-cost-1350-tablet-now-costs-750-can-be-justified-113032 Planned Parenthood controversy proves complicated for Democrats http://www.wbez.org/news/planned-parenthood-controversy-proves-complicated-democrats-112501 <img typeof="foaf:Image" src="http://llnw.wbez.org//main-images/gettyimages-482208094_wide-d6b4bf495f6d8dddc7f8c85a0d3e2b3a7ad8aaf7-s800-c85.jpg" alt="" /><p><p>The&nbsp;<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xw2xi9mhmuo">latest</a>&nbsp;in a series of undercover sting videos features a woman who says she worked for a company that harvested organs from fetuses aborted at Planned Parenthood.</p><p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZUjU4e4fUI">Planned Parenthood leaders say</a>&nbsp;the videos are heavily edited and that they&#39;re not making money from facilitating fetal tissue donation for medical research. But the controversy over the videos is becoming a campaign issue &mdash; for both Democrats and Republicans.</p><p>At an anti-Planned Parenthood rally outside the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday, Kentucky senator and GOP presidential hopeful Rand Paul referred to a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjxwVuozMnU">video</a>&nbsp;released earlier this month by the anti-abortion Center for Medical Progress. It shows a Planned Parenthood doctor meeting over lunch with activists posing as representatives of a company that handles fetal tissue donations.</p><p>&quot;This callous disregard expressed over wine and cheese should inflame and infuriate us all, and we should stop once and for all any penny of money going to Planned Parenthood,&quot; Paul said.</p><p>Paul is proposing legislation to cut funds to Planned Parenthood. Federal funding for abortions already is illegal in most cases, but the organization receives public money for services like health screenings for low-income women.</p><p>Also taking the mic at the rally was Ben Carson, a retired neurosurgeon, and Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas. Cruz directed his jabs at the Democratic frontrunner.</p><p>&quot;I call upon our friends in the mainstream media to ask Hillary Clinton if she is pleased that she has so much passionate support from Planned Parenthood, an entity that appears to be a national criminal enterprise,&quot; Cruz said.</p><p>Planned Parenthood President Cecile Richards has insisted that the organization has broken no laws. She told&nbsp;<a href="http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/video/cecile-richards-undercover-video-controversy-32692756">ABC News</a>&nbsp;this weekend that the videos are a product of a &quot;three-year effort to entrap doctors.&quot;</p><p>&quot;Planned Parenthood does not at all profit from fetal tissue donation, which is an important ... element of health care research in this country,&quot; Richards said.</p><p>As the videos have been released online, Clinton has largely defended Planned Parenthood as a longtime provider of health care for low-income women.&nbsp;<a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clinton-defends-planned-parenthood-amid-video-controversy/">At a campaign stop</a>&nbsp;in South Carolina on July 23, Clinton said the attacks on the organization are an attack on women&#39;s Constitutional right to an abortion.</p><p>&quot;And I think it is unfortunate that Planned Parenthood has been the object of such a concerted attack for so many years,&quot; she said.</p><p>After a third sting video was released Tuesday, Clinton said in an&nbsp;<a href="http://www.unionleader.com/article/20150729/NEWS0605/150729073">interview</a>&nbsp;with the New Hampshire&nbsp;Union Leader&nbsp;newspaper that she had seen pictures from the videos and found them &quot;disturbing,&quot; but reiterated her support for Planned Parenthood&#39;s record as a provider of family planning and health services.</p><p>Other Democratic presidential hopefuls aren&#39;t exactly lining up to defend the organization. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders has said that Richards was right to apologize for the &quot;tone&quot; of a Planned Parenthood doctor featured in one of the videos.</p><p>It&#39;s a tricky issue for the left, says political scientist&nbsp;<a href="http://www.drake.edu/polsci/facultystaff/rachelcaufield/">Rachel Caufield</a>&nbsp;of Drake University in Des Moines.</p><p>&quot;It creates an environment where the pro-choice supporters have to be in a position to justify some of the practices of Planned Parenthood,&quot; she said. &quot;[Sanders] took a more measured tone and was less willing to defend Planned Parenthood outright, [and] recognized that this is not a practice that Americans are accustomed to hearing about and not something that they&#39;re particularly comfortable with.&quot;</p><p>Regardless, Americans are going to hear more about it. Paul has promised the Senate will take up his proposal to defund Planned Parenthood before leaving for the August recess. The issue also is likely to come up in next week&#39;s Republican debate in Cleveland.</p></p> Wed, 29 Jul 2015 13:03:00 -0500 http://www.wbez.org/news/planned-parenthood-controversy-proves-complicated-democrats-112501 Emanuel ribs Clinton over 'dead broke' comment at book tour stop http://www.wbez.org/news/culture/emanuel-ribs-clinton-over-dead-broke-comment-book-tour-stop-110328 <img typeof="foaf:Image" src="http://llnw.wbez.org//main-images/Hillary Rahm WBEZ Alex Keefe.JPG" alt="" /><p><p>In an hourlong talk that touched on foreign policy, economics and her Chicagoland upbringing, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Wednesday still did not answer the question that has generated political speculation for months: Will she run for president in 2016?</p><p>Clinton sat down to be interviewed by Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel for her first public appearance on a nationwide tour to plug her new book, Hard Choices. Emanuel, who had served as a top adviser to her husband, former President Bill Clinton, and was the White House Chief of Staff under President Barack Obama while Clinton was secretary of state, mostly stuck to softball questions.</p><p>But he ribbed Clinton about a controversial comment she made in a recent <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hillary-clinton-defends-high-dollar-speaking-fees/story?id=24052962" target="_blank">ABC News interview</a>, when she said she and her family were &ldquo;dead broke&rdquo; when they left the White House.</p><p>&ldquo;&lsquo;Dead broke?&rsquo; Really?&rdquo; Emanuel asked.</p><p>&ldquo;Well that may have not been the most artful way of saying that,&rdquo; Clinton said. &ldquo;You know, Bill and I have gone through a lot of different phases in our lives. That was then, this is now. And obviously we are very fortunate.&rdquo;</p><p>Some Republicans pounced on that remark to portray Clinton, who is giving big-dollar speeches across the country, as out of touch.</p><p>She also reminisced about her time growing up in Northwest suburban Park Ridge, and visiting her father&rsquo;s downtown Chicago office at the Merchandise Mart; where, she said, she was cautioned about sticking her head too far out the window on hot days, lest a &ldquo;giant dragon&rdquo; that lived in the Chicago River snatch her up.</p><p>But the former top U.S. diplomat was not afraid to stick her neck out when it came to Russian President Vladimir Putin. Clinton said some world leaders wouldn&rsquo;t be happy to read the anecdotes in her new book, then added, &ldquo;I&rsquo;m talking to you, Vladimir.&rdquo;</p><p>Clinton later lambasted Putin for passing a law, criticized as being anti-gay, that makes it a crime to distribute &ldquo;propaganda of nontraditional sexual relations&rdquo; to children.</p><p>&ldquo;What Putin&rsquo;s doing in Russia, with all these laws against the LGBT community, that is just a cynical political ploy,&rdquo; Clinton said. &ldquo;I&rsquo;ve had shouting matches with top Russian officials about this.&rdquo;</p><p>Clinton also addressed Tuesday&rsquo;s surprising primary defeat of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, the No. 2 Republican in the U.S. House, suggesting Cantor lost to a more conservative candidate &ldquo;who basically ran against immigrants,&rdquo; she said.</p><p>&ldquo;The answer is not to throw out of work and deport the 11 million immigrants who are contributing already to our economy,&rdquo; Clinton said. &ldquo;The answer is to grow our economy to create more jobs.&rdquo;</p><p>Clinton did not address whether she would make a run for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2016, as is widely speculated. But she did focus on what she said were the qualities of a good leader: &ldquo;skin as thick as the hide of a rhinoceros,&rdquo; and the ability to &ldquo;make sausage&rdquo; in a political environment where compromise is sometimes a dirty word.</p><p>&ldquo;We&rsquo;ve always managed to do that,&rdquo; as a country, Clinton said, pointing to the constitutional amendment that ended slavery in 1865. &ldquo;Look, did it take, you know, maybe giving some people some post office jobs? It might have. But it ended slavery! That&rsquo;s a pretty good trade-off when you stop to think about it.&rdquo;</p><p dir="ltr" id="docs-internal-guid-629defdb-8cc4-433e-f07f-0aa043926bdd"><em><a href="http://www.wbez.org/users/akeefe">Alex Keefe</a> is political reporter at WBEZ. You can follow him on <a href="https://twitter.com/WBEZpolitics">Twitter</a> and <a href="https://plus.google.com/102759794640397640028">Google+</a>.</em></p></p> Wed, 11 Jun 2014 16:07:00 -0500 http://www.wbez.org/news/culture/emanuel-ribs-clinton-over-dead-broke-comment-book-tour-stop-110328