Mediaboss Marketing

The Vermont senator said Clinton is lashing out -- attacking him on guns, taxes and more -- because polls show their race having tightened in Iowa while Sanders has maintained a narrow lead in New Hampshire.

"Secretary Clinton and her campaign is in serious trouble," Sanders told reporters Monday after a campaign stop in Pleasantville, Iowa.

"And I think a candidate who was originally thought to be the anointed candidate, the inevitable candidate, is now locked in a very difficult race here in Iowa and in New Hampshire," Sanders said. "So obviously in that scenario what people do is start attacking. Suddenly Bernie Sanders is not a nice guy. That is not surprising when you have a Clinton campaign that is now in trouble and now understands that they can lose."

Sanders offered a similar take later at the Iowa Brown and Black Forum. When Sanders was asked if he has noticed that Clinton is attacking him harder and more often, he offered a mischievous "yes."

"It could be that the inevitable candidate for the Democratic nomination may not be so inevitable today," he said.

It's Sanders' antidote to Clinton's "electability" argument. His comment bring to mind her failure to capture the Democratic nomination in 2008, and allude to polls that show Sanders with a real shot at winning in Iowa and New Hampshire.

Sanders is benefiting from a base of supporters that is more enthusiastic than Clinton's -- and he got an unexpected boost from Vice President Joe Biden, who said Sanders has credibility on the issue of income inequality.

"Bernie is speaking to a yearning that is deep and real. And he has credibility on it," Biden said during an interview with CNN chief political analyst Gloria Borger.

"It's relatively new for Hillary to talk about that," Biden continued, acknowledging that Clinton has "come forward with some really thoughtful approaches to deal with the issue" of income inequality.

"Hillary's focus has been other things up to now, and that's been Bernie's -- no one questions Bernie's authenticity on those issues," he said.

Sanders' remarks come after an NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Marist University poll showed Clinton with just a 48% to 45% lead among likely Iowa caucus-goers.

"Our major problem has been I am running against a candidate who was perceived to be the inevitable nominee, right?" Sanders told CNN's Brianna Keilar in between campaign stops in Iowa. "And her name recognition is phenomenal, almost everybody knows who she is, that wasn't the case with me. So we started off in national polls at 3 percent. Well, we've come a very long way."

Sanders said he was proud of the work his team is doing in both Iowa and New Hampshire.

"I think we have a real chance of winning both of those states," he said. "I think we're doing a lot better in Nevada and in South Carolina than people think and if we do well in all of those states, I think we have a real path to victory for the Democratic nomination and I think then we can win the general election."

Clinton, meanwhile, has attacked Sanders on guns in recent days, blasting him for voting for a bill -- while Sanders, Clinton and President Barack Obama were all still in the Senate -- that protected gun manufacturers from liability when their firearms are used in crimes.

"I was there, I voted against it. Sen. Obama was there, he voted against it. And Sanders voted for it," Clinton said of the liability bill in a meeting with the Des Moines Register's editorial board Monday. "And it was the biggest request by the NRA and related gun lobby actor to the Congress and I think and I know the President wants to revisit that as well."

Sanders stood by his vote Sunday on ABC's "This Week" but said he would "revise" parts of the bill.

The debate gun debate continued on the campaign trail Monday and Tuesday.

At the Iowa Brown and Black Forum, Sanders wouldn't back away from that vote, saying: "It's not a mistake. Like many pieces of legislation, it is complicated."

Clinton's campaign and allies were quick to pounce, accusing Sanders of doubling down on his support for a bill that was championed at the time by the National Rifle Association.

"I think most Americans think it was a mistake and wish he would admit it," said Steve Benjamin, mayor of Columbia, South Carolina, and a Clinton supporter, after the debate.

In Tuesday in Ames, Clinton hammered Sanders, saying she has a long history of working -- with success -- to take on issues like income inequality and gun control.

"Don't talk to me about standing up to corporate interests and big powers," she said, in a comment directed at Sanders. "I've got the scars to show for it -- and I am proud of every single one."

CNN's Tom LoBianco and Dan Merica contributed to this report.

View original post here:
Bernie Sanders: Hillary Clinton 'in serious trouble ...

NEW YORK A new documentary about the 2013 mayoral run of disgraced ex-Congressman Anthony Weiner could be the latest thorn in the side of Hillary Clintons presidential campaign.

Previewed exclusively by the New York Times this week, Weiner was deemed by the paper a visceral film that is a potentially distracting issue in Clintons campaign, as Weiners wife, Huma Abedin, one of Clinton's closest advisors, appears throughout.

The Times says Weiner shows how Ms. Abedin with facial expressions ranging from hurt to hostile copes with the second sex scandal to engulf her husbands career and crush her hopes of becoming a powerful political wife.

After it premieres at the Sundance Film Festival, Weiner will be released in theaters on May 20, and is slated to have a TV premiere on Showtime in October, just weeks ahead of the general election.

Tony Sayegh, a Republican strategist and Fox News Contributor, said the Weiner repercussions could be very real for Clinton, and cost her the support of some female voters.

Among the more damaging is that it reveals another example of how hollow the war on women argument is when coming from the Hillary camp, disabling that most favorite of perennial liberal ad hominem attacks is the equivalent of taking Superman's ability to leap tall buildings away, Sayegh told FOX411. For both Anthony Weiner and Bill Clinton, their sexual misconduct went well beyond the realm of a boys will be boys defense.And it was Hillary and Huma to the rescue all in the name personal advancement.That is not a story Hillary wants out there, especially through a more popular medium that has the ability to reach a broader audience.

But Brad Blakeman, a member of former President George W. Bushs Senior Staff and a Professor of Public Policy, Politics and International Affairs at Georgetown University, says the documentary is the least of Hillarys concerns.

If you like Hillary, the film will reinforce the vast right wing conspiracy and if you dont like Hillary the film will just validate what you already thought, he said.

Dan Gerstein, an independent political strategist and owner of Gotham Ghostwriters, a ghostwriting agency that specializes in speeches, agreed with Blakeman that while the documentary could be a distraction to Clintons presidential bid, she has bigger fish to fry.

It affects her aide, he said, referring to Abedin. Its an indirect negative, and therefore the press finds it more interesting than the public does. Im not trying to say its a positive by any means. Clinton has much bigger issues affecting her campaign than a side show like this.

One person who couldnt care less about the movie? Weiners sexting partner, Sydney Leathers.

Im not concerned about any of it coming back up because I find it hilarious. Its not a big deal to me, Leathers told FOX411. Its certainly not a good look for Hillary.There are comparisons to be made between Weiners behavior and Bills behavior. I find it fascinating the way Huma and Hillary have handled infidelity in their marriages.It seems they apply a Dont Ask, Dont Tell Policy when it comes to [their husbands].

Leathers, who found herself entangled in yet another sexting scandal with Indiana State Rep Justin Moed in 2015, had a few more words for Weiner.

He should just be happy anyone cares about him after he resigned from Congress and had a failed mayoral bid, she added. What other unemployed, sex obsessed, creepy middle-aged men have documentaries coming out about them?

FOX411 reached out to Anthony Weiner, Huma Abedin, the Hillary Clinton campaign, and filmmakers Josh Kriegman and Elyse Steinberg, but did not receive comment.

Diana Falzone is a FoxNews.com reporter.You can follow her on Twitter @dianafalzone.

Go here to see the original:
Could documentary 'Weiner' cost Hillary Clinton women's votes ...

"I am very pleased that he flip-flopped on the immunity legislation," Clinton told CNN's Jake Tapper on "State of the Union," a day after Sanders, who had been hammered by her campaign for his past position, announced he would change course and back legislation to reverse a 2005 law granting firearm manufacturers legal immunity.

She then called on her rival to do the same with the so-called "Charleston loophole," which allows licensed dealers, once they have initiated a federal background check, to complete the gun sale in question if they haven't hears back from authorities after three days.

Clinton also defended her campaign's decision to employ daughter Chelsea as a surrogate and critic of Sanders.

At an event last week, Clinton's daughter accused the Vermont senator of attempting to "dismantle" popular programs like Medicare as part of his push for single-payer health care.

But Clinton defended the comment Sunday, calling it "factual" and suggesting Chelsea had not sought out the issue, but simply "been asked a question."

Asked about the ongoing probe into her use of a private email server during her time leading the State Department, Clinton said he not been interviewed by the FBI.

Clinton is not under investigation by the bureau, and is not the subject of any criminal investigation, but her use of the private server -- instead of a more deeply encrypted government account -- set off what's known as security referral, or inquiry into the location of certain pieces of classified information.

Republicans' suggestions that Clinton's server holds previously unseen communications about the deadly 2012 assault on the American outpost in Benghazi, Libya, has provided fodder for a long series of political attacks.

Still, Clinton said she had not yet seen the new movie about the Benhazi raid, released nationally last week, which doesn't name her but does cast blame on bureaucratic officials for not doing more to aid the contractors and U.S. ambassador killed after militants stormed their compound.

The former secretary of state also addressed the pressure on the 74-year-old Sanders to release his medical records.

"I've released my medical records and I remember being asked frequently to do so," Clinton said, adding she would the decision was now "up to his campaign."

On Saturday, Clinton's own campaign chairman, John Podesta, seemed to push back again super PAC chief David Brock.

"Chill out," he wrote in a tweet after reports of the group's plans began to spread. "We're fighting on who would make a better President, not on who has a better Physical Fitness Test."

Speaking with Tapper after Clinton, Sanders said he was healthy and planned on releasing details soon.

See the original post:
Hillary Clinton zeroes in on Bernie Sanders - CNNPolitics.com

The former secretary of state told National Public Radio that the report was a "leak" designed to harm her in the presidential race despite offering no evidence. And a spokesman for the Democratic presidential front-runner went so far as to publicly accuse investigators looking into her server as conspiring with Republican senators to embarrass her.

"As the State Department has confirmed, I never sent or received any material marked classified, and that hasn't changed in all of these months," she said. "This, seems to me, to be, you know, another effort to inject this into the campaign. It's another leak."

She also called an inspector general's letter a "continuation of an inter-agency dispute that has been going on now for some months."

Clinton was referring to a letter sent by Intelligence Community Inspector General I. Charles McCullough III to leaders on congressional intelligence committees last week detailing the findings from a review of Clinton's emails, a spokeswoman for the inspector general confirmed to CNN.

Two government agencies flagged emails on Clinton's server as containing classified information, the inspector general said, including some on "special access programs," which are a subset of the highest "Top Secret" level of classification, but are under subject to more stringent control rules than even other Top Secret information."

Clinton's spokesman, Brian Fallon, told Bloomberg that the campaign believes McCullough and Republican senators worked together to make sure the report would become public.

"It is suspect from the beginning that the intelligence community inspector general is continuing to reveal materials and surface allegations while the Justice Department review is going on," Fallon told Bloomberg. "It's completely fair to suspect that the intelligence community inspector general is not operating in good faith."

Fallon also appeared on CNN Wednesday morning to dispute the report. He argued on "New Day" that the information described as "classified" may be no more than a news article that was forwarded, although he ceded it is not entirely clear what classified material the report mentions.

Fallon argued that the crux of the issue is a dispute between the State Department and the intelligence community over what should be classified. He said the emails were not classified in the eyes of the State Department when they were sent to Clinton. Fallon also implied the inspector general has an ax to grind with Clinton.

There were several dozen emails in question beyond the two previously reported emails containing top secret information, according to the report.

RELATED: Some Clinton Benghazi emails released

Clinton's campaign and the State Department have long denied that any information was handled improperly, saying that the information and emails in question were all retroactively classified.

State also has noted that the same information can come from multiple sources, not all of which are classified.

State Department spokesman John Kirby said the department is still undergoing its review process, but any upgraded classification that is needed will be done.

"The State Department is focused on and committed to releasing former Secretary Clinton's emails in a manner that protects sensitive information," Kirby said in a statement. "No one takes this more seriously than we do. We have said repeatedly that we anticipate more upgrades throughout our release process. Our (Freedom of Information Act) review process is still ongoing. Once that process is complete, if it is determined that information should be classified as Top Secret, we will do so."

The Justice Department is investigating if classified information improperly ended up on Clinton's email server. The server contained correspondence between Clinton and a variety of aides and friends.

Republican lawmakers requested the inspector general investigate in March.

The Inspector General report was first reported by Fox News. It comes as the State Department is facing over a dozen Freedom of Information Act lawsuits related to information on or about Clinton's private email server.

On Wednesday, the department released a set of emails between top Clinton aides and an IT staffer to The Daily Caller and the advocacy group Cause of Action in one such suit.

Earlier in the week, the same plaintiffs received emails from Clinton aide Huma Abedin, now a top official on Clinton's presidential campaign, which show Clinton was given the option of using a State Department Blackberry for email purposes, but the option was dismissed.

See the original post here:
Report: Hillary Clinton server contained highly classified ...

America had just elected a Democratic president. The Senate was majority-Democratic. The House of Representatives had more Democrats than at any time since 1992.

The Republicans could either change themselves -- by embracing the young, diverse and tolerant America of the 21st century -- or they could try to change whose voices count in our democracy.

We all know the cynical path they chose. Six years ago Thursday, the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United transformed our politics by allowing corporations to spend unlimited amounts of money to influence elections.

The effect was immediate. In the 2010 midterms, outside groups spent nearly 60% more than in 2006. In 2014, the top 100 donors spent nearly as much as all 4.75 million small donors combined. National networks of big-money donors funneled mountains of cash into targeted state races. By 2014, one party controlled both the governor's mansion and the state legislature in 36 states -- the most since the 1950s.

Meanwhile, Republicans launched an aggressive campaign to restrict voting rights across the country. After the 2010 election, lawmakers in 41 states introduced at least 180 measures designed to make it harder for people to vote. This ugly effort got a boost in 2013 when the Supreme Court made another disastrous ruling, striking down hard-won Voting Rights Act protections. Today, 21 states have new laws restricting voting rights.

And some of the greatest damage to voting rights has come in states with single-party control -- like North Carolina, which eliminated same-day voter registration and slashed early voting; Florida, which instituted such heavy restrictions on voter registration drives that the League of Women Voters had to shut down operations; and Alabama, which passed a strict photo ID requirement and then closed dozens of driver's license offices across the state, making it much harder for citizens to get the IDs they now need to vote.

Put it all together -- the flood of corporate money in our elections, the rise of single-party control of state governments, the sharp increase in voting-rights restrictions -- and the result is unmistakable. Our democracy is being hollowed out. And that should offend every American, no matter what party you belong to.

We can't let this continue. It's time to reclaim our democracy, reform our distorted campaign finance system and restore access to the ballot box in all 50 states.

That starts with reversing Citizens United. And that's where my comprehensive plan to restore common sense to campaign finance begins. As president, I'll appoint Supreme Court justices who recognize that Citizens United is bad for America. And if necessary, I'll fight for a constitutional amendment that overturns it.

Meanwhile, we need more transparency in our politics. In the last three elections, more than $600 million in donations came from unknown, untraceable sources. That's a lot of secret, unaccountable money. As president, I'll require federal contractors to fully disclose their political spending. I'll call on the Securities and Exchange Commission to require that publicly traded companies do the same. And I'll fight for legislation requiring the disclosure of all significant political donations, no matter where they come from or who they benefit. Whether you're a Democrat or a Republican, you should have to identify your donors.

We should also make it easier for Americans to run for elected office. You shouldn't have to be rich or well-connected to serve. I'll fight to create a robust small-donor matching system, so people with good ideas and a passion for public service know that they can run without having to court big donors and special interests.

Finally, we have to do a much better job of protecting Americans' voting rights. Nothing is more vital to our democracy. I'll fight to restore the full protections of the Voting Rights Act. And I'll go further, because we should be making it easier to vote, not harder.

All Americans should be automatically registered to vote on their 18th birthdays, unless they opt out. Every state should have at least 20 days of early in-person voting. And no one should ever have to wait more than 30 minutes to cast a ballot.

Citizens United and its aftermath have twisted and perverted our democratic system. Now the deck is stacked even more in favor of those at the top. But as Al Smith, another Democrat from New York, once said, "All the ills of democracy can be cured by more democracy." So that's what we need now: more transparency, more accountability, and above all, more citizens exercising their right to vote.

This November, we can show Republicans that they made the wrong choice eight years ago. Let's restore people's voices and people's votes to their rightful place -- at the center of our democracy.

Join us on Facebook.com/CNNOpinion. Read CNNOpinion's Flipboard magazine.

Excerpt from:
Hillary Clinton: Cure for Citizens United is more democracy ...