FAILED CHOICES

A Critique of the Hillary Clinton State Department

Authors:
Dr. Stephen Thompson, Ph. D.
Raj Shah & Tim Miller

TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER ONE: WHEN 112 IS NOT ENOUGH ............................ 4
CHAPTER TWO: HILLARYS WAR: LIBYA AND BENGHAZI .... 12
CHAPTER THREE: THE FAILED RUSSIAN RESET .................. 33
CHAPTER FOUR: THE MOST VOLATILE REGION OF THE
WORLD ......................................................................................... 49
CHAPTER FIVE: BROKEN PROMISES TO ISRAEL, WEAKNESS
ON IRAN ....................................................................................... 67
CHAPTER SIX: SCANDALS AND MISMANAGEMENT ............. 88
EPILOGUE ................................................................................... 110

CHAPTER ONE: WHEN 112 IS NOT

ENOUGH
Two vanquished presidential contenders and a former president
stood behind a Foggy Bottom podium in early February 2009.
Vice President Joe Biden was administering the oath of officethe
office of Secretary of State that isto Hillary Clinton with her
husband and daughter at her side. It was not the oath Clinton had
anticipated for herself, and it was one that she was reluctant to
take, having spurned President Barack Obamas requests on a
number of occasions. Not in a million years, she told her staff
when the topic was first broached.1
As the pain from her primary loss eventually subsided, Senator
Clinton made the political calculation and realized that being seen
as a team player could be the first step toward charting a new path
to the presidencythis time, however, not as a junior senator
from New York, but from the powerful perch in Foggy Bottom,
where the State Department is headquartered.
Once she finally accepted President Obamas offer to serve as his
secretary of state, she brought an unprecedented level of visibility
to the position. Secretary Clinton was the first elected official to
take the job since Senator Edmund Muskie (D-ME) in 1980. But
as a former first lady, senator, and one-time presidential front
runner, she brought far more political star power to the job than
Muskie, or any other of her modern predecessors.
Secretary Clinton was termed the rock star diplomat and acted
the part.
After taking the oath she observed that this ceremony takes place
at a real hinge of history. Indeed it did: she took the reins of
Americas foreign policy in the midst of a global economic crisis,
in the twilight of two American wars, and on the precipice of the
Arab Spring that would reshape the Middle East.
4

Paired with President Obamas own global celebrity statushis

stoked even further by charismatic speeches that were high on
promises, such as his July 2008 address to hundreds of thousands
of adoring foreigners in Berlin, Germanythe Obama-Clinton
tandem was setting the tone for a grandiose foreign policy pivot,
hopeful in its aspirations and ambitious in its scope. The two
believed they were setting out to repair Americas image around
the globe, heal the wounds between the Islamic world and the
West, and usher in a new era of peace and prosperity.
Four years later, as Secretary Clinton stepped down from office in
early 2013, a look back at her tenure finds that none of these
ambitious goals came to pass. Nor for that matter did many of the
less ambitious endeavors either. The Obama-Clinton foreign
policy proved erratic and failed to deliver any signature
diplomatic achievement.
Despite the promise of the new administration and the grand
opportunity presented to her, Secretary Clintons tenurein terms
of historic importance and accomplishmentfell far short of the
lofty goals envisioned. In a time of global tumult, and even greater
challenges to Americas interests, Clintons performance as
Americas top diplomat was found wanting. In some instances her
failures were a natural result of the caution that comes from a
calculating politician keeping a watchful eye on a future campaign
of her own. In other instances it was poor judgment, awful
management, and failed choices.
Her allieseven those who worked with her inside the State
Departmentstruggle to paint a picture of her tenure any better
or more compelling than what her political adversaries already
paint. Instead, her allies, at Foggy Bottom or elsewhere, largely
punt, pointing to the number of countries she visited. At a going
away party on January 6, 2013, Secretary Clinton was cheered on
by dozens of State Department employees. After Clinton
announced she would be stepping down later in the month, Tom
5

Nides, her deputy secretary, convened the group to give her

several going away presents, one of which was a numbered jersey
with Clinton and 112 stitched on the back. The 112 represented
the record number of countries Clinton visited as secretary of
state,2 beating out the previous record set by Madeleine Albright,
Bill Clintons secretary of state.3 Even some of the most studied
foreign policy observers fall back on 112 when asked to describe
Secretary Clintons accomplishments.
No one would dispute Clintons familiarity with landing strips in
foreign capitals or the star status with which she was received at
many of those outposts, but what remains unclear is what policy
benefits Americans gained from all her travels. In diplomacy, as in
politics, building relationships by meeting people is important, yet
for those relationships to matter, they need to deliver tangible
results. When looking at Clintons time at the State Department,
those results are hard to come by. Simply put, 112 is not enough.
On the flip side, it is not hard to identify significant failures that
took place on her watch while traipsing from Tbilisi to Tashkent.
In fact, in the few instances where Secretary Clinton attempted
bold foreign policy initiatives, her instincts were wrong and the
execution botched. Americans need look no further than the
tragedy in Benghazi and the bungled aftermath of the NATObacked intervention in Libya. Or they can point fingers at a nave
Reset with Russia, whiffing on the Green Movement in Iran, and
stumbling through the Arab Spring. In the absence of noteworthy
achievement, it is these failures that increasingly define her
legacy.
This narrative dilemma masks an even deeper problem facing
Clinton as she prepares for an upcoming presidential run. Delving
into her record, one uncovers significant failures in leadership
and political vulnerabilities, which go far deeper than what many
Americans know. Her department was replete with insider
dealings and conflicts of interest, while scandals were brushed
6

under the rug. Taxpayer dollars were wasted, lost, and handed out
to Clinton pals. Opportunities to make a difference in troubled
areas such as Syria or Nigeria were squandered.
As she launches a 2016 presidential bid with a memoir about her
time at the State Department, the title itselfHard Choicesis
defensive and an acknowledgement of her many failures. Turmoil
and Triumph this book is not.
Clintons memoir will try to refashion history. In Hard Choices,
she will follow a familiar pattern that has been battle tested over
her two decades in public life. First, she will try to take credit for
progress that happened on her watcheven if she opposed
policies that brought it about. Then, she will omit failed
judgments and portray minor accomplishments as significant.
Clinton, who is far more seasoned at political posturing than
successful diplomacy, will find a way to turn a bleak canvas into a
pretty picture. But she will not find the painting easy.
At a recent forum, the New York Times Thomas Friedman asked
her, When you look at your time as secretary of state, what are
you most proud of, and what do you feel was unfinished, maybe
love to have another crack at someday? In a long-winded
response that ran over two minutes, Clinton began by saying it
was her job only to pass the baton, then ticked off a series of
excuses but failed to mention a single concrete accomplishment,
following it up with an awkward read my book gag line.
Look, I really see my role as secretary and in fact leadership
in general in a democracy as a relay race, I mean you run the
best race you can run, you hand off the baton. Some of what
hasnt been finished may go on to be finished. So when
President Obama asked me to be secretary of state and I
agreed, we had the worst economic crisis since the Great
Depression, we had two wars, we had continuing threats
from all kinds of corners around the world that we had to
deal with, so it was a perilous time, frankly. And what he said
7

to me was, Look, I have to be dealing with the economic

crisis. I want you to go out and represent us around the
world, and it was a good division of labor because we
needed to make it clear to the rest of the world that we were
going to get our house in order. We were going to stimulate
and grow and get back to positive growth and work with our
friends and partners. So I think we did that. Im very proud
of the stabilization and the really solid leadership that the
Administration provided that I think now leaves us to be able
to deal with problems like Ukraine, because were not so
worried about a massive collapse in Europe and China,
trying to figure out what to do with all their bond holdings,
and all the problems we were obsessed with. I think we really
restored American leadership in the best sense that once
again, people began to rely on us, to look at us as setting the
values, setting the standards. I just dont want to lose that
because we have a dysfunctional political situation in
Washington. And then of course a lot of particulars, but I am
finishing my book so youll be able to read all about it.
Haha.4
She passed the baton is not exactly the mark of a great secretary
of state, and it is a far cry from the lofty promise that carried her
into the seventh floor of Foggy Bottom.
State Department Spokeswoman Jen Psakia top aide on
Obamas reelection campaignwas one of the first to be
caught in the collateral damage of what did Clinton
achieve? question. Pressed repeatedly to name a single
accomplishment from Secretary Clintons 2010 Quadrennial
Strategy Review, or QDDR, a major State Department review
of policies and priorities, Psaki came up empty.5 The
embarrassing moment became a cable news punch line, but
Psaki was not alone. Longtime Clinton loyalist Lanny Davis
argued that her greatest achievement was being the most
popular woman in the world. Politico editor Susan Glasser
8

described how not even an ardent defender of Clintons

could name a single accomplishment. Prominent political
reporters like MSNBCs Chuck Todd, the Huffington Posts
Sam Stein, the New York Times Nick Confessore, and
Politicos Clinton expert Maggie Haberman have all at
various times noted the political challenges she faces in
highlighting tangible achievements. 6
Andrew Sullivan took the criticism much further. He noted
the inability of Clintons allies to name a signature
accomplishment from her entire time in the national
spotlight.
But more importantly for me is the inability of her
supporters to answer a simple question. I was having
dinner with a real Clinton fan the other night, and I
actually stumped him (and hes not easily stumped).
What have been Hillary Clintons major, signature
accomplishments in her long career in public life? What
did she achieve in her eight years as First Lady exactly?
What stamp did she put on national policy in her time
as Senator from New York? What were her defining and
singular achievements as secretary-of-state?7
This growing political vulnerability is the tide that Hard
Choices will aim to stem.
But no matter her response, she cant rewrite history. She
cant go back in time and sign a peace accord. More
importantly, she cant go back and change the failed choices
that have weakened America and left our nation poorly
positioned on the world stage. It is these errors that will dog
her. Failed Choices highlights some of the most egregious.
Chief among them was her stewardship over Americas Libya
policy. Unlike any other policy emerging from the Obama
administration, Libya was Hillarys War.8 After overcoming
9

skeptics of military force to remove Gaddafi, and declaring

victory, Secretary Clinton oversaw a failed post-war
reconstruction that allowed al-Qaeda-affiliated terrorists to
set up bases, kidnap Libyan leaders and attack Western
targets. This policy fiasco led to the most fateful night of her
tenure. Despite repeated warnings and every indication of
danger on the ground, Secretary Clinton left our U.S.
ambassador vulnerable to a deadly attack in Benghazi that
claimed the lives of four Americans.
Secretary Clintons failures in the Middle East extended far
beyond Libya. Throughout the Green Movement in Iran and
the Arab Spring protests that rocked Egypt, Syria, and the
wider Middle East, Clinton and the administration were
caught unprepared, and responded with shaky leadership
and an incoherent strategy. She dropped the ball as
reformers in the most troubled region of the world rallied
around a cry for democracy. Today, our influence in the
region is on the decline as Bashar al-Assad wages a brutal
civil war massacring Syrians by the thousands. And though
she had spent years giving lip service in support of Israel,
when it came time to act, Secretary Clinton undermined our
closest ally on many fronts, kept the peace process at arms
length, and showed weak leadership when confronting the
looming threat posed by Irans nuclear ambitions.
Secretary Clinton was also the face of a Russian Reset
policy that bet unilateral concessions to Russia would
somehow change the behavior of Vladimir Putin. Instead
Putin took advantage of the administrations desire to
appease him, committing grievous human rights abuses,
propping up the worlds worst dictators, including Syrias
Assad, and most recently as of this writing, invading Eastern
Ukraine.

10

As a manager of the State Department bureaucracy,

Secretary Clinton oversaw astounding incidents of
government waste, grotesque scandals, and contractors run
amok. Her political staff intimidated internal critics and
whistleblowers, trying to protect her future political career.
The departments technology remains vulnerable even after
the WikiLeaks debacle made us less safe and damaged our
reputation throughout the world. And despite her public
focus on issues relating to women and children, her
department managed a visa program that for years sent
foreign teenagers to homes where many were sexually
abused or placed in the custody of convicted criminals. She
also brought the trademark Clintonian sleaze to Foggy
Bottom. The State Department was meticulous in the area
ripest for cronyism: economic statecraft.9 She and her staff
were very good to those companies who were supportive of
other Clinton efforts, particularly clients of the Clintonconnected consulting firm Teneo, a firm that employed a top
Clinton aide while she worked at the State Department
thanks to a special arrangement.10
These stories barely scratch the surface. Failed Choices
abounded. At the end of Secretary Clintons tenure, there
was no region in the world where our alliances were stronger
or our enemies weaker thanks to Secretary Clintons
diplomacy. In her book and on a presidential campaign, she
will spin, exaggerate, and lie to try to turn these failures into
accomplishments. But no amount of whitewashing or
political spin can protect her from her record. While the
choices she faced may have been hard, the results of these
choices are what really matters. That is what America Rising
will expose in Failed Choices and beyond.

11

CHAPTER TWO: HILLARYS WAR: LIBYA

AND BENGHAZI
During her tenure at the State Department, no issue was
imprinted with Secretary Clintons policy views, management
style, and worldview to a greater degree than the U.S.-backed
NATO intervention in Libya. For her supporters, it was for a time
what they expected to be her signature success.11 Yet the tragic
events in Benghazi on September 11, 2012, and the ensuing chaos
in the nation will likely make it her defining failure.
Libya was not supposed to emerge as a problem for Clintons
political future. Secretary Clinton had successfully pushed the
president for military intervention over the counsel of other
advisers12, took credit for the removal of Libyan leader Muammar
Gaddafi, and handpicked Chris Stevens to serve as her
ambassador.13 It appeared to be a model of success. But in the
months and years to come, Libyas needs and rebuilding were met
with inadequate foresight. As violence began to rise14, Clinton was
lauding the countrys new leadership and not taking the necessary
steps to bring stability.15
Throughout 2012, the security situation continued to deteriorate
as rebels, once united against Gaddafi, openly clashed with each
other.16 The weak central government grew increasingly unable to
police the state as theft, crime, and lawlessness took hold of the
country.17 Conditions were particularly dire in Eastern Libya,
which had been the rebels stronghold.18 By the summer, multiple
U.S. intelligence agencies were issuing stark warnings about the
perilous conditions and growing influence of al-Qaeda-linked
militias as attacks on Western targets were accelerating.19
In Benghazi, the increasing tumult was particularly ominous. 20
Though personally aware of the rising influence of Al Qaeda,
Clinton claims never to have seen or been informed of repeated
requests for additional security from Ambassador Stevens and
12

others on the ground.21 She told a congressional hearing, I didnt

see those requests. They didnt come to me. I didnt approve them.
I didnt deny them.22
As conditions grew worse, the State Department actually
withdrew security forces23 and stationed American personnel in a
diplomatic facility that did not even meet federally mandated
security standards.24
On September 10, 2012, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney
told the press corps that the president was briefed on the many
precautions the U.S. government was taking in preparation for the
9/11 anniversary.25 Yet the Benghazi consulates substantial
security needs had not been addressed26 and the Clinton State
Department did not fulfill its obligation of identifying to DoD
[Department of Defense] those diplomatic posts that require
additional measures or a prospective emergency response.27
Without adequate security personnel or resources in the
compound on September 11, vulnerable U.S. personnel were
overrun by armed militants in an hours-long assault on the
diplomatic facility and nearby CIA annex28 that claimed the lives
of Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans.29
Following the attacks, Congress asked the intelligence community
for talking points on the attack. As they were being crafted, the
State Department intervened, requesting changes to remove
references to prior CIA warnings and the deteriorating security
situation.30 These talking points would be used by the
administration spokesperson set to do Sunday show interviews
days after the attack.31 Secretary Clinton refused to do the Sunday
shows,32 leaving then-U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations
Susan Rice to appear before the nation reiterating the talking
points that are now known to be false.33 Asked why she didnt do
the Sunday shows herself after her hand-picked ambassador had
been murdered, Secretary Clinton quipped, There are other
things that I would prefer to do on Sunday mornings.34 Rices
13

appearances would be the symbol for the administrations

misleading rhetoric in the attacks aftermath, a role that would
force the ambassador to withdraw her name from consideration to
become Clintons successor as secretary of state.35
For eight days following the attack, the State Department
continued to link the attack to a video, Innocence of Muslims.36
Secretary Clinton went so far as to tell the father of one victim that
the U.S. government was going to arrest and prosecute the
producer of the video.37 When pressed about the misleading
account regarding how the attack was committed, Clinton
famously said in testimony to Congress, What difference, at this
point, does it make?38
And while the PR operation was humming to spin that attack,
Clintons State Department failed to take action to hold the actual
attackers responsible. Weeks went by before the attack site was
secured while potential evidence was looted.39
Today, Libyas weak central government is being overrun by
armed militias40 as blaring headlines announce high-profile
terrorist attacks and the rise of al-Qaeda.41 To date, the United
States has not brought a single perpetrator of the attack in
Benghazi to justice, in large part because of the instability in the
country.42
The steady transformation of Libya from what Clinton and her
allies saw as a signature foreign policy success to a national
tragedy in Benghazi is the result of her failed leadership. Of all
Clintons failed choices in Foggy Bottom, those made in Libya are
the starkest.
Hillarys War
The tragedy of Benghazi began long before September 11, 2012,
with the Clinton-backed overthrow of Libyas leader Muammar
Gaddafi amidst the Arab Spring. On February 15, 2011, just four
days after Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak resigned because of
14

massive protests in Egypt, demonstrations broke out in Libya

against the Gaddafi government. Social upheaval soon engulfed
Libya, and civil war broke out across the country.
As the Obama administration debated whether to intervene,
Secretary Clinton became a strong proponent of military action43
and, as the New York Times reported, became instrumental in
swinging the administrations policy in her favored direction.
The change became possible, though, only after Mrs.
Clinton joined Samantha Power, a senior aide at the
National Security Council, and Susan Rice, Mr.
Obamas ambassador to the United Nations, who had
been pressing the case for military action, according to
senior administration officials speaking only on
condition of anonymity.44
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who was at the end of his
Pentagon tenure and running out of patience with those who
were blithely talking about the use of military force as though it
were some kind of video game[,]opposed military intervention in
a third Muslim country.45 So did Director of Counterterrorism
John Brennan, who warned that the Libyan rebels were unknown,
and could have ties to al-Qaeda.46 Nevertheless, Secretary Clinton
and other supporters of military action expected a short, easy
fight. How many times in history, Gates asked, had that nave
assumption proven wrong?47 It would certainly be tested in
Libya.
Despite this unbridgeable gap between two prominent Cabinet
members, Obama, who had been weighing arguments from a
sharply divided Cabinet for several days, sided with his secretary
of state.48 An international coalition was formed to help
overthrow Gaddafi that consisted of NATO, Sweden, Qatar, the
United Arab Emirates, Jordan, and Morocco. Secretary Clinton
campaigned to maintain NATO and coalition support, telling
reluctant Arab nations its important to me personally.49 She
15

was the driving force behind the overthrow of Gaddafi. Libyas

liberation, for better or worse, was Hillarys War, wrote reporters
Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes, in their biography HRC.50 Her
support was pivotal both within the Cabinet and among U.S.
allies. 51
Following a months-long bombing campaign, the U.S. and its
allies successfully backed rebels over government, culminating in
Gaddafis overthrow and death. 52
On October 20, 2011, upon learning of Gaddafis death, Secretary
Clinton rhetorically spiked the football, proclaiming, We came,
we saw, he died.53 Clinton and her allies were quick to proclaim
Libya a success story.54 Speaking to the Washington Post, the
secretary crowed, [W]e set into motion a policy that was on the
right side of history, on the right side of our values, on the right
side of our strategic interests in the region. 55 And traveling to
Tripoli for a victory lap, Secretary Clinton opened her remarks
with a joke about then-Ambassador to Libya Gene Cretz fearing
for his life during military operations.
As [Ambassador Gene Cretz] and Assistant Secretary
Feltman and I were walking through here, they were talking
about how the last time Jeff was here was when we were very
worried that Qadhafi and Sanussi were going to kill
[Ambassador Cretz].56
The macabre joke was met at the time with laughter, but it
would serve as a foreboding remark that presaged the death
of a future U.S. ambassador to Libya.
Libyas Unraveling
In a 2004 appearance on Larry King Live following the U.S.s
toppling of Saddam Hussein, then-Senator Clinton criticized
President George W. Bush for poor post-war planning in Iraq,
asking, How could they have been so poorly prepared for the
aftermath of the toppling of Saddam Hussein?
16

The failure to plan is the most hardof all the things is

the hardest for me to understand. I mean, how could
they have been so poorly prepared for the aftermath of
the toppling of Saddam Hussein? And theres just a
number of questions that, you know, we still dont really
have answers for.57
However, months after the U.S. intervention in Libya,
Secretary Clinton appeared unaware of or unwilling to
acknowledge the growing violence rapidly overtaking the
country, and her own inadequate planning for the events to
come. In a March 2012 joint press conference with Libyas
new interim Prime Minister, Clinton hailed the new
government with a rosy assessment of its performance.
[O]ver the last four months, the prime minister and this
interim government have provided essential and
effective leadership and theyve begun the hard work of
putting Libya back together. Weve seen progress in
each of the three key areas of democratic society
building an accountable, effective government;
promoting a strong private sector; and developing a
vibrant civil society. And we will stand with the people
of Libya as it continues this important work.58
But Secretary Clinton was ignoring the failures of the
government to provide basic security and law enforcement.
As early as January 2012, news organizations were reporting
that Rival militias, no longer unified by their struggle
against Gaddafi, are now openly clashing in the streets, and
the new governments inability to impose control has
resulted in a skyrocketing of crime and random violence.59
In certain pockets of the country, some of the militias that were
key to the uprising, such as Ansar al-Sharia, which played a role in
the Benghazi attack, took hold. Chief among these areas, Benghazi
17

became a regional hub for the training of Islamic extremist

fighters.60
It was this unraveling of the government of Libya and the
countrys violent descent into Jihadist control that serves as the
backdrop for the events leading up to the tragic terrorist attacks in
Benghazi on September 11, 2012.
A Security Debacle
The deterioration in Libyas security crystalized for Americans on
September 11, 2012, when armed militants attacked the State
Departments temporary diplomatic facility in Benghazi and the
nearby CIA annex. Four Americans were tragically killed in the
attack, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, the first ambassador
killed in the line of duty since 1979, and seriously wounding two
other Americans as well as injuring three Libyans hired to guard
the facility. 61 The attack would lead to the destruction and
abandonment of the U.S. Special Mission facility.
During Clintons 2009 Senate Secretary of State confirmation
hearing, she lamented the deaths of previous State Department
workers and said, Many risk their lives, and some have lost their
lives in service to our nation. They need and deserve the
resources, training and support to succeed.62
But Stevens was in that vulnerable diplomatic post in Benghazi on
September 11, 2012, because of Secretary Clintons plans to
convert it into a permanent post. As Gregory Hicks, the Chief of
Mission in Libya, described Stevens mission:
According to Chris, Secretary Clinton wanted Benghazi
converted into a permanent constituent post. Timing
for this decision was important. Chris needed to report
before September 30th, the end of the fiscal year, on the
physical and the political and security environment in
Benghazi to support an action memo to convert
18

Benghazi from a temporary facility to a permanent

facility.63

So to meet Secretary Clintons goals, and the State Departments

deadlines, Stevens embarked for Benghazi. 64
There were ample reasons to fear Stevens deployment to
Benghazi. In the months leading up to the September 11 attack,
there were at least 20 attacks against Western targets in
Benghazi.65 Among these were two bombings against our facility
itself, one of the attacks blowing a 40-foot hole in the outer wall.66
In response to these attacks and others, many countries began
19

moving their personnel and assets out of Benghazi. The State

Department did not.67
Other U.S. intelligence agencies also advised of the danger. In
June 2012, there were two disturbing reports from the
Department of Defense. The Defense Intelligence Agency warned,
We expect more anti-U.S. terrorist attacks in eastern Libya,68
while a report by the Joint Chiefs of Staff described conditions
ripe for more attacks, terrorist safe havens in Libya and warned
that attacks would become more lethal, especially in eastern
Libya, because of growing terrorist links in the region with alQaeda.69 The CIA and even the Library of Congress also warned of
al-Qaedas presence in Libya.70
According to a bipartisan report by the Senate Homeland Security
Committee, chaired by Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT), key officials
at the State Department were also made aware of the
deteriorating security situation in Benghazi.71 On August 16, 2012,
Stevens sent a cable to the State Department, which raised
additional concerns about the deteriorating security situation in
Benghazi and a security officer expressed concerns with the
ability to defend [the] post in the event of a coordinated attack.72
The Senate Homeland Security Committee also concluded
that Secretary Clinton should have shut down the Benghazi
facility.
Despite the inability of the Libyan government to fulfill
its duties to secure the facility, the increasingly
dangerous threat assessments, and a particularly
vulnerable facility, the Department of State officials did
not conclude the facility in Benghazi should be closed or
temporarily shut down. That was a grievous mistake.73
Secretary Clinton even admitted that she had seen these threat
reports and was certainly aware of the security risks in Benghazi
prior to the attack.
20

Well, I was certainly aware of a number of reports from

throughout our Government. I dont know of the
specific one that you are referring to. There were DoD
reports, intelligence community reports, State
Department reports talking about the decreasingor
the increasing threat environment in eastern Libya.
That was what we were trying to address with the
Libyans.74
She added that she was well aware that there were people
claiming to be associated with al-Qaeda working in the
area.75
Yet that very day, when pressed about her knowledge of repeated
security requests from Stevens and others on the ground,
Secretary Clinton said she did not know of any specific security
requests. None.
The specific security requests pertaining to Benghazi,
you know, were handled by the security professionals in
the department. I didnt see those requests. They didnt
come to me. I didnt approve them. I didnt deny
them.76
Its a truly stunning statement given the context, and speaks
to a glaring failure in leadership. Despite all these
government reports issuing stark warnings, all the previous
terrorist attacks, including a bomb blasting through the
facilitys outer wall, and her own purported concerns about
the dangers State Department officials faced, the secretary
could not be bothered to hear out her own ambassadors
pleas for more security? In particular, after the White
Houses statements and assurances that extra precautions
would be in place on the anniversary of 9/11, how could there
be such a significant lapse in what was clearly one of the
most dangerous outposts in the entire world?77
21

In fact, according to a March 2014 Bloomberg poll, a majority of

the American people dont believe that Clinton was unaware of
security requests.78 General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, said he was surprised to hear about
Secretary Clintons claims of ignorance.79 To many in the foreign
service, military, and diplomatic communities, the dangers in
Benghazi were common knowledge.
Whether or not Clinton was informed of these security
requests, her Department was not fulfilling them, and at
times with apparent zeal. In the months prior to the attack,
Ambassador Stevens sent numerous cables to State
Department headquarters highlighting concerns about
security in Benghazi, and he requested additional security
multiple times.80
On June 6, 2012, the same day that a bomb blew a hole
through the Benghazi facilitys outer wall, Stevens
recommended the creation of security teams in Tripoli and
Benghazi. In spite of the bombing, the teams were never
created.81 The next month, Stevens asked for thirteen
temporary duty U.S. security personnel for Libya. But
according to the Senate Intelligence Committees review,
The State Department never responded to the request.82
State Department officials were often combative and
insulting to individuals requesting security. When Regional
Security Officer Eric Nordstrom inquired why a security
request was an issue, Deputy Assistant Secretary for
International Programs Charlene Lamb shot back: Well, you
know, this is a political game. You have to not make us look
bad83
In March 2012, in response to a request for additional
security, including five agents for Benghazi, a State
Department official mockingly asked why the requester
sought the sun, the moon, and the stars.84
22

In fact, the State Department not only refused to grant

requests for more security, it actually reduced security staff
in Libya.85 The Department of Defense had provided a
sixteen-member special operations detail called a Site
Security Team (SST), detailed to the chief of mission in
Libya, at no expense to the State Department.86 The SST left
Libya in August 2012, one month before the attack, because
the State Department failed to request its renewal.87
In congressional testimony, Eric Nordstrom said Charlene
Lamb told him, You cannot request an SST extension.88
This should not have been the case.
The Senate Intelligence Committee, chaired by Senator Diane
Feinstein (D-CA) determined the attack was preventable and
singled out the State Department for criticism.89, 90 It noted that
Communication, cooperation, and coordination between
Washington, Tripoli, and Benghazi occurred collegially at the
working-level but were constrained by a lack of transparency,
responsiveness, and leadership at senior bureau levels.91
The Senate Intelligence Committee also found there was
confusion within the State Department as to which bureau was
responsible for security.92 In response to the deteriorating
security conditions and intelligence warnings, the State
Department would not adjust their security posture.93 The CIA,
with the same intelligence, did make adjustments.94
Unfortunately, the failures in security extended beyond security
personnel to physical security. The State Departments
designation of the Benghazi diplomatic facility as temporary also
led to deadly bureaucratic red tape. Temporary designation
exempted the Benghazi facility from federal laws mandating
additional security infrastructure.95 The Senate Homeland
Security Committee found that the State Department knew that
the temporary designation of the Benghazi facility placed
Americans in greater danger.96
23

Partisans have alleged that Republican budget cuts contributed to

the security failures in Benghazi. But as the Washington Posts
Glenn Kessler noted, State Department officials repeatedly told
Congress that a lack of funds was not an issue.97 In a
congressional hearing, Representative Steve Chabot (R-OH)
quoted the State Departments Chief Financial Officer for
Diplomatic Security Robert Baldre, who said, I do not feel that
we have ever been at a point where we have sacrificed security due
to lack of funding.98 Instead, Kessler noted, security was
hampered because of bureaucratic issues and management
failures.99 Ironically, the State Department increased danger
pay while failing to meet security requests.100
The State Departments handling of physical security upgrade
requests in particular has been a management fiasco. Earlier this
year, the State Departments Inspector General released a
damning report confirming that many of the problems in
Benghazi were indicative of Clintons State Department in hot
spots around the world.101 The Inspector General found that the
State Department did not effectively prioritize physical securityrelated funding for the most at-risk facilities.102 The Department
could only properly account for $76 million actually being spent
of physical security-related projects, out of the $938 million
allocated for itjust 8 percent of allocated funds.103 The
complexity of the bureaucratic process for requesting physical
security-related funding was actually so bad that it deterred some
officials from making needed security requests.104
On the night of the attack, as armed assailants overran the State
Departments Benghazi facility, those under assault were not only
outmanned, they were left with a facility that was also severely
under-resourced with regard to weapons, ammunition, [nonlethal deterrents] and fire safety equipment, including escape
masks.105 Both men who were killed at the State Department
facility, Ambassador Stevens and Sean Smith, died of smoke
inhalation, making the lack of basic security materials like escape
24

masks even more unfortunate and disappointing in

retrospect.106,107 A Libyan doctor who treated Ambassador Stevens
reportedly said asphyxiation suffered from smoke inhalation was
his only injury.108
Evacuating personnel fled to the CIAs Annex facility nearby. At
11:15 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, mortars began to hit the annex
and heavy fighting began.109
At 10:08 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, Secretary Clinton put out a
written statement on the attack. In it, she assigned a motivation
for the attack: anger toward inflammatory material posted on the
Internet.
Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a
response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet.
The United States deplores any intentional effort to
denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to
religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our
nation.110
Secretary Clinton had already provided a suggested motive for the
assailants in a statement to the press before the second attack was
even over, with two of the American victims from that night still
defending themselves. Her statement was quickly proven wrong
by her departments top brass in an email sent the next day
among senior State Department staff blaming the attack on
terrorist group Ansar al-Sharia, and not the video. 111
There has been significant debate and controversy over whether
the military could or should have responded and scrambled
resources to Benghazi during the hours-long attack. Retired
Brigadier General Robert Lovell of AFRICOM testified that on the
night of the attack, the State Department failed to provide strong
enough requests for action.112 Testimony by Gregory Hicks, the
deputy chief of mission in Libya during the attack, best captures
the sense of abandonment felt by the Americans in Benghazi.
25

Hicks spoke with the Department of Defense during the attack,

asking if any military resources were going to be sent; Hicks
reaction afterwards was were on our own.113
The mere fact that no military assets were within close range itself
is a failure of the Clinton State Department. [I]dentifying to DoD
those diplomatic posts that require additional measures or a
prospective emergency response, was the job of the State
Department.114 In fact, General Darryl Roberson testified,
[E]verything the State Department asked for from the DoD we
provided, everything.115 A Marine Detachment or other military
assets within range to be deployed were not among the assets
requested. Had the State Department fulfilled its obligation, it is
possible that there could have been a military response to the
attack, the consulate could have had necessary security, and
American lives might not have been lost.
The Clinton Spin Machine
Instead of taking any responsibility for these failures, the Clinton
spin machine sprung into action.
Soon after the attack, a bipartisan Senate Homeland Security
Committee found that senior officials in the State Department
knew it was a terrorist attack from the beginning. There was
never any doubt among key officials, including officials in the IC
[Intelligence Community] and the Department of State, that the
attack in Benghazi was an act of terrorism, the Senate committee
concluded.116
Yet as the CIA began crafting talking points for Congress that
would serve as the basis for then-UN Ambassador Susan Rices
now infamous interviews with five Sunday talk shows, it was the
State Department that raised objections to a version that
mentioned CIA warnings and al-Qaedas presence. State
Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland requested that
language involving CIA warnings to the State Department be
26

27

removed, writing it could be abused by members [of Congress] to

beat up the State Department for not paying attention to warnings,
so why would we want to feed that either?117 Nuland insisted on
changes to satisfy my buildings leadership and consulted with
top Clinton aide Jake Sullivan about the talking points.118 One
email released by the White House described a video conference
call in which CIA Deputy Director Mike Morrell, who made the
final edits, noted that he would be happy to work with Jake
Sullivan and White House aide Ben Rhodes to develop
appropriate talking points.119
The talking points scrubbed all references to CIA warnings or alQaedas presence and laid blame for the attack on protests
sparked by a YouTube video, a now debunked theory that Rice
famously repeated on those five Sunday talk shows.120
Secretary Clintons response to the controversy surrounding the
talking points and the actions taken by her department to change
them was again to plead ignorance. I certainly did not know of
any reports that contradicted the IC talking points at the time that
Ambassador Rice went on the TV shows, she said.121
And when pressed in Senate testimony about how her department
could have falsely attributed the attack to a protest against a
YouTube video, the secretary angrily responded, What
difference, at this point, does it make?122
But the truth is, early on, senior officials within the State
Department knew that what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist
attack. In a September 12, 2012, email, Assistant Secretary of
State for Near Eastern Affairs Beth Jones recounted a
conversation in which she told the Libyan ambassador to the
United States: [T]he group that conducted the attacksAnsar al
Shariais affiliated with Islamic extremists. The email went to
nine senior State Department officials, including Secretary
Clintons chief of staff, Cheryl Mills. This was Clintons inner circle
telling the Libyan government that Benghazi was a terrorist attack
28

four days before Susan Rice ever appeared on a Sunday show.123

How could the secretary be completely unaware of her inner
circles assessment? The State Department under John Kerry
would officially label Ansar al-Sharia a perpetrator of the
attack.124
But while the Clinton operation was quick to spin the facts, it
was terribly slow to take action to protect U.S. interests in
Libya and work to bring the attackers to justice.125 Almost
four weeks after the attack, the diplomatic facility, still
unprotected, had been looted, and sensitive documents
remained strewn across the floor.126 At the time, some local
former security personnel feared for their lives after
documents revealing their private information were
discovered at the site. The State Department had left behind
papers detailing the names, phone numbers, and other
personal information for dozens of locals who worked with
the diplomatic facility.127
When CNN published Ambassador Stevens diary, which had been
left at the attacked Benghazi facility, in which he spoke of constant
threats and fears for his life, a Clinton spokesman slammed CNN
for its disgusting handling of the diary, rather than address why
the site had yet to be secured.128
In an attempt to offer some semblance of independent
assessment, Secretary Clinton commissioned the Accountability
Review Board and then hand-picked four out of the five
members.129 Though touted by the White House and State
Department as the definitive review of the Benghazi attack, the
board never even interviewed Clinton and her top deputies and
failed to hold any of them accountable.130 Yet even the Clintonappointed Accountability Review Board found there were
systemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies
at the State Department, which led to the weak security posture
that night.131
29

Meanwhile, the State Department, including Clintons chief of

staff, Cheryl Mills, resisted congressional inquiries into the attack.
After a State Department lawyer was blocked from a classified
briefing about Benghazi, Mills was very upset and called one of
the attendees to demand a report on the briefing.132 When the
Senate Intelligence Committee issued its bipartisan report on
Benghazi, the committee noted in the report that its investigation
received a significant amount of resistance, especially from
State, and that the lack of cooperation hampered the committees
review.133
Today Clinton and her allies continue to shirk responsibility,
attack those who challenge her, and claim that the tragedy in
Benghazi is old news, or a fake scandal. In her book, Clinton
argues not only that she didnt know about requests for more
security, but actually that she shouldnt have known about
them.134 Amid escalating attacks on Western targets,
including attacks on the facility itself and the rise of Al
Qaeda-linked militia, that claim is nothing short of appalling.
Clinton will also attempt to silence critics, claiming that
those who question her leadership leading up to and after the
attack are doing so on the backs of dead Americans.
I will not be a part of a political slugfest on the backs of
dead Americans. Its just plain wrong, and its unworthy
of our great country. Those who insist on politicizing
the tragedy will have to do so without me. 135
Yet one of her top political allies, David Brockfor whose
group Bill Clinton has raised money136went so far as to
write a book titled The Benghazi Hoax that tried to absolve
Clinton of all blame.137 Today, Clintons team is setting up a
campaign-style war room and holding strategy sessions, all
while claiming the former secretary of state is somehow
above politics.138
30

The brazenness of such quintessentially Clintonian efforts to

absolve themselves of blame and point the finger instead at
their political foes shows just how far Clinton and her allies
will go to avoid being held even minimally accountable for
this failure on her watch.
The Results of Hillarys War
In the aftermath of the attack, Libyas security conditions
would grow increasingly dangerous and unstable, with a
weakening government unable to stem the rising tide of
violence. By December 2013, the State Department was
forced to issue a chilling travel warning to Americans
planning to travel in Libya.
The Department of State warns U.S. citizens of the risks
of traveling to Libya and strongly advises against all but
essential travel to Tripoli and against all travel to areas
outside of Tripoli. Many military-grade weapons
remain in the hands of private individuals, including
antiaircraft weapons that may be used against civilian
aviation. Crime levels remain high in many parts of the
country. In addition to the threat of crime, various
groups have called for attacks against U.S. citizens and
U.S. interests in Libya.139
As militias grew stronger, and violence reigned, Libyas prime
minister was kidnapped, and militias staged a high-profile
takeover of three oil ports demanding political autonomy.140 By
April 2014, another prime minister quit after just a month, when
his family was threatened.141 In the south of Libya, the United
Nations reported earlier this year, As a result of the clashes, the
South is suffering from shortages of food supplies, medicine, fuel,
and money in the banks.142 Libya is increasingly becoming a
regional hub for Islamist militias, as al-Qaeda affiliates entrench
in many parts of the country.143 In a May report on NBC Nightly
News, correspondent Ayman Mohyeldin painted a dire picture.
31

Since Libyas NATO-backed revolution in 2011, the country

has been in constant turmoil. It has failed to draw up a
constitution and has seen several leaders resign. Large parts
of the country are controlled by militias, and the presence of
al-Qaeda-linked militants is on the rise.144
The dangerous security situation and rise of militias has left
the U.S. remarkably incapable of carrying out
counterterrorism efforts. None of the assailants in the
Benghazi attack has been brought to trial, and one of the
suspects, Ahmed Abu Khattala, gave an interview to CNN at
a coffee shop in Benghazi.145 In 2014, it was chillingly
revealed that fifteen locals who were aiding the U.S.
investigation have been killed in Benghazi.146
Today Libya is a nation in chaos, a danger to its inhabitants
and the rest of the world. There is no clear path to a stable
government in sight. Our ambassador and three other
Americans are dead. The perpetrators are on the loose. These
are the results of Hillarys War. From them she cannot hide.
Such a disastrous outcome calls for a leader to take
responsibility for her failures, but with her eye on the White
House, that is one hard choice that Clinton refuses to make.

32

CHAPTER THREE: THE FAILED RUSSIAN

RESET
One of the most indelible images from Secretary Clintons State
Department tenure shows her smiling broadly and holding a small
toy-like reset button for the towering Russian Foreign Minister
Sergei Lavrov to press. The image alone captured Clintons most
envelope-pushing diplomatic endeavora Reset in relations
with Russia that held the promise of thawed bilateral relations
between Washington and Moscow.
In that moment, Secretary Clinton became the diplomatic face of
the Obama administrations Russia Reset policy, which today is
broadly considered an abysmal failure. At best, it could be
described as a hopelessly nave attempt at diplomacy with
Vladimir Putin. At worst, it was a deadly miscalculation that only
empowered him to support some of the worlds worst leaders and
regimes, trample on the rights of Russians, and weaken American
prestige.
In the beginning, Obama and Clinton intended for the Reset to
ease tensions between the U.S. and Russia, after Putin and his
protg Dmitry Medvedev invaded Georgia in 2008. Then,
through a series of concessions both rhetorical and real, Obama
and Clinton sought a strategic partnership with Russia that could
help the U.S. with rogue states, such as Iran.
But for every inch conceded by Clinton, Putin took a mile. The
Russians never intended to play their part in the script written by
Clinton and Obama. Instead, concessions emboldened Putin to
poke America in the eye without fear of retribution. In fact, as
Clinton was packing up her office at Foggy Bottom, Putin was
banning Americans from adopting Russian children147, arming
Syrias Bashar al-Assad as he waged a brutal civil war148, and
issuing bellicose threats to counter U.S. missile defense plans.149

33

And earlier this year, the final embers of hope for this doomed
policy were stamped out, as Russian forces annexed Crimea and
invaded Eastern Ukraine in total disregard of international law or
the threat it posed to NATO.150
As the face of the Reset, Clinton went into damage control mode.
Knowing that she had to distance herself from the failed policy
and assuage critics that Putin and Medvedev had not taken
advantage of her, Clinton lashed out. At a March 2014 fundraiser
in Long Beach, California, she criticized Putin, comparing the
Russian leaders invasion of Crimea to Adolf Hitlers actions in the
late 1930s.151
This reaction was widely seen for what it was: overcompensation
for her own failed choices. Comparing Putin to Hitler wouldnt
absolve years of misjudgment in dealing with the Russian
strongman.
The Reset hurt Americas standing in the world because it
backfired so badly. It failed to prevent innocent Syrians from
being murdered by Russian weapons. It failed to protect
journalists, gays, and dissidents from being jailed in Russia. It
failed to assuage the fears of our Eastern European allies that the
Russian military might one day move in their directions again.
History will not look kindly on Vladimir Putin, nor will it favor
those who emboldened him with concessions, holding to the
misguided notion that the ex-KGB spy could be made a Western
ally.
The Button
Within her first two months as secretary of state, Clinton traveled
to a conference in Switzerland to meet with Russian Foreign
Minister Sergei Lavrov. The trip was so important to the Obama
administration because it was considered a test of Clintons
diplomatic skills.152 The meeting required a combination of
diplomacy and media hype, a public display of the fresh start
34

between Washington and Moscow.

At the press conference, Secretary Clinton was meant to hand the
Russian minister an actual Reset button, but the gimmick epically
backfired. Secretary Clintons communications advisor, Philippe
Reines, had come up with the plan to bring a toy button but was
unable to track down the correct prop. At the eleventh hour,
Reines identified an emergency stop button at the hotel Jacuzzi
and stole it for the press conference.153 But he did not take the
time to have the Russian word vetted through State Department
translators. In the end, Secretary Clinton handed Lavrov a button
bearing what she thought was the Russian translation for the
word reset; it actually read overcharged, which Lavrov noted
in front of the international press corps, to Secretary Clintons
embarrassment.154
We worked hard to get the right Russian word, Mrs.
Clinton said, handing the button to Mr. Lavrov. Do you
think we got it? You got it wrong, he replied,
explaining that the Americans had come up with the
Russian word for overcharged.155
The word on the button should have been the Russian word for
naivete. Lavrovs terse response, you got it wrong, would
describe the outcome of Secretary Clintons misguided judgment
in the coming years.
From the beginning, Russia had a different understanding of what
reset meant on a host of issues. On the day Secretary Clinton
announced the Reset, the Russian Foreign Ministry criticized the
U.S. for seeking the extradition of a Russian citizen, Viktor Bout, a
notorious international arms dealer nicknamed the Merchant of
Death.156 Then a month later, Russia banned certain U.S. meat
exports, citing swine flu fears, even though the World Health
Organization insisted that eating meat has nothing to do with
getting swine flu.157 And then in April 2009, two Russian officials
were expelled from NATO headquarters allegedly for espionage,
35

prompting Russia to retaliate and expel NATO officials from

Moscow.158 This provocative pattern continued throughout
Secretary Clintons tenure at the State Department, and it was
obvious from the start. The Washington Posts Anne Applebaum
noticed when the Reset was announced that Russian leaders
appeared to have no interest in changing policy.
The profound differences in psychology, philosophy and
policy that have been the central source of friction
between the American and Russian governments for the
past decade remain very much in place. Sooner or later,
the Obama administration will have to grapple with
them. Anyone who doubts the truth of this need only
look at remarks Lavrov himself made last weekend in
Brussels, where he presented a vision of the world
utterly unchanged by the events of Jan. 20 [President
Obamas Inauguration]. 159
Shortly following the initial overture, Secretary Clinton continued
to push for better relations with Russia. At her urging, NATO
leaders agreed to resume high-level talks with Russia, which
broke off in the aftermath of the invasion of Georgia.160 In July
2009 on Meet the Press, Secretary Clinton heaped praise on her
new allies in Moscow, declaring, We view Russia as a great
power.161
During the period when Clinton was promoting a new partnership
between Russia and NATO, Russian troops remained in the two
separatist regions of Georgia, which Moscow agreed to vacate as
part of a ceasefire agreement, a fact that was not well received
amongst our allies in Eastern Europe. 162
Lithuanian Foreign Minister Vygaudas Usackas expressed concern
with the Reset, noting that the policy was being implemented when
there was no significant change in respect to Georgias territorial
integrity.163 And the Reset naturally raised questions in Tbilisi,
Georgias Capital, about whether the United States would push to
36

have the cease-fire plan fully honored.164 Within two months after
the Reset was announced, an Organization for Security and CoOperation in Europe (OSCE) plan for monitoring the ceasefire
agreement in the disputed regions of Georgia was blocked by
Russia. In reaction, Georgias OSCE ambassador said it was very
evident that Russia did not want international monitoring of
Georgia.165 Secretary Clinton raised the issue of Russias continued
military presence in Georgia with Lavrov, to no apparent affect.
166 As of this writing, Russian troops remain.
In the end, Secretary Clintons plan for Russia to become a NATO
partner again never happened. Relations between NATO and
Russia are as tense today as they have been since the Cold War.
Recently Alexander Vershbow, former U.S. ambassador to Russia
and now deputy secretary-general of NATO, said, Clearly the
Russians have declared NATO as an adversary...167
The Resets Grand Hope: Iran
Two of the most important diplomatic initiatives for Secretary
Clinton were negotiating a nuclear arms agreement with Russia
the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty or New Startand
obtaining Moscows assistance in countering Irans quest for
nuclear weapons. For their part, the Russians wanted to stop the
expansion of U.S. missile defense in Eastern Europe as part of
NATOs defensive shield, and force America to reduce its nuclear
and conventional forces. The State Department under Secretary
Clinton moved quickly to announce a tradeoff between missile
defense and Russian assistance on Iran. Just weeks after Clinton
was sworn in as secretary of state, her undersecretary, William
Burns, publicly linked Russias help with Iran to a U.S. decision on
Eastern European missile defense, observing that Russian pressure
on Tehran obviously shapes the way at which we look at missile
defense.168 At the same time, President Obama sent a secret
letter relaying a similar message to then-Russian President Dmitry
Medvedev.169
37

In order to achieve this goal, Secretary Clinton and her staff at the
State Department were more than willing to offer other major
diplomatic concessions to the Russians, unilaterally. In addition to
linking Iran and missile defense, in May 2009 Secretary Clintons
top arms control negotiator, then-Assistant Secretary of State Rose
Gottemoeller, announced the U.S. was willing to agree to count
both nuclear warheads and missile delivery vehicles in a nuclear
arms reduction treaty. The announcement was a shift from the
existing arms reduction agreement negotiated in 2002 by the Bush
administration, which was set to expire and did not count delivery
vehicles.170 Russia stood to benefit from the change.
In September 2009, Secretary Clinton and the Obama
administration formally dropped the U.S. plan to expand a longrange missile defense system to Poland and the Czech Republic.
According to an analysis by the Associated Press, The Kremlin got
exactly what it wanted when the United States scrapped plans for
missile defenses on Russias borders.171 The tilt toward Russia was
noticed immediately in Europe. The result was that key U.S. allies
in Eastern Europe expressed discomfort and confusion at the
dramatic shift172 and became a lot less likely to fall in line behind
the United States on foreign policy.173 The affront by the Obama
administration was particularly stinging to leaders in Poland. The
announcement came on the 70th anniversary of Russias invasion of
Poland, and WikiLeaks cables later documented the
administrations ambivalence toward the Poles concerns.174
Reversing the Bush administration plan allowed Moscow to claim
a victory over the United States and show the countries in Eastern
Europe that Russia could bully Secretary Clinton and the Obama
administration.
For now, Russia appears to have the upper handthe
Kremlin can crow to a domestic audience about staring
down the Americans and thumbing its nose at the
upstart Poles.175
38

The reversal was followed in February 2010 by the Obama

administration acquiescing to Russian demands for the New
START treaty to include language linking missile defense with
offensive capability.176 Embarrassed, the administration
announced the concession in a Russian language blog post by the
U.S. Ambassador in Moscow John Beyrle.177
The treaty deals with offensive, not defensive systems,
but since we acknowledge a logical link between them,
our presidents have agreed that the treaty will contain a
provision on the interconnection between strategic
offensive and defensive weapons, Beyrle said in his
Russian-language blog post.178
Despite these major concessions, and the fact that a new
European defense shield planned by the Obama administration
would only defend against short- and intermediate-range ballistic
missiles from Iran, Moscow continued to act with Cold War-like
belligerence and threats. In November 2011, Russian President
Dmitry Medvedev threatened military countermeasures if the
U.S. continued to pursue any European missile defense at
all.179 ,180
All of these key concessions, which weakened U.S. defenses, not
only failed to assuage the Russians, they also failed to gain Russias
complete assistance in countering Iranian nuclear ambitions.
While Russia did eventually support watered down U.N. sanctions
against Iran in 2010, Moscow blocked further efforts to strengthen
the sanctions, and voiced strong opposition to other measures to
counter Iran.
In early 2010, Russia reiterated that it would continue to sell
certain arms to Iran, while also rejecting Secretary Clintons
requests to delay Russian assistance in construction of the 1,000
megawatt nuclear reactor at Bushehr, Iran, in front of the
international press corps.181 The embarrassing moment for Clinton
came at a March 2010 press conference, where she argued it
39

would be premature to go forward with the nuclear reactor

without Iran ending its nuclear weapons program, only to have
Lavrov, several feet away, respond immediately that Russia had no
intentions of delaying construction.182 The very same day, Putin
declared that the first reactor at Irans nuclear power plant in
Bushehr is to be launched already in the summer.183 The plant
went online in August 2010.184 Adding further embarrassment
during the trip, Putin only agreed to meet with Secretary Clinton at
the last minute, and even then publicly criticized U.S. policy during
the phot0 op.185
When agreement on UN sanctions was announced in May 2010, it
was reported that Russia had fought previous drafts with tougher
sanctions.
[S]ome of the toughest proposals were barely even
discussed as the United States sought support from
China, which is a major trading partner with Iran and
has been the most resistant to new sanctions. Along
with the Russians, the Chinese blocked any measure
that would stop the flow of oil from Iranian ports or
gasoline into the country.186
The UN agreement did not include significant sanctions on
Irans energy sector187 or its central bank, and it weakened
inspections of cargo imports, all while carving out
exemptions that allowed Russia to sell surface to air missiles
to Tehran.188 Without these tougher measures, the Russianbacked UN sanctionsthe biggest concession Moscow ever
made during the Resetwere, as French President Nicolas
Sarkozy called them, toothless.189 It would be U.S.
sanctions on Irans central bank, on which Congress took the
lead in 2011 and 2012, as well as sanctions by the European
Union, that actually had a profound impact on Irans
economy, devaluing its currency and sending oil exports
plummeting.190
40

Russias tepid support for international efforts to confront Irans

nuclear ambitions is evidence that, despite the many concessions
Secretary Clinton made to Russia, she failed to achieve her primary
goal. Ultimately, they only served to weaken U.S. defense
capabilities, while strengthening the hands of Russia and Iran.
Moreover, recent Russian efforts to water down and subvert the
interim nuclear deal on Iran,191 including swapping Iranian oil192
for Russia goods and nuclear energy technology,193 serve as further
proof that Moscow will never be serious about confronting Tehran
over its nuclear weapons program.194
So after four years under Secretary Clintons leadership, the U.S.
made many concessions to the Russians:
Reducing the U.S. nuclear arsenal advantage over Russia195
Reducing missile defense and missile delivery mechanisms 196
Removing missile defenses in Poland and the Czech Republic,
undermining our relationship with allies in the region197
And along the way, Russia thumbed its nose at the U.S. and used
the leverage it was gaining to project strength and influence to bad
actors around the world. What did the U.S. get for all that? A
watered down sanctions package that provided little disincentive
for Iran to stop developing its nuclear program.
Strategic Partnerships with U.S. Adversaries
Not only did the Russians not reset their defense or foreign policies
toward Iran, they increased their worldwide belligerence to levels
not seen since the end of the Cold War. Just over a year after the
Reset, the U.S. Justice Department made a dramatic
announcement that federal agents had arrested a spy ring of eleven
Russians operating as moles in the United States.198 Acting as
though this was aberrant Russian behavior (the spies had been in
the U.S. for over a decade), Secretary Clinton tried to play down
the arrests in the interest of protecting the myth of a strategic
41

partnership. Foggy Bottoms reaction drew the Associated Press

headline: US State Department plays down fallout in spy case.199
If Russia had strategic partners when Clinton was Secretary of
State, it was more often than not with Americas adversaries.
Moscows alliances with rogue states and bad actors go far beyond
Tehran.
Leading up to Hillarys War in Libya, Russia was a fierce
opponent of her NATO-led air campaign to remove Muammar
Gaddafi from power.200 And in Syria after Bashar al-Assad ignited
a bloody civil war, Russia undermined any attempt at a Syrian
arms embargo by the UN Security Council, for which Secretary
Clinton had been an advocate. 201Worse, Russia didnt just prevent
arms embargoes, it actively supported Assad militarily, shipping
helicopters202 and advanced missile systems203 to Syria, aiding
Assads brutality which has led to the deaths of over 160,000
people as of this writing.204 The sheer barbarism was chilling. In
2013, Assad used chemical weapons on his own people. Despite all
of this, Russia has supported Assad politically, maintaining that his
exit from power should not be a precondition for any peace
settlement.205 All of this was a finger in the eye to Obama and
Clinton. Though the U.S. policy in Syria was a muddled mess, one
thing was clear: arming Assad was an unacceptable breach, and the
first shipment of weapons should have brought an end to the farce
of a Reset.
Russia was also uncooperative outside North Africa and the Middle
East. Moscow delivered some 1,800 shoulder-fired antiaircraft
missiles to Venezuela in 2009, despite U.S. efforts to block
Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez from getting them. According to
embassy cables, the fear was that the missiles would be sent to
drug cartels and guerillas fighting the Colombian government.206
And in April 2010, Putin traveled to Venezuela to strengthen
economic ties with Chavez and the Venezuelan government,
forging new agreements on energy production and trade.207
42

Romney: Right on Russia

One American political figure saw Russia for the growing menace
that it was and was willing to call Putin out for his transgressions.
During President Obamas reelection campaign, Mitt Romney
warned of a growing Russian strategic threat, highlighting their
role as our number one geopolitical foe.208
The response from President Obama, Secretary Clinton, and other
Democrats was not to echo his sentiment, but actually to ridicule
Romney and support the Russian government. President Obama
hurled insults, saying Romney was stuck in a Cold War mind warp
209 and in a nationally televised debate mocked the former
governor, saying the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign
policy back 210
When asked to respond to Romneys comment, Secretary Clinton
refused to rebuke the over-the-top and false Obama campaign
attacks. Instead, she delivered a message that echoed campaign
talking points arguing that skepticism of Russia was outdated: I
think its somewhat dated to be looking backwards, she said,
adding, In many of the areas where we are working to solve
problems, Russia has been an ally.211 A month after Secretary
Clintons statement on Romney, Putin rejected Obamas calls for a
landmark summit.212 He didnt seem to share the secretarys view
that the two countries were working together.
It was ironic that while Obama and Clinton were saying Romney
was in a Cold War mind warp,213 the Russian leader was waging a
virulent, anti-America election campaign (thats if you can call
what they did in Russia an election). In fact, if anyone was in a
Cold War mind warp, it was Putin, and his behavior demonstrated
just how right Romney was about Russias intentions.
Putin has helped stoke anti-Americanism as part of his campaign
emphasizing a strong Russia, Reuters reported. He has warned
the West not to interfere in Syria or Iran, and accused the United
43

States of political engineering around the world.214 And his

invective was aimed not just at the United States. He singled out
Secretary Clinton for verbal assault.
Putin unleashed the assault Nov. 27 [2011] in a
nationally televised address as he accepted the
presidential nomination, suggesting that the
independent election monitor Golos, which gets
financing from the United States and Europe, was a U.S.
vehicle for influencing the elections here. Since then,
Golos has been turned out of its Moscow office and its
Samara branch has come under tax investigation. Duma
deputies are considering banning all foreign grants to
Russian organizations.
Then Putin accused U.S. Secretary of State Hillary
Rodham Clinton of sending a signal to demonstrators to
begin protesting the fairness of the Dec. 4
parliamentary elections.215
Despite all the evidence that the Russians had no interest in
working with the U.S., President Obama and Secretary Clinton
seemed to believe that we were just a Putin and Obama election
victory away from making progress. In March 2012, President
Obama was caught on a live microphone making a private pledge
of flexibility on missile defense after my election to Dmitry
Medvedev.216 The episode lent credence to the notion that while the
administrations public unilateral concessions were bad enough, it
might have been giving away even more in private.
So it shouldnt have been a surprise that Putin didnt abandon his
anti-American attitudes after he won the presidential election. In
the last few weeks of Clintons tenure as Secretary of State, Putin
signed a law banning American adoption of Russian children,217 in
a move that could be seen as nothing less than a slap in the face to
the United States. Russia had been one of the leading sources of
children for U.S. adoptions.218 This disservice to Russian orphans
44

in need of a home was the final offensive act in a long trail of

human rights abuses for which Secretary Clinton failed to hold
Russia accountable.
Human Rights
While Russia was empowering the worlds must brutal dictators, at
home Putin was cracking down on dissent himself.
Secretary Clinton looked the other way as Moscow stepped up its
efforts to target journalists, opponents of Putin, gays, and others.
In 2009, despite objections from gay rights activists, Clinton met
with outspoken Moscow Mayor, Yuri Luzhkov. Luzhkov had
blocked all attempts to hold gay pride marches in the city, once
observing that gays can be described in no other way than as
satanic. Rather than speak out, Secretary Clinton remained silent,
prompting leading Russian gay rights activist Nikolai Alexeyev to
say, Russia is supposed to be a democracy and she said
nothing.219
In another high-profile instance, a Russian auditor, Sergei
Magnitsky was found beaten to death in a Russian prison where he
had been tortured. The story was met with global outrage, and in
December 2012 the United States Congress took up the Magnitsky
Act, which would enable the U.S. to withhold visas and freeze
financial assets of Russian officials thought to have been involved
in human rights violations.220 Clintons State Department was
truculently opposed, not just to the Magnitsky Act but to any
action that would reprimand even the most obvious human rights
offenders in Russia for fear that it would disrupt the Reset and
interfere with trade.221
While Clinton was unwilling to stand up to these awful human
rights violations, Putin and his cronies took every opportunity to
highlight what they saw as Americas failings.
Standing up for human rights, freedom, and democracy should
never be a hard choice for Americas top diplomat, but in this
45

case Secretary Clinton chased the white whale that was Russian
cooperation rather than stare them down. On January 31, 2013,
just one day before Clinton left her post as secretary, Human
Rights Watch issued a scathing report on Putins human rights
record for the previous year.
[A]fter his return to the presidency, Vladimir Putin oversaw
the swift reversal of former President Dmitry Medvedevs few,
timid advances on political freedoms and unleashed an
unprecedented crackdown against civic activism. New laws in
2012 restrict nongovernmental organizations and freedoms of
assembly and expression. New local laws discriminate against
lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people.222
After leaving the State Department, no doubt aware of her deep
failings in the area of human rights, Clinton posted a picture on
Instagram of herself with the jailed Russian band Pussy Riot. Yet,
while the band was jailed and tried in the spring and summer of
2012, Clinton and other Democrats had publicly defended Russia
against criticisms from Republicans.223
The photo op reeked of political calculation and overcompensation
for a time in which Clinton and her fellow Democrats placed
election-year rhetoric over standing up for human rights.
Reset Post-Script: Snowden and Ukraine
As Secretary Clintons tenure came to an end and she settled into
private life, if there was any remaining doubt that Putin had zero
interest in her overtures, he would offer a few final, stinging insults
to Americagranting asylum to a fugitive leaker of national
security secrets and invading Eastern Ukraine over objections from
the West.
In one of the most embarrassing episodes in the annals of U.S.
intelligence-gathering, last year NSA contractor Edward Snowden
leaked a huge collection of secret materials detailing sophisticated
U.S. data mining and other surveillance tactics.224 As the leaks
46

reverberated around world capitals, Snowden absconded to Hong

Kong and later fled to Russia.225
A week after Edward Snowden landed in Russia, Russian state
television began making him out to be a hero.226 Soon after, Putin
granted Snowden asylum. You would expect a country that
Secretary Clinton had called an ally just the year before wouldnt
harbor an individual who leaked so much sensitive material about
the United States. But thats exactly what Putin did.
In remarks at the University of Connecticut earlier this year,
Clinton attacked Snowden for choosing to flee to Russia. It was the
latest, desperate attempt to overcompensate for her failed
record.227
Her allies are attempting the same bait and switch on Ukraine
policy. Today, no one asserts that Russia is a U.S. ally. Now that
Russia has invaded Ukraine and thumbed its nose at the West,
American politicians are tripping over themselves to talk tough and
encourage action against Russian aggression. In transparently
political moves, Clintons allies have begun whispering behind the
scenes that she never really trusted Putin, but there is absolutely
no evidence that was the case in her actions.228
While Secretary Clinton recently criticized Putins invasion of
Ukraine as evidence of his desire to re-Sovietize Russias
periphery,229 she was not always so skeptical of Putins intentions
with his neighboring countries. The most glaring example of this
was her support for pro-Russian Ukrainian President Viktor
Yanukovych. As secretary of state, Clinton ignored Yanukovychs
ties to Moscow, his questionable commitment to democracy, and
his human rights record. Moreover, in April 2010 Secretary Clinton
supported Yanukovychs fateful decision to extend rights for 25
years to the Russian Black Sea Fleets naval base in Crimea. She
said his decision was a balancing act between Russia and the
United States and makes sense to us. However, more clear-eyed
observers of the deal warned that it furthered Russian influence in
47

Ukraine and the Black Sea, delayed urgent reform of the natural
gas market, and made Ukrainian politics more unstable.230
Secretary Clinton also hoped Yanukovych would maintain good
relations with Russia, labeling the idea that Ukraine had to align
with either Russia or the West a false choice.231
Earlier this year, upon Putins annexation of Crimea, Yanukovych
fled to Russia, claiming to have invited Putins army into
Ukraine.232 The support for his government in Washington
evaporated. He has since fallen from grace, and was subjected to
U.S. sanctions for threatening the peace, security, stability,
sovereignty, or territorial integrity of Ukraine.233 Secretary
Clintons misjudgment of Yanukovych and Russian intentions in
Ukraine is reflective of everything that was wrong with the Reset
and her geopolitical instincts regarding Putin from the start.
In fact, Clintons support for Yanukovych even continued after she
left the State Department. In the fall of 2013, just months before
the Russian invasion of Crimea, he would be one of the world
leaders invited to hobnob with the other favored members of
Clinton Inc. at the Clinton Global Initiative,234 an appropriate cap
to the disastrous Reset.
Today Bashar al-Assad continues to massacre Syrians, Iran
attempts to undermine U.S. sanctions, and Russian troops remain
in Georgia and Ukraine, threatening further destabilization. The
consequences of Clintons failed choice on Russia continue to
reverberate around the globe.

48

CHAPTER FOUR: THE MOST VOLATILE

REGION OF THE WORLD
The Great Missed Opportunity
When Secretary Clinton took the helm at Foggy Bottom, the most
volatile and challenging region for U.S. foreign policy was
undoubtedly the Middle East. Shortly after his election, President
Obama said, I would like to think that with my election and the
the early decisions that weve made, that youre starting to see
some restoration of Americas standing in the world.235 In his
high-profile speech in Cairo in the summer of 2009, President
Obama called for a new beginning between America and the
Muslim world.
Ive come here to Cairo to seek a new beginning
between the United States and Muslims around the
world, one based on mutual interest and mutual
respect, and one based upon the truth that America and
Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition.
Instead, they overlap, and share common principles
principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the
dignity of all human beings.236
It was lofty rhetoric that never became reality. And one of the
reasons is because Barack Obama chose Hillary Clinton to be
secretary of state.
In no other region of the world was Secretary Clinton offered
more opportunity to shape the course of history. Yet during her
four years as secretary of state, despite numerous openings, she
failed to act boldly when it was clearly in Americas long-term
interests. Rather than leaving the Middle East more peaceful and
secure, the region is as dangerous as it has ever been. Iran has
made great strides in its nuclear ambitions and continues to
violate the most basic rights of its citizens, while Americas closest
ally, Israel, has been treated as though it were a major threat to
49

Middle East peace. And in what could have been a tremendous

opportunity for America to achieve some of the lofty goals of
Obamas Cairo speechthe momentous Arab SpringSecretary
Clinton mishandled the situation so badly, her actions can only be
referred to as diplomatic malpractice.
The Green Movement and the Arab Spring called out for historic
leadership but were met with caution, confusion, and failed
choices.
The First Cry for DemocracyIran
On June 13, 2009, Irans Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was re-elected
as president by an overwhelming margin, and there was a
significant trail of evidence that his government fixed the vote.
One employee of the Interior Ministry, which carried out the
vote count, said the government had been preparing its fraud
for weeks, purging anyone of doubtful loyalty and importing
pliable staff members from around the country.
They didnt rig the vote, claimed the man, who showed his
ministry identification card but pleaded not to be named.
They didnt even look at the vote. They just wrote the name
and put the number in front of it.237
A week before the election, government polls allegedly had
leading opposition candidate Mir Hussein Mousavi winning by 10
to 20 points, only to lose in a landslide.238 Record-breaking voter
turnout raised obvious suspicions, as the vote in dozens of Iranian
towns exceeded the population of registered voters in many
cases.239
The trail of alleged fraud triggered riots and accusations of votefixing.240 Over the following six weeks, protestors would take to
the streets in what would come to be called the Green
Movement to challenge the regime and its leadership.241 As
scores of Iranians united in peaceful demonstrations, the regime
50

used state-sponsored militias and policemen to quell unrest,242

opening gunfire on protesters. In one famous incident, security
forces shot and killed a young woman, Neda Agha-Soltan, whose
death was caught on video and soon went viral on the Internet.
Tehran responded by suppressing communication, cutting off
mobile phone services and blocking websites.243 A top judiciary
official acknowledged that protestors had been tortured in Iranian
prisons.244 The events should have been a clarion call for the
Obama administration to stand up for human rights and
democracy, and challenge our adversaries in Tehran. Yet
Secretary Clintons State Department proceeded with a puzzlingly
muted response.
On June 16, 2009, days after the vote, the State Department said
it was deeply troubled by unrest in Iran. However, it stopped
short of condemning Irans security forces for cracking down on
demonstrators and said that Washington did not know whether
the allegations of fraud were, in fact, true.245 Secretary Clinton,
speaking to reporters the next day, committed the United States
to direct talks with whoever was declared president of Iran,
undercutting protesters. The Associated Press reported: The
Obama administration will pursue talks with Iran on nuclear and
other issues regardless of who emerges as president in the
aftermath of Irans disputed election, Secretary of State Hillary
Rodham Clinton said Wednesday.246
Other than rhetoric, the State Departments response to the wave
of human rights abuses in Iran was to ask Twitter to delay a
maintenance upgrade so protestors could continue to use the
social media site, and to disinvite Iranian diplomats from July 4th
parties at U.S. embassies around the world.247 So much for hot
dog diplomacy, quipped the Washington Posts Glenn Kessler.248
These stunningly passive moves were all Secretary Clinton was
willing to do.

51

To add insult to injury, the State Department ended funding for a

non-profit, the Iran Human Rights Documentation Center, which
gathered evidence of human rights abuses in Iran.249 For the first
time since their founding, the centers federal budget request was
not fulfilled. Senator Joe Lieberman (I-CT) said, It is disturbing
the State Department would cut off funding at precisely the
moment when these brave investigations are needed most.
Neither the State Department nor USAID could provide an
explanation for why funding was cut for the most comprehensive
clearing house of documents related to human rights abuses in
Iran.250
In its first test amid the coming tumult in the Middle East,
Secretary Clinton and the Obama administration failed abysmally.
As Iran, a state sponsor of terror pursuing nuclear weapons, was
suppressing a grassroots democratic uprising, the State
Department showed next to no action. The Green Movement was
an early opportunity for Clinton to lay down a marker in the
Middle East on the values we would fully support. Instead she
chose the pursuit of diplomacy with a rogue terrorist state over a
democratic movement amongst its people. This failed choice
would serve as a harbinger of Americas failures in the region in
the coming years.
The Arab Spring Begins
On December 17, 2010, 26-year-old Mohamed Bouazizi set
himself on fire in Sidi Bouzid, Tunisia, after a dispute with police
over selling vegetables in the street. Bouazizi had lived a tough
life, supporting his family at a young age. Angry and frustrated,
Bouazizi went to the front of a government building and set
himself on fire. He died the following month from his burns. 251
Bouazizis self-immolation became a symbol of the frustration
many Arabs felt living amid some of the most autocratic and
oppressive regimes in the Middle East and North Africa. On the
same day he immersed himself in flames, protests began in Sidi
52

Bouzid. It was not long before the protests spread throughout

Tunisia and forced President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali to flee the
country. 252 The grip of an autocrat ruler had been weakened by
the actions of one man, inspiring millions.
The rebellion in Tunisia served as a spark that would spread
throughout the rest of the Middle East and North Africa. The Arab
Spring quickly gained unexpected force.
The revolution has rippled beyond Tunisia, shaking
other authoritarian Arab states, whose frustrated young
people are often written off as complacent when faced
with stifling bureaucracy and an impenetrable and
intimidating security apparatus. That assumption was
badly shaken with Mr. Bouazizis reaction to his slap,
and now a picture of him, in a black jacket with a wry
smile, has become the revolutions icon.253
While the Arab Spring created a foreign policy challenge for the
United States, it also created unprecedented opportunity, as a
volatile region of the world with little or no experience in real
democracy (other than in Israel) erupted in protests in the name
of basic human rights and democratic values. Democratic
reformers were taking to the streets and risking their lives in a
brave attempt to create the type of representative government
Americans take for granted. It was a challenge that many
secretaries of state would have welcomed to promote American
values and interests in a region crying out for change. It was
Secretary Clintons opportunity to join the ranks of Americas
greatest diplomats.
Stumbling out of the Gate
The day after Bouazizi set himself on fire, the State Department
dismissed the Tunisian protests. Spokesman Phillip Crowley
referred to the Tunisian uprising as demonstrations that were
triggered by economic concerns.254 Weeks later, on January 10,
53

as the protests were spreading to Algeria, the State Department

said it did not see a connection between what is happening in
Tunisia and what is happening in Algeria.255 On January 21, the
State Department further perpetuated the notion that Tunisias
protests were isolated, saying it did not believe there would be a
snowball effect in the region as a result of the protests in
Tunisia.256
And though Ben Ali had fled the country by January 14, the
United States failed to engage Tunisia or assist a peaceful
transition toward democracy. For weeks, the U.S. neglected to
contribute material assistance to the country during and after the
protests. Writing in Foreign Policy, J. Scott Carpenter said that
the West has been slow to respond, and the United States has
provided nothing. The U.S. government has so far neglected to
contribute material assistance to the task of democratization in
Tunisia, adding to uncertainty about American intent in the
country.257 According to Carpenter, the U.S. Embassy in Tunis
was staffed to manage a sleepy relationship with a dictator, and
there was no sign that Secretary Clintons State Department was
planning to add staff or resources, despite an urgent need in the
country.258 It was clear that the United States, led by Secretary
Clintons State Department, was caught flat-footed as the Arab
Spring spread throughout the region, and was slow to respond.
When Secretary Clinton finally visited Tunisia, she said that she
was honored to visit the country at that moment in their
history.259 But her inaction ensured that the United States played
little role in shaping that history.
As the Arab Spring spread throughout the Middle East and North
Africa, two of the largest uprisings would sweep through Egypt
and Syria.
Egypt

54

The arrival of the protests in Egypt posed a vexing policy problem

for the Obama administration. In 2009, the administration had
made a point of building close relations with Egypts Hosni
Mubarak. When asked about the authoritarian label, President
Obama responded: No, I tend not to use labels for folks. The
president added that he considered Mubarak a force for stability
and good in the region.260 Secretary Clinton also had a
particularly cozy relationship with Mubarak. In an interview with
Al Arabiya, the secretary described Mr. and Mrs. Mubarak as
friends of my family and talked about how she hoped to see
him often here in Egypt and in the United States.261
Though Mubaraks long-standing ties to the United States
spanned decades and presidents from both parties, the Obama
administration aimed at renewing an alliance that had been
strained in previous years when tensions between Egypt and the
U.S. had grown following American criticism of Mubaraks
oppressive policies.262
This marks a significant departure from the Bush
administration, during which tensions between
Washington and Cairo raged over U.S. policies in the
Middle East, the 2003 invasion of Iraq and American
criticism of Egypts political and human rights
record.263
When the Arab Spring finally arrived in Egypt, Secretary Clinton
and the administration had a vested interest in protecting their
ally. On January 25, 2011, the first day of protests, tens of
thousands turned out, drawing riot police as clashes with
protesters left at least three dead.264 Riot police used tear gas and
rubber bullets to disperse the protesters, but the protests soon
continued unabated.265
In reaction, Secretary Clinton and the rest of the Obama
administration were caught trying to formulate a policy on the fly,
in light of the fast-moving events in Egypt and the broader Middle
55

East. Having failed to anticipate the events in Tunisia, and

dismissing their impact on the region, Secretary Clinton and the
Obama administration were now scrambling, caught between a
dictator facing an insurrection, but nonetheless a close ally of the
administration, and democratic reformers who could possibly
serve as Americas natural allies.
Would the U.S. stand by Mubarak or back the protesters? It
wasnt clear. What soon unfolded was a series of conflicted,
muddled statements that showed a clear lack of planning,
strategy, or even understanding of what was transpiring on the
ground.
With the protests just gaining steam and clashes with police
underway, Secretary Clinton reiterated that Washington saw
Cairos government as U.S. ally and that she believed the Egyptian
government was stable. 266 The assessment came as the
protestors began chanting, Down with Hosni Mubarak, down
with the tyrant!267 Day by day, the world saw protests growing in
size, Mubaraks grip on power loosening, and Secretary Clinton
standing by a collapsing regime. Later reports indicated that
behind the scenes, Clinton was even more fervent in advocating
within the administration that the U.S. stand by Mubarak. 268
After several more days of protests, the secretary was forced to
change course. When questioned by CNNs Candy Crowley about
Mubaraks staying power, Secretary Clinton seemed to be more
pessimistic than she had been in the past. Crowley asked
Secretary Clinton whether presidential elections already
scheduled for September would be enough to keep Mubarak in
power. In her answer, Secretary Clinton publicly distanced the
United States from the Mubarak regime for the first time: Well,
no. Much has to be done. Thats not what theyre in the streets
protesting for.269 That same day, in an interview on Fox News
with Chris Wallace, Secretary Clinton shifted from her previous
support for the Mubarak regime toward supporting democracy,
56

participation, economic opportunity.270 She likewise emphasized

that these were not new priorities but rather what weve been
saying for 30 years.271 The truth is, however, Clinton was only
now beginning to speak about democracy in Egypta clear shift in
the administrations policy.
On January 29, Mubarak appointed his intelligence chief, Omar
Suleiman, as vice president and assumed successor.272 As the New
York Times noted, Suleiman was unlikely to satisfy the protesters.
But Mr. Suleiman, a former general, is also the
establishments candidate, not the publics. His appointment,
and his elevation, if it were to occur, would represent not the
democratic change called for on the street, but most likely a
continuation of the kind of military-backed, authoritarian
leadership that Mr. Mubarak has led for nearly 30 years,
experts said.273
Three days later, as protesters continued demanding Mubarak
step down, the Egyptian leader made another concession,
pledging not to run in the presidential elections scheduled for
later that year. As it became clear that the concession was not
enough to quell the protests, the Obama administration ultimately
dropped Mubarak.
Later that evening, after a phone call with Mubarak, President
Obama gave an address to the nation, stating that Egypts leader
must peacefully relinquish power, and that the transition must
begin now.274 Finally, the administration appeared to side with
the protesters in calling for a swift end to Mubaraks reign and a
peaceful transition to democracy.
But it was only temporary. The fumbling and unforced errors
would soon continue.
Speaking at a security conference days after Obamas remarks,
Secretary Clinton backed Mubaraks plan to transfer power,
despite the thousands continuing to protest in the street.275
57

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, speaking at a security

conference touted the transition concept, a strategy that tens
of thousands of Egyptian protesters in Cairo appear to reject
in favor Mubaraks immediate ouster.
I think its important to support the transition process
announced by the Egyptian government, actually headed by
now-Vice President Omar Suleiman, Clinton said. That is
what we are supporting, and hope to see it move as orderly
but as expeditiously as possible, under the circumstances.276
McClatchy noted backing Mubaraks plan was, yet again, the
latest shift.277 This was now the administrations second clear
policy change in a matter of days.
What further complicated the administrations efforts was the
deployment of former Ambassador to Egypt Frank Wisner as an
envoy. Speaking at the same security conference where Secretary
Clinton had backed Mubaraks succession plan, Wisner took U.S.
support for Egypts embattled leader too far. With Secretary
Clinton in attendance, the former diplomat said Mubarak must
stay in power.278 I believe that President Mubaraks continued
leadership is criticalits his chance to write his own legacy,
Wisner told his audience.279
Wisner had been sent to Egypt at Secretary Clintons urging
earlier that week, and just days before his remarks,280 the State
Department said officials were deeply appreciative of Wisners
willingness to serve as an envoy.281
Now, after her handpicked envoy had added a further confusing
voice to the cacophony, Secretary Clinton was forced to clarify
Wisners remarks. Did they reflect Obama administration policy?
The answer was no, they were so far off the original message
that Secretary Clinton had to disavow Wisner entirely.
The remarks were so far off of the administrations
message, which at this moment is that its not the U.S.
58

governments place to weigh in on Mubaraks future,

that Clinton was forced to clarify on the plane ride
home that Wisner was a private citizen and in no way
spoke on behalf of the U.S. government.282
Once again, the administration was back-pedaling from previous
statements and losing credibility with reformers throughout the
region. The shifting rhetoric amounted to what Bloomberg News
Indira Lakshmanan and Hans Nichols called a muddied by
multiply foreign policy, in which U.S. officials reacted to events
with contradictory language.283
While Secretary Clinton and the Obama administration were
clinging to Mubaraks succession plan, events on the ground were
changing rapidly. On February 11, amid continuing unrest, and
with his support within Egypts military collapsing, Mubarak
stepped down.
An 18-day-old revolt led by the young people of Egypt ousted
President Hosni Mubarak on Friday, shattering three
decades of political stasis here and overturning the
established order of the Arab world.
Shouts of God is great erupted from Tahrir Square at
twilight as Mr. Mubaraks vice president and longtime
intelligence chief, Omar Suleiman, announced that Mr.
Mubarak had passed all authority to a council of military
leaders.284
Recounting Secretary Clinton and the administrations shifting
response to the 18-day crisis is a dizzying exercise. After Secretary
Clinton called the government stable, Obama told the world
Mubaraks transition from power must begin now, only to have
his secretary of state back Mubaraks slower succession plan that
was opposed by protesters. This was followed the deployment of
an envoy who offered an unqualified endorsement of Mubarak,

59

saying his continued leadership is critical, forcing Secretary

Clinton to disavow him on the plane ride home.285
A well-placed American official later admitted the obvious:
Secretary Clinton and the administration were caught by
surprise. Despite endless strategy sessions on the Middle East,
they had never contemplated turmoil in Egypt.
This is what happens when you get caught by
surprise, said one American official, who would not
speak on the record. Weve had endless strategy
sessions for the past two years on Mideast peace, on
containing Iran. And how many of them factored in the
possibility that Egypt, and presumably whatever
dominoes follow it, moves from stability to turmoil?
None.286
As one former Reagan and Bush administration official observed,
this situation in Egypt should have been an obvious consideration.
They were advised by a number of people that there
could be a problem in Egypt, said Elliott Abrams, a
senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and a
former deputy national security advisor under George
W. Bush. No one foresaw exactly what came, but they
didnt seem prepared for anything. The succession crisis
for an 82-year-old, ill Mubarak was obviously around
the corner.287
In February 2011, a week after the military formally took over in
Egypt from Mubarak, Secretary Clinton confessed, We had no
control over what happened in Egypt.288 She was right for once.
Without a coherent strategy, Secretary Clinton and the Obama
administration did not even have the ability to influence the tide
of events let alone control them. Some critics have argued that the
Obama administration was on the wrong side of history, but in

60

failing to take any side, President Obama and Secretary Clinton

stayed on the sidelines as history passed them by.
Syria and Clintons Reformer
Secretary Clintons failed choices with Syria started well before
the Arab Spring protests began.
In Bashar al-Assad, the U.S. did not have an ally or family friend
at all.289 Instead, America had a brutal dictator with close ties to
Iran on its hands that Secretary Clinton and the Obama
administration appear to have foolishly thought could be turned
into a Middle East partner. Secretary Clinton made repeated
errors in judgment as Assad worked to undermine U.S. interests
in the Middle East and later brutalized Syrians with the barbaric
use of chemical weapons.
It was not long after Clinton became secretary of state that her
policy toward Syria and Assad began to take shape. In March
2009, she announced that two senior State Department officials
were traveling to Damascus for talks with a nation that had long
been designated a state sponsor of terrorism.290 At a Mideast
Summit, Secretary Clinton pointedly stopped to shake hands and
chat with Syrias Foreign Minister Walid Mouallemearning her
the headline, Hill Buddies Up To Syria.291
Within a month of the summit, Secretary Clinton was forced to
acknowledge that Syria was destabilizing Iraq by allowing foreign
fighters to cross the border.292 General David Petraeus told
Congress that the deadly terrorist pipeline running through Syria
to Iraq had been reactivated.293 By August, Iraqs Prime
Minister Nuri al-Maliki said nearly all of the suicide bombers in
Iraq were foreigners coming through Syria.294
Syrias obvious lack of cooperation in stemming terrorism in Iraq
did not alter Secretary Clintons outreach efforts. In June 2009,
Foggy Bottom arranged for executives from top technology
companies to visit Syria in an attempt to peel the country away
61

from its long-standing alliance with Iran.295 Later that month,

Secretary Clinton announced that the U.S. would be sending an
ambassador to Syria for the first time in four years296 and was also
dispatching a senior State Department official to Damascus to
examine the security situation for a new embassy.297 Secretary
Clinton was hopeful: We think that its a fruitful engagement that
we intend to pursue. We have notified the Syrians that we are
returning an Ambassador to Damascus.298 By late July, Syrian
officials said U.S. Envoy George Mitchell discussed a potential
meeting between Assad and Secretary Clinton or even President
Obama.299 The State Department also loosened U.S. sanctions on
the sale of information technology, telecommunications, and civil
aviation equipment to Syria.300
Assad, however, didnt feel the need to reciprocate, and the
pattern continued. In November 2009, the State Department said
Syria was blocking International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
inspectors, and not offering any credible explanations that clarify
the true nature and scope of its clandestine nuclear activities. 301
Yet two months later, George Mitchell said Secretary Clinton and
Obama still envisioned comprehensive peace in the Middle East
that includes peace between Israel and Palestinians, Israel and
Syria, Israel and Lebanon, and full normalisation of the
relations between Israel and the Arab States.302
The dictator in Damascus had other ideas. In February 2010, the
State Department found Assad lying about arming Hezbollah with
SCUD Missiles, according to WikiLeaks cables. Though the U.S.
privately warned Syria against arming Hezbollah, Assad bluntly
stated that he knew of no new weapons systems going to
Hezbollah.303 Then, later that month, Assad rebuked Secretary
Clintons attempts to place distance between Syria and Iran.
When Assad was asked about her strategy, he responded, I find it
strange how they talk about Middle East stability and at the same
time talk about dividing two countries. 304 And in an obvious
swipe at Clinton, Assad mocked criticism of Ahmadinejad,
62

saying Irans president was misunderstood, maybe because of [a]

translation error by Secretary Clinton.305
The diplomatic overtures by the secretary continued, however. In
May 2010, the State Department quietly lifted sanctions on a
Russian organization that engaged in illicit arms sales to Syria,
publishing them in the federal register but not otherwise
announced by the State Department.306
Syrian behavior only grew worse. During the fall of 2010, Syria
countered U.S. diplomatic visits with high-profile meetings with
Iran. The incidents were particularly egregious. [T]wo days after
a US envoy visited the Syrian capital, Assad met with Irans
Ahmadinejad, reaffirming their strong ties. Later that month,
Secretary Clinton met with Syrian Foreign Minister Walid AlMoallem to make the case for negotiations with Israel.307 Yet
again, Assad rebuffed her efforts and went straight to Tehran,
buttressing his ties with Ahmadinejad.308 Despite these actions, in
January 2011, the U.S. sent its first ambassador in five years to
Damascus.309
This embarrassing series of diplomatic overtures met with blunt
responses from Assad was the backdrop for the Arab Spring
arriving in Syria. On March 18, 2011, security forces loyal to Assad
fired on protesters.310 By March 24, the Assad regime came under
heavy pressure from thousands of angry demonstrators
protesting the shooting deaths and demanding democratic
reforms.311
As the protests grew and the level of violence rose, Secretary
Clinton was asked on CBSs Face The Nation about Syrias
leadership, which opened fire with live ammunition on these
civilians. This is the friend of Iran, an enemy of Israel? Her
answer was bewildering, and as with Mubarak a couple of months
earlier, appeared entirely out of step with reality. Secretary
Clinton defended Assad as a different leader from his brutal
father, Hafez al-Assad, and a reformer. While adding that
63

Assads actions against protesters were concerning, Secretary

Clinton compared them to excessive police enforcement, saying
theres a difference between calling out aircraft and
indiscriminately strafing and bombing your own cities, then police
actions, which frankly have exceeded the use of force that any of
us would want to see.312 After repeated diplomatic overtures had
only yielded a new pipeline of terrorists into Iraq,313 SCUD
missiles to Hezbollah314 and the doubling down of Assads alliance
with Iran315, Secretary Clintons navet was remarkable. The
Washington Post countered, Ms. Clinton was only reflecting a
piece of wishful thinking to which the Obama administration and
its congressional allies have tenaciously clung: that Mr. Assad,
despite his brutality, sponsorship of terrorism and close alliance
with Iran, can somehow be turned into a western ally.316
Syria would descend into a bloody civil war, as Assad, unlike Ben
Ali or Mubarak, was entirely unwilling to cede power. By October
2011, as Assads tactics grew more brazen in their brutality, the
U.S. withdrew its newly installed ambassador due to threats
against his personal safety.317
In August 2012, as Syrias death toll climbed, peace talks
collapsed, and calls for U.S. intervention increased, President
Obama issued a so-called red line, warning Assad there would
be consequences if he stepped over it and used chemical weapons
against Syrians.318 Later in December, Secretary Clinton herself
reiterated Obamas threat on the use of chemical weapons,
warning, This is a red line for the United States.319
A year after the red line was first drawn, U.S. intelligence officials
discovered Syrian forces carrying out chemical weapons attacks
on six densely populated neighborhoods, killing 1,500 civilians,
including over 400 children.320 The red line had been crossed. Yet
Obama seemed to vacillate from his earlier pledge, initially calling
for a military strike before retreating to ask Congress to pass a

64

resolution authorizing the use of force. Clinton, now out of office,

backed him.321
Before the congressional vote, however, a last-minute
development emerged. Russias Putin, a long-time ally of Assad,
offered a compromise. Assad would relinquish his chemical
weapons to Russian custody, and in exchange the U.S. would
stand down. Two of the least trustworthy men on earth were
teaming up to offer the U.S. a deal. Already reluctant to enforce
his red line in the sand, Obama jumped at the deal.322 And
Clinton, who had backed Obamas earlier pledge to deter Assad,
endorsed it as well.323 A presidential line in the sand had been
crossed, yet after all the embarrassing, failed diplomatic
overtures, Clinton still publicly professed faith in Assad and Putin.
Given Russia and Syrias track records, no one should have
expected the tragic story to end there. In early 2014, the Daily
Beast reported, Videos have surfaced on YouTube of barrels with
fins being pushed out of military helicopters in areas where the
Assad regime is alleged to have used chlorine, according to one
American official.324 Chlorine, a devastating chemical weapon,
was not restricted by the 1997 Chemical Weapons Convention
because of its commercial applications. So in the wrong hands it
can be made into a lethal weapon.325 In May 2014, reports
indicated that Western intelligence agencies believe the Syrian
government had a secret stockpile of chlorine bombs and other
nerve agents, and retains the ability to assemble large-scale
chemical weapons.326
As of this writing, the war in Syria has claimed over 160,000 lives,
according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. The
groups data include over 50,000 civilians, among them over
8,500 children.327
Secretary Clintons reformer in Syria has refused to cooperate
since the beginning, and has exposed the U.S. to international
ridicule. Clintons offer of unilateral concessions and normal
65

relations with Assad were mocked in Damascus and Tehran. Her

overtures were repaid with the slaughter of 160,000 Syrians and
the unleashing of chemical weaponsover the warnings she and
her boss had issued.
As the bloody civil war in Syria claims more lives, Secretary
Clintons failed choices during the historic Green Movement and
Arab Spring protests and their aftermath prove starker by the day.
A region-wide cry for democracy was met with timid, unsteady
leadership, incoherent policy, and stunning navet by the worlds
most powerful and influential democratic nation. A mockery has
been made of President Obamas ambitious vision laid out in his
2009 Cairo speech to the Muslim world, as U.S. prestige and
influence in the region continue to decline.

66

CHAPTER FIVE: BROKEN PROMISES TO

ISRAEL, WEAKNESS ON IRAN
Secretary Clintons record on Israel can be summed up as a
shameful failure to stand with Americas closest ally.
Secretary Clinton came to the job in 2009 with a record as a
staunchly pro-Israel senator. During her presidential campaign,
she called for greater U.S. engagement in the peace process,328
pledged to support an undivided Jerusalem in any peace
agreement,329 and on arguably the most critical issuethe
existential threat posed by Iranactually threatened to totally
obliterate Iran should it dare launch a nuclear strike against
Israel.330 Her credentials as a friend of Israel appeared strong.
Yet after her triumphant arrival at Foggy Bottom, Americans and
Israelis quickly learneda bleak warning for the futurethat
when Hillary Clinton is running for political office and claiming
to be a great defender of Israel, it is nothing more than empty
promises and political posturing.
Over the course of her four years as secretary, Clinton didnt just
change positionsshe actually became a leading critic of Israel
within the administration. The former senator who once
represented a large and fervently pro-Israel constituency in New
York state soon backtracked on her pledge to support an
undivided Jerusalem331 and used the Middle East peace
process to direct her criticism at Israel.332 And in the worst
affront to her former constituents, Secretary Clinton sought to
undermine Israel and its congressional allies attempts to deter
Irans nuclear ambitions through aggressive sanctions and a
credible threat of military force. 333
Speaking before the American Jewish Committee in May 2014,
Clinton asserted that it was her privilege to be a friend of
Israel.334 As with her version of events on Russia and many other
67

regions of the world, Clintons recounting of her record as

secretary on U.S.-Israeli relations seems a far cry from the facts.
A Fervor to Blame Israel
In the same May 2014 speech before the American Jewish
Committee, Clinton claimed that as secretary, she invested a great
deal in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.335
I have been proud to do my part to keep our relationship
rock-solid over the years, she said of U.S.-Israeli ties. I
must say, as my book is published, youll see more of the
ways that I did that in the four years I served as secretary.
The endless meetings, the vigorous discussions, even
arguments, the endless phone calls.336
Clinton would have you believe that she spent countless hours
engaged in shuttle diplomacy between Israeli leaders and the
Palestinian Authority. But closer examination of her four years as
secretary reveal all too clearly that Secretary Clinton chose the
path of least resistance, keeping the conflict at bay and investing
her considerable political and diplomatic capital elsewhere.
As Mark Landler pointed out in the New York Times, Clinton
kept the peace process in general at arms length.337 Far from
the endless meetings and phone calls she cited before the
American Jewish Committee, Clinton only visited Israel five times
as secretary of state. 338 By contrast her predecessor, Secretary
Condoleezza Rice, made over two dozen trips to Israel. 339
The sole area where Secretary Clinton did play a leadership
role during peace negotiations was criticizing Israeli
settlements in the West Bank. Yet earlier this year the New
York Times, undoubtedly referring to claims from political
allies attempting to rewrite history, reported that Clinton
privately had qualms about the strategy. However, there
was no evidence of this in her actions as secretary of state.340
68

To the contrary, she surprised the presidents inner circle

with her apparent zeal.
Mrs. Clintons marching orders from the White House
were to demand that Israel cease the building of Jewish
settlements in the West Bank as a way to lure the
Palestinians into talks, and she did so with a fervor that
surprised Mr. Obamas advisers.341
In May 2009, Secretary Clinton called on Israel to cease building
settlements in the West Bank, stressing that her demand meant
no exceptions.
[Obama] wants to see a stop to settlementsnot some
settlements, not outposts, not natural growth
exceptions. We think it is in the best interests of the
effort that we are engaged in that settlement expansion
cease. That is our position.342
A year later, Secretary Clinton went further, directly
criticizing the Israeli government before the American Israel
Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said before
the influential American Israel Public Affairs
Committee (AIPAC) in Washington Monday that Israeli
settlement activity in occupied Arab landsEast
Jerusalem and the West Bankundermines trust
between the two allies and makes the US role in the
peace process more difficult. Her words follow Mr.
Netanyahus assertion Sunday that Israel would not
cease all settlement construction in Jerusalem, which it
claims as its capital.343
Clinton bluntly told the crowd that America does not accept
the legitimacy of continued settlements.344

69

And it did not stop there. When the Israeli government

announced construction of 1,600 new housing units in East
Jerusalem, during a visit by Vice President Joe Biden to
Israel in March 2010, Secretary Clinton launched a tirade
against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in an
angry, 45-minute phone call.345
What was stunning about the episode was that it was not
limited to a private disagreement among long-time friends.
The State Department went out of its way to reinforce
Secretary Clintons message, in an effort to publicly shame
Israel in unusually undiplomatic terms.
State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley described
the nearly 45-minute phone conversation in unusually
undiplomatic terms, signaling that the close allies are
facing their deepest crisis in two decades after the
embarrassment suffered by Vice President Biden this
week when Israel announced during his visit that it
plans to build 1,600 housing units in a disputed area of
Jerusalem.
Clinton called Netanyahu to make clear the United
States considered the announcement a deeply negative
signal about Israels approach to the bilateral
relationship and counter to the spirit of the vice
presidents trip, Crowley said. Clinton, he said,
emphasized that this action had undermined trust and
confidence in the peace process and in Americas
interests.346
Its unlikely that Secretary Clintons public dressing down of
the Israeli prime minister was an isolated incident, as it
appeared to be part of a larger Obama administration
pattern of publicly chastening him. In 2011, on the eve of a
visit by Netanyahu, the administration announced a shift in
70

U.S. policy unfavorable to Israel, drawing protests from the

Israeli government.
A day before the arrival in Washington of Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, Mr. Obama
declared that the prevailing borders before the 1967
Arab-Israeli waradjusted to some degree to account
for Israeli settlements in the West Bankshould be the
basis of a deal. While the 1967 borders have long been
viewed as the foundation for a peace agreement, Mr.
Obamas formula of land swaps to compensate for
disputed territory created a new benchmark for a
diplomatic solution. The Israeli government
immediately protested, saying that for Israel to return
to its pre-1967 borders would leave it indefensible.
Mr. Netanyahu held an angry phone conversation with
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Thursday
before the speech, officials said, in which he demanded
that the presidents reference to 1967 borders be cut.347
More Insults Directed at Israel
In May 2012, over 60 nations were invited to attend a NATO
conference in Chicago. Israel was not. Published reports indicate
that Turkey was behind the effort to exclude Israel.348 The AntiDefamation League condemned the move and publicly urged
Secretary Clinton to press NATO for an invitation.
The politicized exclusion of Israel from the summit will
potentially have real negative security consequences. It will
be noted in Tehran at a critical time for international
solidarity to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear
capability, the most critical of international security issues
today.349
The next month, the snubs grew worse. Secretary Clinton traveled
to Istanbul, Turkey to announce the creation of a new U.S.71

sponsored counterterrorism forum. Conspicuously, the forum did

not include Israel, and in her remarks, she failed to mention any
of the terrorist groups that had targeted our ally for years.
Although Clinton mentioned that terrorism is a challenge in
Afghanistan, Pakistan, Mali, Somalia, Yemen, Nigeria, the
Maghreb, Turkey, and Europe, she didnt mention Israel or
any of the groups that support terrorist attacks against
Israeli interests, such as Hamas and Hezbollah. Although
29 countries and the European Union were invited to be
founding members, Israel was not.350
While the Israeli government did not publicly complain about the
snub, officials privately were unhappy about being left out.
The Israeli government hasnt publicly complained about the
snub and the Israeli embassy in Washington declined to
comment, but multiple Congressional sources said that
Israeli officials have complained privately to them, saying the
Israeli government was unhappy about being left out.351
Secretary Clinton was more than content being the face of two
American insults directed at Israel.
Backtracking on an Undivided Jerusalem
In 2007, while running for president, Senator Clinton pledged to
ensure that an undivided Jerusalem was central to any peace
agreement between Israel and the Palestinian territories.
In her new position paper on Israel, Hillary Rodham
Clinton comes not only to praise the Jewish state but to
bury doubts that she would be any less vigilant in its
protection than the Bush administration.
The position paper, published this week, goes so far as to
outflank President Bush from the right.

72

It says Clinton, the U.S. senator from New York and

frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination
believes that Israels right to exist in safety as a Jewish
state, with defensible borders and an undivided Jerusalem
as its capital, secure from violence and terrorism, must
never be questioned.352
Yet in a 2010 interview, when pressed on the pledge, the
secretary backtracked, refusing to give a direct answer.
Instead, she responded, Jerusalem is a contested
emotional issue for both Israelis and Palestinians. I want to
support what is the outcome that the parties can agree to.
And I think both parties know that theyre going to have to
engage on this issue and come to an understanding and a
resolution so that Jerusalem becomes not a flashpoint but
the symbol of peace and cooperation.353
The episode truly exposed the shallowness of Clintons campaign
rhetoric. After boldly claiming that an undivided Jerusalem
must never be questioned, the secretary was called out for her
political double speak. The interviewer pressed, Who should we
believe, then? Candidate Clinton or Secretary of State
Clinton?354
Rewriting History on Iran Sanctions
Among the greatest threats to Israel and the United States is the
nuclear ambitions of Iran. And on Iran, Secretary Clintons
political posture is simple: actively work against the passage of
sanctions, and then later claim credit for the work of others.
Multiple times during her tenureduring the Green Movement,
as Congress debated sanctionsshe failed to make the hard
choices that would have made a difference. Instead, she either
stood in the way of bold action or let opportunities pass her by.

73

Despite this record, Clinton presses forward, patting herself on

the back in preparation for her presidential run.
At an April 2014 forum with the IMFs Christine Lagarde, Clinton
was tossed a softball from New York Times columnist Thomas
Friedman, as he implied she had led the effort to pass the
toughest sanctions that forced Iran to the negotiating table on
nuclear weapons. Secretary Clinton was quick to take credit,
previewing a whole chapter on the negotiations in her upcoming
book.
The New York Times Thomas Friedman: I think you also
laid the predicate for the Iran negotiations. Without those
sanctions, its something people dont see, but I think it was
very, very important.
Clinton: Well, you know, I write obviously a whole chapter
on this, because this is the kind of slow boring of hard boards
that Max Weber talks about with politics, but which also
applies to diplomacy. It is painstaking, microscopic
advantages, and putting together the international coalition
to impose tough sanctions on Iran is what eventually
changed the calculus inside the Iranian government and
brought them to the negotiating table.355
This was yet another episode of Secretary Clinton rewriting
history on her and the administrations foreign policy record. The
reality is that in the run-up to the UN vote to sanction Iran,
Secretary Clinton made concession after concession to appease
China and Russia, to a point where a top State Department official
later conceded the UN sanctions were far from the tough
sanctions she cites today, but largely symbolism.356 The more
effective sanctions, imposed by the European Union and
Congress, which brought the administration along kicking and
screaming, should have received the praise from Friedman for
laying the predicate for the Iran negotiations.
74

In late 2011 even a senator from her own partyNew Jerseys Bob
Menendezchastised Clintons undersecretary of state for
political affairs, Wendy Sherman, for opposing the toughest
congressional sanctions that would impact Irans banking sector.
357

Thus, no matter what Clinton tries to take credit for on her book
tour and on the campaign trail, her policies toward Iran were just
one failed choice after another: whiffing on the Green Revolution,
trying in vain to convince Russia to cooperate productively, and
watering down effective sanctions bills. None of her hard choices
led to successful results. Instead her caution, misjudgment, and
flawed strategy stood in the way of progress at a critical moment
in history.
Toothless UN Sanctions
In April 2009, Secretary Clinton announced that the new Obama
administration was building support for very tough and
crippling sanctions to stop Iran from enriching uranium and
building a nuclear bomb.
As the President said in his inaugural address: We will
hold out our hand. They have to unclench their fist. But
we are also laying the groundwork for the kind of very
tough, I think you said crippling, sanctions that might
be necessary in the event that our offers are either
rejected or the process is inconclusive or
unsuccessful.358
Over a year later, however, crippling had been replaced by
significant sanctions. Why the change in wording? In June
2010, after lengthy negotiations, the United Nations Security
Council enacted a set of sanctions. Secretary Clinton said at a
press conference in Bogot, Colombia that we were very pleased
by the action in the Security Council. These were the most
significant sanctions that have been imposed on Iran. Iran worked
75

very, very hard to avoid the large vote in favor of these

sanctions.359
Despite her praise, the BBC explained why the UN sanctions, or
Resolution 1929, were far from crippling:
The sanctions were passed after being watered down
during negotiations with Russia and China. There are
no crippling economic sanctions and there is no oil
embargo.360
But the months leading up to the vote should not have left
Secretary Clinton very pleased. Earlier that year, the secretary
and the Obama administration had circulated a tougher draft
sanctions resolutions. The original drafts targeted Irans banking,
shipping, and insurance industries. The sanctions drafts called for
outright bans on transactions with those sectors of the Iranian
economy, and targeted Irans Central Bank, adding it to the list of
foreign banks blacklisted by the United Nations.361 The sanctions
would have also banned international investment in Irans energy
sector, and authorized seizure of cargo on ships suspected of
transporting materials for Irans nuclear program.362 Also, there
would have been sanctions targeting the travel and assets of Irans
political elite, including the Revolutionary Guard Corps, which
ran the nuclear program and large sectors of the economy.363
But within weeks, U.S. and EU officials dropped any attempt to
impose a ban on the export or import of Tehrans petroleum
products, the lifeblood of the Iranian economy, because of
opposition from Russia and China, removing the hardest hitting
sanctions from the resolution.364 A new proposal scrapped
outright bans on new trade agreements with Iran, only calling on
countries to exercise vigilance.365 China also opposed banning
new investments in Irans energy sector and cargo seizures.366
There were also no crippling sanctions on Iranian banks and
insurance companies involved in financing and facilitating Irans
nuclear program.
76

On May 18, 2010, a weakened draft resolutionthat would later

be agreed upon with little changedid not contain a
comprehensive arms embargo sought by Washington and Paris. It
allowed Iran to continue to buy light weapons367 and exempted
sales of high-tech defensive missiles, such as the Russian S-300
long-range surface-to-air missiles. The Russians already had a
deal in the works to sell them to Iran.368 The draft also dropped
the requirement on countries to block financial transactions,
including insurance and reinsurance, or ban Iranian banks, all
suspected of financing nuclear proliferation. It simply called upon
them to do so.369 Furthermore, it dropped an earlier attempt to
ban foreign investment in Irans bond market,370 and only
sanctioned 40 individuals, or entities, suspected of involvement in
Irans nuclear program.371 Finally, to secure Russia and Chinas
agreement, references to Irans Central Bank and energy sector
would be limited to the introductory paragraphs of the resolution,
and not inserted in later paragraphs, an important development
that further weakened any long-term bite to sanctions.372
Secretary Clinton and the administration had given away the
store.
On June 9, 2010, the watered-down Security Council resolution
passed on a split vote of 12-2-1, subjecting the administration to
criticism.373 The three previous rounds of UN sanctions enacted
during the Bush administration passed the Security Council
unanimously, which signified to Tehran that the world was united
in confronting its nuclear ambitions.374
Though the Wall Street Journal editorial board rightly noted, a
nonunanimous vote is itself a victory for Iran,375 Secretary
Clinton ironically claims it as a victory for the United States.
During her May 2014 speech before the American Jewish
Committee, Clinton actually touted the split vote, saying, I
worked for months to round up the votes.376

77

Both the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal reported
that some of the toughest measures were barely discussed by the
UN Security Council.377 The French in particular had been
pushing for an expanded arms embargo and sanctions on Irans
oil revenue.378 In April, as the resolution was being negotiated,
French President Nicolas Sarkozy spoke the truth, saying a
toothless resolution based solely on winning enough votes to
pass would achieve nothing.379,380
With the Russian Reset, placating Moscow became a major policy
objective, regardless of the outcome. On May 21, 2010, leading up
to the vote, the Obama administration lifted U.S. sanctions on
four Russian organizations that had been involved in helping Iran
and Syria develop nuclear weapons.381 The announcement, which
was placed in the U.S. Federal Register but not mentioned by
Secretary Clinton or the State Department, raised suspicions that
it was part of a larger Obama administration strategy to win
Russias vote.382 The State Department denied any quid pro quo,
saying the action reflected the fact that Russia had over time
adapted its approach to Iran.383 But the timing of the
announcement and the appearance of hiding it in a regulatory
publication few Americans read raise questions about the State
Departments veracity.
The bottom line is that the UN sanctions were watered down to
such a degree that their impact on the Iranian economy was far
from the crippling effect Secretary Clinton once touted. Her dual
track strategy of multilateral sanctions combined with direct
negotiations with Tehran did nothing to slow uranium
enrichment in the rogue state. In fact, while Clinton was secretary
of state, Irans rate of uranium enrichment nearly tripled.384 Over
the course of Secretary Clintons tenure, Iran grew closer toward a
bomb, and had enough stockpiles of uranium to build five or more
nuclear weapons.385 Last June, The Economist concluded that
although Iran may not have decided whether it wants a bomb, it
already has most of what it needs to build one.386
78

Fighting the Tough Approach from Congress

The tough sanctions that impacted Irans economy did not come
from Secretary Clinton or the State Department, but from
Congress and the EU. Congress in particular wanted to take the
biggest hammer available to Iran, but Secretary Clinton objected
in favor of a more nuanced approach.387 Clintons positions on
sanctioning Iran had changed since she was a senator, and were
something of a mystery to her former colleagues as she took the
reigns at Foggy Bottom and asked them to soften their stances.388
In fact, since Democrats controlled both Houses of Congress at
the time, she was able to intervene directly in negotiations
between the House and Senate on a final unilateral sanctions bill,
and often carried the water for Russia and China.389
More than a year before the UN Security Council passed
weakened multilateral sanctions in 2010, tough measures were
introduced in Congress that began an international process of
truly crippling Irans economy. On April 28, 2009, a bipartisan
group of senators introduced legislation that hardened economic
sanctions on foreign oil and shipping companies doing business
with Iran. The bill would have expanded the presidents authority
to crack down on companies exporting gasoline and other refined
petroleum products to Iran.390 The next day, a similar bill was
introduced in the House of Representatives.391 On July 20, 2009,
another bipartisan group of senators introduced an amendment to
the annual defense authorization bill that encouraged the
president to levy sanctions on Irans Central Bank if Tehran failed
to stop their uranium enrichment or refused to engage in direct
talks to end it.392 Then in the autumn of 2009, the Senate Banking
Committee passed a comprehensive sanctions bill targeting
Iranian financial institutions and firms doing business with Irans
oil and gas industries.393 The congressional noose was tightening
on Tehran. Finally, on April 19, 2010, letters signed by majorities
in both the House and Senate encouraged President Obama to
implement congressional sanctions quickly against Iran.394
79

The response by Secretary Clinton and the Obama administration

to the tough approach on Capitol Hill was to ask members of
Congress to be more lenient because their actions might damage
relations with Europe, Russia, and China.395 This did not sit well
on Capitol Hill. The administration doesnt carry out the laws
that are on the books and they want the new law to be as weak and
loophole-ridden as possible, Representative Brad Sherman (DCA) complained.396
In fact, while the bills in Congress allowed the president to waive
sanctions if they were not in the U.S. national interesta standard
loophole most administrations are offered in deference to
executive authoritythis was not enough for Secretary Clinton
and the Obama administration. Clintons Undersecretary of State
William Burns asked Congress to remove a provision that forced
the White House to name companies given waivers. In the name
of diplomacy, the State Department was so deferential to other
nations that it opposed the mere act of publicly naming
companies the administration had already exempted from
sanctions.397
On June 24, 2010, the Senate voted unanimously for a new round
of sanctions taking aim at Irans energy industry and targeting
businesses that exported refined petroleum products to the
Tehran regime. Firms found shipping refined petroleum products
or providing financial services to select Iranian industries would
lose access to U.S. markets. 398 A successful House vote followed
Senate action. President Obama signed into law The
Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment
Act of 2010 (CISADA) on July 1.
However, Secretary Clinton and the Obama administration were
more interested in watering down the sanctions. On September
30, 2010, the White House picked an easy target and sanctioned
an Iranian energy firm based in Europe under CISADA, which the
State Department conceded had no commercial activity in the
80

United States.399 However, they spared four European firms from

penalties and declined to penalize Chinese and Russian firms,
fearing diplomatic fallout.400
Then, on November 21, 2011, Secretary Clinton and Treasury
Secretary Timothy Geithner held a joint press conference where
they appeared to be getting tougher, designating Iran and the
Central Bank a jurisdiction of primary money laundering
concern.401 While the measure served as another warning to
Iran,402 it actually stopped short of imposing full sanctions on the
Iranian Central Bank.403 Once again there was substantial
criticism that the measure failed to go far enough against Russia,
China, and others.404
Again, Congress stepped into the breach. A few days later, on
December 1, 2011, the Senate unanimously backed an amendment
to the FY 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that
aggressively targeted foreign financial institutions doing business
with the Iranian Central Bank, barring them from opening or
maintaining correspondent operations in the United States.405
Days before the amendment was passed, the administration
sought to scuttle it, sending senior administration officials to the
Senate to lobby against the provision.406
The break between this Democratic senator, who is up for
reelection next year, and the Obama administration comes
two days after the administration sent three very senior
officials to meet with senators to try to get them to scuttle the
amendment. On the morning of Nov. 29, Treasury Deputy
Secretary Neal Wolin, Deputy Secretary of State Bill Burns,
and Deputy National Security Advisor Denis McDonough
called an emergency meeting on Capitol Hill, multiple Hill
sources told The Cable.407
Days later, at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing,
further criticism of the sanctions bill from two administration
81

officials, including Clintons undersecretary Wendy Sherman,

brought on a fierce rebuke from Committee Chair Senator Bob
Menendez (D-NJ).
The New Jersey Democrat took seven minutes at the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee hearing to chastise
Undersecretary of State Wendy Sherman and Treasury
Undersecretary David Cohen at Thursdays Senate Foreign
Relations Committee meeting for asking him to negotiate on
their behalf, and then criticizing the compromise he struck
with Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL). At your request we engaged in
an effort to come to a bipartisan agreement that I believe is
fair and balanced. And now you come here and vitiate that
agreement. ... You should have said we want no
amendment, Menendez said. Everything that you have said
in your testimony undermines your opposition to this
amendment. The clock is ticking.408
Menendez went on to call for stiffer sanctions than the ones the
administration and Secretary Clinton were opposing:
This certainly undermines your relationship with me for the
future, Menendez told the administration officials. He also
urged for more drastic measures, such as a gasoline embargo
on Iran. If the Europeans are considering an embargo, we
shouldnt be leading from behind, we should be leading
forward.409
Following the rebuke, and likely out of fear of looking weak
toward Tehran heading into his re-election, President Obama
signed the bill into law on December 31, 2011. The punitive
measures were slated to go into effect six months later, on July 1,
2012.410
Using the presidents waiver authority, the administration quickly
moved to weaken the sanctions. On March 20, 2012, Secretary
Clinton exempted ten EU countries and Japan from sanctions.411
82

On June 11, 2012, she exempted seven more countriesincluding

India, South Korea, and Turkey.412 Finally, Secretary Clinton
granted a waiver to ChinaIrans top oil consumer at the time
days before increased sanctions were to take effect.413 While the
EU was shown to be reducing its importation of Iranian oil, key to
any exemption, China appears to have been given a free pass.414
Secretary Clinton and the Obama administration may have tried
to water down the intent of the NDAA amendment through the
use of White House waivers. But almost immediately the tougher
approach by Congress worked better than the weakened
multilateral approach favored by Secretary Clinton.
Just two days after President Obama signed the sanctions into
law, the Iranian rial hit a record low against the dollar, losing 10
percent in value.415 The drop was evidence that currency traders
believed the Central Bank sanctions could hurt Irans ability to
export oil, as petrol importers looked for other sources, and
currencies, to pay for them. In particular, South Korea, Japan,
and other Asian countries began to search elsewhere for oil. 416
The Asian efforts to wean themselves from Iranian
crude are in response to legislation enacted by Congress
at the end of last year requiring the administration to
phase in sanctions in stages by late June that would
make it very difficult for others to buy Iranian oil, by
barring transactions with Irans central bank.417
While tough congressional sanctions had their intended effect in
Asia, there were even more effective sanctions coming from
Europe. In January 2011, a European embargo on Iranian oil was
passedset to go into effect in July. The EU ordered every
contract for importing Iranian oil to be terminated, and European
companies were banned from insuring transportation of Iranian
oil.418 The EU embargo on Iranian oil was potentially more potent
than any American sanctions because, while a U.S. embargo had
been in effect for decades, the 27-nation EU accounted for 18
83

percent of Irans oil exports, or about 450,000 barrels a day.

Added to the reductions in Asia, Iran lost a significant portion of
its oil revenue.419
The combined European and American sanctions drove down
Iranian oil exports by 40 percent to 50 percent, depriving Iran of
$9 billion in revenue a quarter, while the Iranian currency lost 38
percent of its value after the Central Bank sanctions were
passed.420 The International Energy Agency reported that imports
of Iranian oil by major consumers plunged to one million barrels a
day in July 2012, from 1.74 million barrels in June.421 In other
words, the amount of oil imported by Irans customers dropped a
whopping 42 percent in a single month! Even Iranian President
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that the combined sanctions were
the toughest Iran ever faced.422 To cope with the reduced demand
for their crude oil, and with nowhere to store crude it could not
sell, Irans tankers sat idly in the Persian Gulf. Tehran engaged in
a cheap trick, repainting the tankers and turning off their GPS
systems, to try to disguise the sanctions true bite.423
Congress rightly smelled blood. On November 29, 2012, the
Senate approved a new unilateral sanctions amendment to the
new NDAA that imposed additional financial penalties on foreign
businesses and banks involved with Irans energy, ports, shipping,
and shipbuilding sectors. It also imposed sanctions on trade in
metals with Iran.424 The White House objected and told Senate
Democratic leaders that they did not believe new sanctions were
needed. The Senate responded with a 94-0 vote in favor of the
sanctions.425
What was clear from Congress actions was that after years of
trying to work with Secretary Clinton and the administration on
Iran, members of Congress, including Democrats, were united in
ignoring their misguided approach.
Undermining Israels Red Line on Iran
84

In a September 2012 speech before the United Nations, Israeli

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu asked the world to cast a
red line in the sand against Irans development of a nuclear
weapon.426 Though Secretary Clinton and the administration
were willing to offer the rhetorical deterrent against Bashar alAssadone they would later fail to enforcethey refused in
defense of Americas top ally.
Secretary Clinton led the charge in pushing back against Israels
red line.
Despite attempts to align their positions on Irans nuclear
program, Israel and the United States were publicly at odds
Monday over Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahus call for
Washington to set a clear red line beyond which it would
launch a military attack. A day after Secretary of State
Hillary Rodham Clinton said the United States is not
setting deadlines for Iran and considers negotiations the
best approach, a senior Israeli official charged that these
statements wont serve to deter Iran, but could well put it at
ease.427
The public rebuttal undermined what Israel needed most to deter
Iran: a public and credible threat of the use of force should
Tehran refuse to abandon its nuclear ambitions.
The Sanctions Postscript
On November 24, 2013, the U.S. and five other countries
announced that they had reached a highly controversial six-month
interim deal with Iran, which would freeze the regimes nuclear
program temporarily in exchange for limited sanctions relief.428
As of this writing, negotiations are ongoing. Supporters of the
agreement believe it to be a potential breakthrough, while critics
argue that as sanctions are continuing to affect the Iranian
economy, now is not the time to let up.

85

As Clintons book is set for release, expect her to continue to

falsely claim the toothless UN sanctions she helped negotiate
were responsible for striking an interim deal, rather than the
congressional and European sanctions that targeted Irans central
bank and oil exportsand were passed over both her and her
departments objections. And while taking credit for the interim
deal, Clinton will try to have it both ways, continuing to be
skeptical that any permanent deal will be reached. In a recent
speech before the American Jewish Committee, Clinton previewed
the doublespeak.
Clinton told the audience she remained skeptical that Iran
would follow through on international negotiations aimed at
halting its nuclear program and are currently spearheaded
by Kerry. Clinton said that while it is the time to give
diplomacy space to work, she remains skeptical the
Iranians will follow through and deliver.429
In early 2014, as the interim deal was in place, Clinton fell in line
with the president, opposing any additional efforts to pass new
economic sanctions on Iran.430 In a letter to Senator Carl Levin
(D-MI) on January 26, 2014, Clinton praised the diplomatic high
ground. The former secretary was actually concerned America
could lose the high ground to Tehran.431
Now that serious negotiations are finally under way, we
should do everything we can to test whether they can
advance a permanent solution. As President Obama has
said, we must give diplomacy a chance to succeed, while
keeping all options on the table. The U.S. intelligence
community has assessed that imposing new unilateral
sanctions now would undermine the prospects for a
successful comprehensive nuclear agreement with
Iran. I share that view. It could rob us of the
diplomatic high ground we worked so hard to reach,
break the united international front we constructed,
86

and in the long run, weaken the pressure on Iran by

opening the door for other countries to chart a different
course.432
Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ) said that over the top rhetoric
and fear-mongering tactics were employed by administration
officials to halt a new round of sanctions against Iran.433
Clinton has already previewed how she plans to rewrite her record
on Israel and her weakness in confronting Iran. She will try to
avoid any accountability for weakening and delaying sanctions
against Tehran, and take credit for bold actions by others.
She will also attempt to claim that she strengthened the U.S. bond
with Israel, rather than acknowledge her role as a sharp public
critic who broke her promises from the campaign trail and
repeatedly snubbed Americas closest ally.
Regardless of what she may say in her book, the record is clear.

87

CHAPTER SIX: SCANDALS AND

MISMANAGEMENT
If Secretary Clintons political career had ended with her defeat
for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008, her skills as
a manager would have been judged by her disorganized and
drama-filled campaign for the presidency and her disastrous
Health Care Task Force as First Lady. President Obama, who
defeated her calamitously run campaign, should have been wary
of nominating Clinton to a post that was responsible for tens of
thousands of federal employees throughout the world. While her
tenure in Foggy Bottom didnt have the highly publicized
backstabbing element that tarnished her presidential campaign,
Secretary Clintons deficiencies as a manager were no less evident.
There was one department within State that Secretary Clinton
oversaw with great care: the Global Partnerships Initiative (GPI),
which was run by long-time Clinton family aide Kris Balderston.
Balderston was known in political circles for creating a hit list
that ranked members of Congress based on loyalty to the Clintons
during the 2008 presidential primaries.434 Balderston was
brought to Foggy Bottom to keep the Clinton political network
humming at State.435 He focused his efforts on connecting CEOs
and business interestsall potential Clinton 2016 donorsto
State Department public/private partnerships. Balderston worked
alongside Clintons long-time aide Huma Abedin, who was given a
special government employee waiver, allowing her to work both
as Secretary Clintons deputy chief of staff, and for other private
sector clients. With the arrangement, Abedin would serve as a
consultant to the top Clinton allied firm, Teneo, in a role in which,
as the New York Times reported, the lines were blurred between
Ms. Abedins work in the high echelons of one of the governments
most sensitive executive departments and her role as a Clinton
family insider.436

88

Secretary Clinton and her allies have placed great emphasis on the
secretary of states historic role in promoting American business
interests overseas, dubbing the effort economic statecraft.437
The efforts of the GPI, Abedin, and Balderston ensured that
Secretary Clintons economic statecraft agenda would be rife
with the potential for conflicts of interest reminiscent of the favortrading scandals that emanated from her husbands White House.
While the political office and donor maintenance program was
managed with extreme meticulousness, Secretary Clinton ignored
her role as manager of the rest of the sprawling government
agency.438 When it came to these more mundane tasks, Secretary
Clinton was not on top of what was really going on in the
department she ran.
While Secretary Clinton was preoccupied with being filmed and
photographed all around the world, the State Department was
plagued by chronic management problems and scandals, from
visa programs to security contractors.
And when Secretary Clinton did weigh in on management issues,
it was almost always after a raft of bad press forced her to, and not
from any proactive steps she took. In fact, she and her
departments first reaction in certain instances was to silence
critics or intimidate whistleblowers, rather than get to the bottom
of what was actually going on.
The events that unfolded in Benghazi were the worst example of
Secretary Clinton neglecting her managerial responsibilities. This
pattern of behavior, which led to the tragedy, was characteristic of
her management style throughout her four years at Foggy Bottom.
Economic Statecraft
A big part of Secretary Clintons record-breaking travel112
countries visitedwas her work as a salesperson for select U.S.
business interests.439 Today, her supporters would have us believe
her economic statecraft agenda was a major accomplishment.440
89

Yet, as always seems to be the case with the Clintons, there was
one family that benefited more than any other from all this
economic statecraftthe Clinton family.
The Clinton family financial network, or Clinton Inc., has a
lineage that stretches back to Bill Clintons time in Arkansas. Back
then, it was managed by a few Little Rock lawyersWebb
Hubbell, Vince Foster, and First Lady of Arkansas Hillary
Clintontrying to get legal contracts for the Rose Law Firm out of
then-Governor Bill Clinton.441 It expanded through the formation
of the Clinton Foundation in 2001, the Clinton Global Initiative in
2005, and the formation of the Clinton-allied consulting firm
Teneo in 2011, while Clinton served as secretary of state.442 When
Clinton took over in Foggy Bottom, Clinton Inc. was reaching its
apex, inking deals between world leaders and the most powerful
CEOs, who would then in turn support the web of Clinton-backed
organizations.443
The State Departments role in pursuing U.S. economic interests
overseas gave Secretary Clinton the opportunity to expand the
family Rolodex. But it wasnt always disclosed how companies
were selected for special attention from the secretary. In the last
month of her tenure, BusinessWeek asked the State and
Commerce Departments about this process, specifically how
[Secretary Clinton] decides which ones to bring up in her talks
with foreign dignitaries. Neither department volunteered to
answer this question. 444 It is this kind of opacity that has raised
questions about decisions driven by cronyism in the Clinton State
Department.
As scrutiny increases ahead of a Clinton presidential campaign,
news outlets have begun investigating the timing of donations
overlapping official acts by the State Department, to see if
favoritism drove Secretary Clintons economic statecraft agenda.
One such investigation was published in April 2014, when the
Washington Post carried the headline, For Hillary Clinton and
90

Boeing, a beneficial relationship, on its front page. In 2009,

Secretary Clinton began fundraising for the U.S. pavilion at the
Shanghai Expo. The expo, run by a nonprofit closely tied to the
State Department, was barred from receiving federal funding,
forcing the secretary and Clinton Inc. to raise over $60 million
from private sector sources.445 Initially, State Department lawyers
had nixed Boeing because the departments work lobbying for
the company overseas posed a potential conflict of interest.446 But
with Secretary Clinton in charge, the State Department set aside
ethics guidelines.447 The State Department ruled Boeing could
give up to $1 million. Soon, Secretary Clinton announced that they
were actually contributing $2 million.448 As the Post reported,
How the decision was made to raise the cap remains a mystery,
at least in public.
In addition to the special waiver, the timing of this contribution
raised questions. Secretary Clinton visited Moscow and made a
self-described shameless pitch to the Russian government,
lobbying them to sign a multibillion-dollar deal to buy dozens of
aircraft from Boeing. Just one month later, Boeing contributed
$2 million to the Shanghai Expo. 449 The shameless pitch may
have also carried geopolitical implications. Such a substantial
investment may have led Putin to believe that amidst numerous
sensitive negotiationsfrom confronting Iran to missile defense
he was buying political capital from a country that was already
showing its willingness to make unilateral concessions.
In 2010, there were additional conveniently-timed donations
landing in the Clintons coffers. Two months after Boeing finally
signed the $3.7 billion contract with the Russians, the company
made another substantial donation, this time for $900,000 to the
Clinton Foundation. And if the conveniently timed donations
werent enough, earlier this year a top Boeing lobbyist cohosted a
fundraiser for pro-Clinton Super PAC, Ready For Hillary. 450

91

Every expectation is that more examples of this nature will come

in the ensuing months. As MSNBCs First Read quipped the day
the story broke, Dont be surprised if we see plenty more of these
kind of articles between now and 2016 if Hillary Clinton runs for
president.451 Last year, Amy Davidson of the New Yorker asked
even more bluntly, Has anyone made a serious effort to map her
travels as Secretary of State against the activities of the
Foundation and the donations its received?452 America Rising
will continue to highlight other examples in the months and years
ahead.
A Pattern of Suppressing Information
While Secretary Clinton was busy pushing the interests of Clinton
Inc. donors, her attention was seemingly away from effectively
managing her department. And when headlines drove issues to
the top floor at Foggy Bottom, Secretary Clinton and her top aides
had little interest in actually getting to the root of the problem. All
too often, their first instinct was to bury it.
Many Americans will never know some of the worst episodes that
went on when Secretary Clinton was in charge at the State
Department because of her departments penchant for
suppressing information or interfering with investigations.
The most shameful episode of whistleblower intimidation came in
the aftermath of the Benghazi tragedy, when the State
Department waged a campaign to silence anyone who stepped
forward with more information, or simply made the mistake of
asking the wrong questions. This included government
employees, contractors, and reporters.
When a reporter asked why the State Department had not secured
sensitive information left at the scene of the Benghazi attack,
Philippe Reines, the longtime Clinton loyalist responsible for, as
one official called it, always positioning Hillary for the next big
thing,453 responded by calling the reporter an unmitigated
92

a**hole and told him to f**k off.454 State Department

employees or contractors faced similar, if less crude, treatment.
One security contractor was told not to respond to media
inquiries.455 Former deputy chief of mission in Libya under
Ambassador Chris Stevens, Gregory Hicks, said he was
functionally demoted for speaking out,456 and once received a
phone call in Libya from a very upset Cheryl Mills, Secretary
Clintons chief of staff, because a State Department lawyer was not
allowed to monitor his briefing of a congressman investigating the
attack.457 When the Senate Intelligence Committee, which had a
Democratic majority, issued its bipartisan report on the Benghazi
attack, the committee noted that its investigation received a
significant amount of resistance, especially from State.458
While Benghazi was the most high-profile instance of
whistleblower intimidation and information suppression, there
was a bevy of other very sensitive examples. In 2013, allegations
surfaced that reports of illegal and inappropriate behavior by
federal employees and contractors were allegedly covered up or
suppressed. According to a draft report by the State Departments
Office of the Inspector General, several investigations into
criminal or scandalous behavior were improperly manipulated or
blocked by senior officials at the State Department.
According to [Aurelia] Fedenisn [a former official in the
State Departments Inspector Generals Office turned
whistleblower], when a high-ranking State Department
security officials [sic] was shown a draft of their findings that
investigations were being interfered with by State
Department higher-ups, he said, This is going to kill us. In
the final report however, all references to specific cases had
been removed.459
The whistleblower who revealed the allegations of the cover-ups
by the Clinton State Department later claimed she was subject to a
campaign of intimidation to bully her into silence.460
93

In 2011, the State Department actually blocked the Special

Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR) from
conducting an assessment of the multibillion-dollar effort to train
Iraqi police. The interference came a year after SIGIR issued a
highly critical report of a State Department private security
contractors efforts to train police in several countries, including
Iraq.461
Another case involved USAID, which transferred millions of
dollars to Afghan ministries known to be rife with corruption.
USAIDs own investigative reports, all of which quote or reference
Secretary Clintons statements and positions, found that six of the
seven Afghan ministries receiving aid did not have proper systems
in place to manage and account for the funding. In all, $285
million in direct assistance was delivered to Afghanistan by
USAID . While arguing that Clintons name was only used in
connection with the aid because she was secretary of state, a
department spokeswoman acknowledged that the secretary
initiated and reaffirmed the Afghan foreign assistance program.462
The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction
called the direct aid the biggest gamble with taxpayer money that
USAID has ever made.463 When the report was set to be released,
USAID tried to prevent its public disclosure. The report also noted
that the State Department and USAID were not forthright with
Congress about risks involved.464
With a focus on PR over solid management, the State Department
under Secretary Clinton engaged in a pattern of suppressing
information and intimidating the brave individuals willing to
speak out. Her leadership sent precisely the wrong signal to the
thousands of employees who were charged with representing
America around the world.
Communications Breakdown
In one of the most glaring failures during Secretary Clintons
tenure, Private Bradley Manning, now known as Chelsea
94

Manning, leaked hundreds of thousands of classified

communications from the State Department to the activist group,
WikiLeaks. WikiLeaks posted the information online for the world
to see. It was a huge diplomatic embarrassment for the United
States, and especially the State Department. I have directed that
specific actions be taken at the State Department to protect
State Department information so that this kind of breach cannot
and does not ever happen again, Secretary Clinton pledged in
reaction to the leak.465
But for all the tough talk, the State Department did not follow
through on Secretary Clintons pledge to fix the system, which
today, almost four years later, a report suggests remains
vulnerable to another Manning-style security breach.
In 2009, the State Department reportedly approved funding for
SMART (State Messaging and Archive Retrieval Toolset), a
project intended to facilitate internal sharing of State Department
documents, including sensitive diplomatic cables.466 The
technology was designed with the assistance of Microsoft, a big
backer of the Clinton Foundation and Clinton Global Initiative.
From 2009 to 2013, Microsoft lobbied the State Department on
issues relating to cyber security.467 Inexplicably, SMART was
reportedly built with out of the box software that contained only
commercial grade services and applications with few additional
security modifications.468 Problems reportedly emerged
immediately in the testing phase without any security in place.
As the State Department transferred data from the old system to
SMART, information was reportedly intermixed in one location,
without proper security, a move that gave State Department
Employees potential access to all classified files.469
Knowing the flaws in the SMART System, the State Department
nevertheless went ahead with it.470
The State Department approved the project (and
hundreds of millions of dollars in payments to
95

contractors) in 2009 despite known flaws, and

proceeded even after the 2010 Chelsea Manning leaks,
despite two inspector general reports condemning the
projects lack of security, and even after then-Secretary
of State Hillary Clinton promised to stop another
leak.471
Under Secretary Clintons watch, thousands of cables and
messages, including highly sensitive and classified ones, [became]
vulnerable to espionage or leaks for the last four years. Despite
repeated warnings, the State Departments communication
system reportedly continues to operate without improved
technical security measures in place.472
An inspector general report issued two years after the Manning
leaks reportedly hinted that proper security access controls still
had not been fixed and warned that another WikiLeaks could
happen. The inspector general report noted that if cables were
wrongfully accessed, it was difficult for the State Department to
trace the activity. According to another internal State Department
report, software on 96 percent of the State Department servers
was not compliant with the departments own security standards.
The SMART system reportedly left workstations and servers
unsecured; relied on unencrypted transfer of secret materials; and
mingled classified and unclassified materials.473
Rather than fixing the system, State Department officials under
Secretary Clinton reportedly issued waivers that allowed
information sharing to move forward despite the necessary
safeguards. According to the inspector generals report criticizing
the waiver system, the State Department did not take the
necessary steps to identify the common [security] controls.474
The SMART system carries almost all diplomatic cables, putting
highly sensitive information at substantial risk. The security
flaws in SMART reportedly also place other agencies that share
information with the State Department at considerable risk
96

including the CIA and FBI. It would be relatively simple to gain

unauthorized access to the internal State Department files; former
employees, including those who were terminated, could access the
State Departments internal communications.475
As was typical of Secretary Clintons State Department, employees
who raised concerns were told not to pursue them. According to a
former State Department program manager, the pushback he
received from the department was we just have to get this thing
moving. The former employee reportedly said many contractors
working on SMART were concerned, saying, As we have already
seen with Manning and [former NSA contractor Edward]
Snowden, when you have highly sensitive communications, you
cant forgo security. Another former manager reportedly said
SMART was like pulling up to a gas station going to [a] vending
machine, putting your money in, and all the candy falls out,
adding, It is a Band-Aid over a bullet hole. It is just not going to
stop the bleeding. Although the State Department has begun
rolling out fixes, it is likely they will need to build and deploy a
completely new system.476 Ultimately, this is yet another case
where Secretary Clinton has not been held accountable for saying
one thing but doing anotheror worse, doing nothing all.
The mishandling of communications systemsespecially after the
WikiLeaks debaclewas a case study in mismanagement.
Secretary Clinton was MIA when the largest leak to date in U.S.
diplomatic history rocked Washington, D.C., and capitals across
the globe. Her reaction to the event was an empty pledge,
maintaining an inadequate and insecure system connected to a
Clinton Foundation donor. As a result, Americas diplomatic
communications and national security continued to remain
exposed.
Waste, Fraud, and Abuse
In 2014, the State Department Inspector General released a report
examining six years of the departments contracting practices,
97

including all four years of Secretary Clintons tenure. The report

found that the State Department could not properly account for
$6 billion in mismanaged funds.477 According to the Washington
Post, when releasing the report the Inspector General issued a
management alert for only the second time in the departments
history.478 The Inspector Generals report identified significant
vulnerabilities that could expose the department to substantial
financial losses.479 The report also found that the State
Departments failure demonstrates a lack of internal control. 480
The embarrassing report was a symptom of the systematic
management failures and abuses that occurred under Secretary
Clintons watch. A 2013 report by the inspector general found that
the State Department overstaffed one program in Baghdad
because it did not conduct an analysis of how many people were
needed,481 even though the contract had a potential cost of over $1
billion.482 Overstaffing due to poor oversight was so rampant in
this one program that the State Department spent $111.8 million
on security personnel, but only used about 59 percent of the
personnel provided.483 The Inspector General notified the State
Department of the overstaffing. In response, officials reduced
staffing, without conducting any analysis of what was actually
needed, obviously missing the point of the Inspector Generals
findings.484 The contractor, Triple Canopy, had billed the State
Department for $1,700,000 in unallowable or unsupported
costs, which State Department officials approved.485
And Secretary Clintons culture of lax oversight and absentee
management not only cost taxpayers billions of dollars, it also
risked lives. A 2014 audit of the physical security procurement
process for overseas posts found that many of the problems that
led to the Benghazi tragedy were actually systemic problems
throughout the State Department. Auditors could not identify
total physical security-related expenditures because the State
Department did not keep track of them.486 Nor did officials
maintain a comprehensive list of funding requests for physical
98

security or the status of requests that had been made.487 The State
Department did not even have a process for prioritizing physical
security funding requests, meaning that the most needed security
improvements languished behind less important projects.488
Hypocrisy on Government Contracting
Among the most glaring management failures of Secretary
Clintons tenure was her inability or lack of interest in doing the
hard work necessary to reform the contracting process, after
spending a career in the U.S. Senate as one of its fiercest critics.
Its one thing to complain from the sidelines, its quite another to
actually fix problems.
In April 2008, then-Senator Clinton introduced legislation that
prevented contractors who violated criminal laws from obtaining
federal contracts.489 Yet while she was secretary of state, the State
Department continued to offer contracts to companies with
histories of alleged improprieties.
In another example of Clintons remarkable inconsistency, she
offered an amendment to the FY 2009 Senate budget resolution,
calling for a one-year moratorium on unchecked no-bid
contracts.490 She said in 2008, If we are truly committed to
rooting out wasteful spending we must stop these no and limited
bid contracts.491 However, during FY 2010-2013, the State
Department awarded over $2 billion in no-bid contracts.492
The list continues. In 2008, Senator Clinton said, [P]rivate
security contractors have been reckless and have compromised
our mission in Iraq. The time to show these contractors the door
is long past due.493 Yet while she was at the State Department,
officials spent hundreds of millions of dollars on private security
contractors in Iraq.494 Senator Clinton also charged the Bush
administration with an overreliance on private contractors, which,
she said, resulted in an overwhelming number of disturbing
abuses.495
99

While she was secretary of state, though, Clintons department

became even more reliant on contractors, increasing their
numbers in Iraq, while the large number of contract abuses
continued unabated.496 ,497
One of the most egregious examples of government contracting
hypocrisy was Clintons treatment of private security contractor
Blackwater. As a senator, Clinton made an example out of the
company, introducing government contract reform legislation in
the Senate largely because the State Department intended to
renew its contract with Blackwater in 2008 to provide security in
Iraq. Clinton took to the campaign trail and slammed the Bush
administration for spending large sums of money on security
contractors like Blackwater earning the headline: Clinton Vows
Blackwater Crackdown.498 Senator Clinton even went a step
further and cosponsored legislation in the Senate to ban the use
of Blackwater and other private mercenary firms in Iraq.499
But of course, when Secretary Clinton took over the State
Department, Blackwaters contracts didnt stop.
Under her leadership the State Department awarded Blackwater
which is now named Academiand its subsidiaries contracts
worth almost $300 million. One subsidiary, U.S. Training Center,
was awarded a no-bid contract worth $70 million.500
The story takes a turn even more deeply mired in hypocrisy. As
much as Senator Clinton attacked Blackwater in the Senate, and
co-sponsored a bill to ban Blackwater from Iraq, she actually had
ties to the company.
The Clinton Foundation was forced to disclose its donors when
Senator Clinton was nominated in 2008, and it was revealed that
the Blackwater Training Center, a subsidiary, had donated from
$10,001 to $25,000.501 Also, Jack Quinn, who sits on Academis
board of directors,502 had served as counsel to president in the
Clinton administration503 and has been a long-time advisor to
100

Democratic leaders and has served as counsel to numerous

Democratic campaigns.504 Quinn personally donated from
$25,000 to $50,000 to the Clinton Foundation.505
While we do not know if any of these ties impacted the State
Departments decision-making, Secretary Clintons failure to take
any action against Blackwater speaks volumes about the hollow
nature of her rhetoric as a senator, and what little concern she
gave to billions spent by her department on contracts.
Afghanistan Embassy Contracting Scandal
One of the largest contracting scandals when Secretary Clinton
was at the State Department occurred in Afghanistan at the U.S.
embassy in Kabul. In June 2009, staff of the Senate Homeland
Security Committee, controlled by Democrats, released a scathing
report506 on the performance of U.S. contractor ArmorGroup,
which was guarding the Kabul embassy under a 2007 State
Department contract. The report observed that security lapses
were so severe that the embassy compound was in jeopardy. 507
On the day the report was released, however, the State
Department confirmed during a Senate hearing that officials
intended to renew the contract, saying boldly it wasnt a close
call.508
In September 2009, the Project on Government Oversight
(POGO) released another investigation into ArmorGroups
performance in Kabul in a letter sent to the secretary. POGOs
letter noted that prior to the State Departments renewal of the
contract with ArmorGroup, the department had issued numerous
warnings to the company. 509
Within two months of Secretary Clintons swearing-in, in March
2009, the State Department informed ArmorGroup that it had
grave concerns with its understaffing of guards. 510 Despite these
concerns, in June 2009, senior representatives from
ArmorGroups parent company, Wackenhut Services, and State
101

Department officials testified before Congress that security at the

Kabul embassy was fine. In fact, in 2009 the State Department
renewed the ArmorGroup contract with an option to extend the
contract to 2012.511
Security risks outlined in the POGO investigation were deeply
disturbing. Overworked guards were chronically sleep deprived in
violation of the companys contract, while Nepalese personnel had
language barriers that could lead to a communications breakdown
during an attack.512
The problems with ArmorGroup showed a complete breakdown in
discipline at the Kabul embassy and elsewhere. According to a
Senate Armed Services Committee report related to a different
federal contract, ArmorGroup actually hired personnel loyal to an
Afghan warlord, who relayed sensitive information to the
Taliban.513 The warlord was linked to murder, kidnapping,
bribery, and anti-Coalition activities.514 One employee filed a
lawsuit alleging ArmorGroups managers concealed visits to
brothels and possible sex trafficking from the State
Department.515 Amid the fallout over ArmorGroup, a wartime
contracting commissioner said, This is the equivalent of Abu
Ghraib for Afghanistan.516
The State Department acknowledged that Secretary Clinton has
been apprised of the allegations and was genuinely offended by
what has occurred. 517
As was typical, whistleblowers did not find it easy to come forward
and tell what they knew. In fact, there were allegations of open
threats in addition to intimidation. One whistleblower said he had
a crude poster placed on his door saying, Warning! Rats can
cost you your job and your family.518 Yet despite the political
firestorm, ArmorGroup received contract extensions worth over
$33 million weeks later. It was not until December 2009 that the
State Department publicly decided to cancel its contract with
ArmorGroup. 519
102

Yet there was little urgency. In September 2010a full nine

months after the announcementthe State Department finally
hired another firm to take over security from ArmorGroup. The
company, EOD Technology, was also mentioned in the Senate
Armed Services Committee report, where it was said that the
company employed personnel that had been fired by ArmorGroup
for links to the Taliban.520 In December 2010, federal agents
conducted a raid on EODs Tennessee headquarters as part of an
investigation into allegations that the company engaged in illegal
exports. In March 2011, the State Department also fired EOD
Technology because the company was not going to be able to
start work on May 1, as the contract required, leaving
ArmorGroup still providing security in Kabul.
As the Kabul embassy remained poorly guarded, the contracting
fiasco continued.
In 2011, a third company, Aegis, won a contract to take over
security of the Kabul Embassy from ArmorGroup, beginning in
the summer of 2012. Yet in January 2013, Secretary Clintons last
month at State, POGO released another investigative report
highlighting a petition from Aegis guards, who claimed the
embassy was dangerously understaffed, and that guard leaders
displayed tactical incompetence and a dangerous lack of
understanding of the operational environment.521 The petition,
signed by forty Aegis contractors, was circulated to the State
Department and company supervisors within a month of Aegis
taking over security of the embassy. However, the State
Department dismissed what it called a mutiny as baseless. 522
The charges leveled in the POGO investigation were devastating.
An Aegis supervisor had posted detailed information about the
embassys security on the Internet. Guardswho said the embassy
could not withstand an attackclaimed they worked long hours
with little rest; that training and weapons testing was inadequate;
and that they were housed in poor conditions. And despite the
103

history of car bombs used in terrorist attacks, guards claimed

vehicles entering the compound were not searched for
explosives.523
Once again, several Aegis contractors said they were fired for
speaking out. One guard who helped organize the petition claimed
he was grilled by Aegis and State Department supervisors and
then fired the next day, and given only 90 minutes to catch a
plane out of Kabul. A State Department memo one week later
called on Aegis to fire a second guard who had organized the
petition, while another guard was told to leave Kabul or be
fired.524
For four years, and through three contractors, Secretary Clinton
allowed a contracting fiasco to leave her personnel exposed in one
of the most dangerous embassies in the world. Rather than show
leadership and get to the bottom of the problem, Secretary Clinton
allowed bureaucrats to engage in the type of business as usual that
she had once decried from the floor of the Senate.
It wasnt until scandal, headlines, and political fallout that any
action was taken, and even then, the first instinct was to silence
whistleblowers rather than fix the problem.
Lax oversight of student visa program
Among the roles that the State Department carries out is the
administration of youth student visa programs, a set of nonimmigrant visa programs that allows high school students and
others to participate in study programs in the United States.525
Every year, 25,000 foreign high school students come to live in
the United States through the program.526 These students return
home to serve as cultural ambassadors, relaying their experience
in the United States to their friends and family.
As Secretary Clinton took office, stories of students in the
program being mistreated, exploited, and abused began coming to
104

light. Though she had reportedly heard of the problems, she only
took action when the issue grabbed headlines. 527
In 2009, a series of reports from Scranton, Pennsylvania, revealed
students subjected to malnutrition and unsanitary living
conditions. Secretary Clinton ordered a review of the program
that summer. State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland
said upon ordering the review, Secretary Clinton had demanded,
I want this fixed.528
In October 2009, the State Department Inspector General
released a report saying the program had insufficient oversight
and was one of the most vulnerable exchange programs in the
Department and should demand priority of attention.529 The
inspector generals report noted problems with background
checks performed on host families and recommended the
obvious: uniform criminal background checks, which search a
national criminal database.
The Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs should
establish a standard requirement based on objective
criteria to conduct national criminal history checks of
host families to ensure uniformity and adequacy of
information provided by third-party background check
companies.530
Despite this recommendation, the State Department abandoned a
pilot programin 2011, two years laterthat would have required
FBI-based fingerprint searches on host families. While FBI
fingerprinting is the preferred approach for criminal background
checks, doing so is not feasible at this time, an April 2011 State
Department memo said.531
Its not clear why the State Department considered it unfeasible,
especially considering the Boy Scouts of America and Girl Scouts
of the USA use similar national criminal background checks.532

105

Instead, the State Department outsourced background checks to

the companies placing the students, which have a financial
interest in placing as many students as possible with host families.
In other words, the more students they placed, the more money
they made, creating an environment ripe for abuse.533
Thus Secretary Clinton, who had reportedly heard of these
problems when she took over the reins at Foggy Bottom, failed to
order a review until months into the job, and only after the
programs lax oversight was making headlines. Then, as her
department did not enact a key recommendation from the State
Departments Office of Inspector General, she failed to take
action.
In 2012, an investigation by The Associated Press found a
shocking number of instances where students still ended up living
with convicted criminals. And not just petty criminals, which
would have been bad enough: one student was sent to live with a
convicted murderer, while another was placed with a convicted
drug felon.534 Records indicate the State Department was aware
that background checks by private companies were not as
effective as those conducted by law enforcement.535
One girl, who lived in a mobile home where the host family
threatened her and openly used drugs, was finally removed, but
only after she made multiple complaints to the State Department.
The executive director of the Committee for Safety of Foreign
Exchange Students reported she forwarded dozens of cases of
sexual abuse to the State Department, which did little to
investigate. The executive director said, The State Department is
watching exchange agencies like the Catholic Church watched its
(pedophile) priests.536
A State Department spokesman said in 2012, The Secretary of
States point of view [is], even one child abused under these
programs is one child too many.537 Yet 50 foreign exchange
students reported being sexually abused or harassed during the
106

2010-2011 school year.538 Though Secretary Clinton said, I want

this fixed in 2009, she failed to take effective action to protect
these vulnerable teenagers.539
To be clear, no one expects a secretary of state to know every
ongoing detail of every program within her department. But when
hearing of the widespread and systematic failures that were
endemic to these programs, and after ordering a review, a strong
leader should have monitored the implementation of
recommendations and personally ensured adequate action had
been taken under her watch.
Allegations of High-Level Cover-ups
According to an internal memo from the inspector general, there
were several reports of sexual improprieties and possible criminal
activities carried out by State Department officials and
contractors while Clinton was secretary. The memo was obtained
by CBS last year, citing numerous examples, including:
[A]llegations that a State Department security official in
Beirut engaged in sexual assaults on foreign nationals
hired as embassy guards and the charge that members of
former Secretary of State Hillary Clintons security detail
engaged prostitutes while on official trips in foreign
countriesa problem the report says was endemic. The
memo also reveals details about an underground drug ring
was [sic] operating near the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad and
supplied State Department security contractors with
drugs.540
Senior State Department officials blocked the inspector general
from investigating these incidents.
CBS also reported that illegal or improper activity was not
confined to lower-level employees.
In one specific and striking cover-up, State Department
107

agents told the Inspector General they were told to stop

investigating the case of a U.S. Ambassador who held a
sensitive diplomatic post and was suspected of patronizing
prostitutes in a public park. The State Department Inspector
Generals memo refers to the 2011 investigation into an
ambassador who routinely ditched ... his protective security
detail and inspectors suspect this was in order to solicit
sexual favors from prostitutes. 541
The ambassador, which the New York Post later identified as U.S.
Ambassador to Belgium, Howard Gutman, was a major fundraiser
for President Obama, raising over $700,000 for his campaign and
inauguration.542 Gutman also donated the maximum allowable
contribution to Clinton in 2008.543 The ambassador flew back to
Washington, met with Clintons Undersecretary Patrick Kennedy
to discuss the accusations, and was allowed to keep his job. 544
Gutman later denied the allegations. 545
None of these incidents found in the memo were included in the
inspector generals final publicly released report.546 Fox News
later reported that two top State Department officials appear to
have lied under oath about their knowledge of the inspector
generals investigation into improper activity.547 Longtime Clinton
ally Cheryl Mills, who served as her Clintons State Department
chief of staff, Cheryl Mills isonce againalleged to have
improperly intervened, this time to thwart and inspector general
investigation. 548
These examples are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the
Clinton State Departments cronyism, lax oversight of contractors,
and general poor management. Under her watch, the State
Department mismanaged security, leading to waste549 and the
endangering of American personnel.550 It mismanaged visa
programs, leaving teenagers vulnerable to predators and
exploitation.551It mismanaged contracting, leading to wasteful
spending and the retention of contractors she had once decried in
108

the Senate. It mismanaged its communications systems, leaving

America vulnerable to another national security breach. Finally,
the department Secretary Clinton ran showed a zeal for
intimidating whistleblowers and silencing critics.
Following her disastrous Health Care Task Force, which
contributed to her party losing control of Congress in 1994, and
her mismanaged presidential campaign, which was plagued by
infighting, Secretary Clintons role as head of a major federal
agency was an opportunity to shine as a manager and actually
solve problems she had identified in the Senate. But when handed
the reins at Foggy Bottom, her failed choice was to place the
priorities of Clinton Inc. above the management tasks she had the
duty to carry out. Secretary Clinton spent her time and Americas
foreign policy capital building a well of favors for those who may
be called upon to fund her presidential campaign. Meanwhile, she
was a negligent manager who allowed the chronic problems
plaguing the State Departments bureaucracy to fester or grow
worse.

109

EPILOGUE
There is no need to be coy about what is to come.
Secretary Clintons Hard Choices memoir and ensuing nationwide
tour is the prelude to an inevitable repeat run for the presidency.
There will be unprecedented and breathless media coverage of
what has become a rather rote political rite of passage for former
cabinet secretaries and wannabe presidents alike. Clinton will
take advantage of the major platforms granted her to frame her
past on her terms. She will do it in the most grandiose manner
imaginable.
Hard Choices is a public relations effort to cast Clinton as the
greatest secretary of state since Thomas Jefferson. As This Town
author Mark Leibovich put it, Clintons memoir will be full of
self-mythologizing and a life cast as a riveting series of
pivotal moments choices, calls, decisions, things requiring
courage. 552
These are time-honored tactics of the seasoned politician, but
Clinton will employ them with unique brazenness. In Clintonian
fashion, this self-mythologizing wont be limited by the truth or
reality. Such tactics are necessary because the facts that weve laid
out are so damning.
In early 2014, weve seen a preview of just how untruthful she is
willing to be. In a pattern of cases, Clinton has talked about her
record in a way that doesnt reflect the factstaking credit for
successful policies she opposed, having allies distance her from
any failed policies in whispers to friendly media outlets, or just
telling outright falsehoods about where she stood on an issue.
Just looking at the final few weeks leading up to the publication of
this e-book, there were a number of examples of this revisionist
history. At a speech to a Jewish organization in Washington, D.C.,
Secretary Clinton tried to credit herself for the successful Iran
110

sanctionsthe very sanctions that the State Department lobbied

Congress to spike. 553
A few weeks earlier she took an Instagram photo implying
solidarity with the rock band Pussy Riot, which was jailed in
Russia sparking worldwide outrage. But as secretary of state, she
was too worried about trying to make the doomed Reset policy
work to stand up for jailed dissidents. Her department even
opposed congressional efforts to pass the Magnitsky Act, which is
currently being used to sanction Russian officials in the wake of
the invasion of Ukraine. 554
In a speech at the University of Connecticut, Clinton attacked NSA
leaker Edward Snowden for revealing sensitive materials about
U.S. intelligence gathering, but while at State, she did nothing to
successfully secure diplomatic communications following the
Wikileaks debacle, leaving American diplomats and national
security communications vulnerable to another breach.
When the Nigerian Islamic terror organization Boko Haram made
international news for kidnapping hundreds of girls earlier this
year, Clinton was quick to use it as an opportunity to show how
much she cares about women and children, tweeting out
#BringBackOurGirls. The problem? As secretary of state she
declined officially to designate Boko Haram a Foreign Terrorist
Organization (FTO), waving off requests by the CIA, FBI,
Department of Justice, and members of Congress. It took
Secretary John Kerry to make the designation after she left in
2013. 555
Secretary Clinton has no choice but to employ these types of
misleading claims, exaggerations, or convenient omissions
because the reality of her record is so unappealing.
At America Rising, our mission is to monitor every false claim and
hold Clinton accountable as she attempts to rewrite history,
ensuring that Americans are educated about her Failed Choices.
111

When voters see at an accurate portrayal of her record at the State

Department, they will be forced to address a central question: why
should we expect four years of Hillary Clinton in the oval office to
be any better than four years at Foggy Bottom? What evidence is
there in her record in Foggy Bottom that she is prepared to be a
bold leader who is prepared to meet the challenges that face us?
In 2008, voters rejected Clinton out of a desire to turn the page
from the failed politics of the past and her mistaken judgments in
foreign policy. Today, those same vulnerabilities have grown
starker.
Clinton can rewrite her history as a series of Hard Choices, but
America Rising wont let her fool Americans into thinking they
were successful ones.
As her second attempt at the presidency begins, keep up with our
efforts to hold Hillary accountable at
www.AmericaRisingPAC.org/Hillary-Clinton

112

INDEX
Abedin, Huma, 88, 89
Abrams, Elliott, 60
AFRICOM, 25
Agha-Soltan, Neda, 51
Al Arabiya, 55
al-Assad, Bashar, 10, 33, 42, 48, 62
Alliance with Iran, 63
Clinton, Hillary praise for, 62, 63
Use of Chemical Weapons, 65
al-Assad, Hafez, 63
Albright, Madeleine, 6
Alexeyev, Nikolai, 45
Algeria, 54
Allen, Jonathan, 16
al-Maliki, Nuri, 61
Arab Spring, 4, 6, 10, 14, 50, 63, 66
Egypt, 61
Morocco, 15
Tunisia, 54
Balderston, Kris, 88, 89
Ben Ali, Zine al-Abidine, 53, 54, 64
Benghazi, 6, 10, 32
Accountability Review Board, 29
Ansar al-Sharia, 17, 25, 29
Failure to catch perpetrators, 32
Prior attacks, 19
Security Requests, 23
Security Warnings, 20
Senate Homeland Security
Committee, 26
Senate Homeland Security Committee
Report, 20
Senate Intelligence Committee Report,
23
Benghazi Talking Points, 31
Innocence of Muslims YouTube video,
14
Jones, Beth email, 28
Morell, Mike role in editing, 28
Nuland, Victoria role in editing, 28
Sullivan, Jake role in editing, 28
Beyrle, John, 39
Biden, Joe, 4, 70
Boeing, 91
Boko Haram, 111

Bouazizi, Mohamed, 52, 53

Bout, Viktor, 35
Boy Scouts of America, 105
Brennan, John, 15
Brock, David, 30
Burns, William, 37, 80, 81
Bush Administration
Clinton, Hillary criticism on Iraq war,
16, 100
Criticism of Mubarak, Hosni, 55
Previous role in Missile Defense
Negotiations, 38
UN sanctions on Iran, 77
Bushehr Nuclear Plant, 39, 40
Carney, Jay, 13
Chabot, Steve, 24
Chemical Weapons Convention, 65
Cheryl Mills, 28, 30, 93
China, 8, 40, 74, 76, 77, 79, 80, 81, 83
Clinton Foundation
Donation from Boeing, 91
Donations with ties to Blackwater, 100
Formation of, 90
Clinton Inc., 48, 90, 91, 92, 109
Clinton, Bill, 6, 30, 90
Clinton, Hillary
"Red line" warning to Syria, 64
Congressional testimony on Benghazi,
28
Advocacy for Libya intervention, 16
Criticism of Bush Administration, 99
Criticism of Israel, 67
Criticism of no-bid contracts, 99
Criticism of private security
contractors, 99
Diplomatic overtures to Syria, 62
Exclusion of Israel from
counterterrorism forum, 71
Failure to condemn Russian human
rights abuses, 46
Lobbying for Boeing Contract, 91
Opposition to Congressional sanctions
on Iran, 84
Photo with Pussy Riot, 46, 111
Praise of Viktor Yanukovych, 47

Reaction to Green Movement, 52, 73

Role in United Nations sanctions
negotiations, 78
Russian Reset, 33
Undermining "red line" on Iran, 85
Committee for Safety of Foreign
Exchange Students, 106
Confessore, Nick, 9
Cretz, Gene, 16
Crowley, Phillip, 53
Crowley, Phillipe, 70
Damascus, Syria, 61, 62, 63, 66
Davis, Lanny, 8
Department of Defense Site Security
Team, 23
Economic Statecraft, 89, 92
Egypt, 61
Human Rights Abuses, 55
Wisner, Frank role, 58
Failed Choices, 9, 11, 111
Fedenisn, Aurelia, 93
Foster, Vince, 90
Friedman, Thomas, 7, 74
Gates, Robert, 15
Girl Scouts of the USA, 105
Gottemoeller, Rose, 38
Gutman, Howard, 108
Haberman, Maggie, 9
Hard Choices, 7, 9, 110, 112
Health Care Task Force, 88, 109
Hicks, Gregory, 18, 25, 26, 93
Hubbell, Webb, 90
Human Rights Watch, 46
Hussein, Saddam, 16, 17
International Atomic Energy Agency, 62
Iran, 52, 87
Green Movement, 53
Impact of sanctions, 84
Interim nuclear deal, 87
Progress towards nuclear weapon, 78
Sanctions, 87
Israel, 73
Clinton, Hillary criticism of, 72
Clinton, Hillary reversal on
"undivided" Jerusalem, 72
Clinton, Hillary support as a
presidential candidate, 67

Clinton, Hillary undermining "red

line" on Iran, 85
Exclusion from counterterrorism
forum, 72
Istanbul, Turkey, 71
Jefferson, Thomas, 110
Jones, Beth, 28
Jordan, 15
Kerry, John, 29, 86, 111
Kessler, Glenn, 24, 51
Khattala, Ahmed Abu, 32
Kirk, Mark, 82
Lagarde, Christine, 74
Lamb, Charlene, 22, 23
Larry King Live, 16
Lavrov, Sergei, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 40
Lebanon, 62
Leibovich, Mark, 110
Levin, Carl, 86
Libya, 32
Destabilization of, 12
Jihadist groups, 18
NATO intervention, 16
State Department travel warning, 31
Luzhkov, Yuri, 45
Manning, Chelsea (f.k.a Bradley
Manning), 94, 95, 96, 97
Medvedev, Dmitry, 33, 34, 37, 39, 44, 46
Menendez, Bob, 75, 82, 87
Mitchell, George, 62
Mohyeldin, Ayman, 31
Morocco, 15
Mouallem, Walid, 61
Mubarak, Hosni, 14, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59,
60, 63, 64
Muskie, Edmund, 4
NATO
Intervention in Libya, 15
Relations with Russia, 37
Netanyahu, Benjamin, 69, 70, 71, 85
Nides, Tom, 6
Nigeria, 7, 72
Nuland, Victoria, 26, 28, 105
Obama, Barack
"Red line" warning to Syria, 64
2009 Cairo Speech, 50
Celebrity status, 5

Hot mic moment, 44

Job offer to Clinton, 4
Pre-1967 boders, 71
Secret letter to Medvedev, 37
Support for Mubarak, Hosni, 55
Waive sanctions, 78
Organization for Security and CoOperation in Europe, 37
Parnes, Amie, 16
Petraeus, David, 61
Power, Samantha, 15
Project on Government Oversight, 101,
102, 103
Psaki, Jen, 8
Pussy Riot, 46, 111
Putin, Vladimir
"Election", 45
Anti-American rhetoric, 44
Qatar, 15
Quadrennial Strategy Review, 8
Reines, Philippe, 35, 92
Romney, Mitt, 43
Russia, 48
Criticisms of U.S. missile defense, 41
Human Rights, 46
Invasion of Georgia, 37
Invasion of Ukraine, 48
Relations with NATO, 37
Reset, 41
Spy Ring in U.S., 41
Support for Syria, 65
Weapons sales to Venezuela, 42
Sarkozy, Nicolas, 40, 78
Shanghai Expo, 91
Sherman, Brad, 80
Sherman, Wendy, 75, 82
Smith, Sean, 24
Snowden, Edward, 46, 47, 97, 111
Special Inspector General for
Afghanistan Reconstruction, 94
Special Inspector General for Iraq
Reconstruction, 94
State Department
Allegations of covering up sexual
abuse, 109
Concession in new START treaty, 39

Cutting funding for Iran human rights

monitor, 52
Failure to respond to Benghazi
security requests, 23
Global Partnerships Initiative, 88
Interference with investigations, 94,
109
Intimidation of whistleblowers, 93
Youth student visa program, 107
State Department Contractors
Aegis, 103, 104
ArmorGroup, 101, 102, 103
Blackwater/Academi, 100, 101
EOD Technology, 103
Microsoft, 95
State Department Inspector General, 98
Blocked investigation into Iraqi police
training, 94
Internal memo on cover-ups, 109
Report on Afghanistan Aid, 94
Report on Baghdad staffing, 98
Report on classified communications,
96
Report on embassy security, 24
Report on visa programs, 107
State Messaging and Archive Retrieval
Toolset, 95, 96, 97
Stein, Sam, 9
Stevens, Chris, 12, 13, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22,
24, 25, 29, 93
Suleiman, Omar, 57, 58, 59
Sullivan, Andrew, 9
Susan Rice, 13, 15, 26, 29
Sweden, 15
Syria, 66
Arming of Hezbollah, 62
Russian-backed agreement, 65
U.S. Ambassador to, 62
U.S.-issued "red line", 64
Use of chemical weapons, 64
Tahrir Square, 59
Tashkent, Uzbekistan, 6
Tbilisi, Georgia, 6
Todd, Chuck, 9
U.S. Missile Defense, 39
United Arab Emirates, 15
Usackas, Vygaudas, 36

USAID, 52, 94
Vershbow, Alexander, 37
White House, 13, 21, 28, 29, 32, 69, 80,
83, 84, 89

WikiLeaks, 11, 38, 62, 95, 96, 97, 111

Yanukovych, Victor, 47, 48

NOTES
Steven Lee Myers, Hillary Clintons Last Tour As A Rock-Star Diplomat, The New
York Times, 6/27/12
2 Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes, HRC, p. 362
3 Hillary Clinton Breaks Travel Record, The Associated Press, 7/7/12
4 Hillary Clinton, Remarks At The Women of the World Conference, New York, NY,
4/3/14
5 State Department Press Briefing, 4/22/14
6 Lanny Davis, Hugh Hewitt, 1/29/14; Susan B. Glasser, Was Hillary Clinton A Good
Secretary Of State? Politico, 12/8/13; MSNBCs Morning Joe, 4/10/14; MSNBCs
Ronan Farrow Daily, 4/17/14; Maggie Haberman, Hugh Hewitt, 10/28/13; MSNBCs,
Jansing & CO, 5/16/14
7 Andrew Sullivan, Clintons Achilles Heels, The Dish, 2/4/14
8 Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes, HRC, 2014, p. 213
9 Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes, HRC, p. 128
10 Raymond Hernandez, Weiners Wife Didnt Disclose Consulting Work She Did While
Serving In State Dept., The New York Times, 5/16/13
11 Eleven Things You Should Know About Hillary Clinton, American Bridges Correct
The Record, Accessed 3/7/14; Schoen Wrong On Hillary Clintons State Tenure, Media
Matters Blog, 12/13/13
12 Helene Cooper and Steven Lee Myers, Obama Takes Hard Line With Libya After
Shift By Clinton, The New York Times, 3/18/11
13 Secretary Hillary Clinton, Committee On Foreign Affairs, U.S. House Of
Representatives, Testimony, 1/23/13, p. 7
14 Tarek El-Tablawy and Saleh Sarrar, Libya Names Military Governor In ConflictRavaged South, Bloomberg, 4/1/12
15 Secretary Hillary Clinton, Remarks With Prime Minister Elkeib After Their Meeting,
Washington, D.C., 3/8/12
16 Joshua Foust, A Hollow Victory: The Slow Unraveling Of Libya, PBSs Need To
Know, 4/4/12
17 Militias Could Drag Libya Into Civil War-NTC Chief, Reuters, 1/4/12
18 Tarek El-Tablawy and Saleh Sarrar, Libya Names Military Governor In ConflictRavaged South, Bloomberg, 4/1/12
19 Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 1112, 2012 Together With Additional Views, Senate Select Committee On Intelligence,
1/15/14, p. 9-10
20 Flashing Red: A Special Report On The Terrorist Attack At Benghazi, United States
Senate Committee On Homeland Security And Government Affairs, 12/30/12, p. 5
21 Secretary Hillary Clinton, Committee On Foreign Affairs, U.S. House Of
Representatives, Testimony, 1/23/13, p. 41
22 Secretary Hillary Clinton, Committee On Foreign Relations, U.S. Senate, Testimony,
1/23/13
23 Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 1112, 2012 Together With Additional Views, Senate Select Committee On Intelligence,
1

1/15/14, p. 20; The Security Failures Of Benghazi, Committee On Oversight And

Government Reform, U.S. House Of Representatives, Hearing, 10/10/12. p. 116
24 Benghazi: Exposing Failure And Recognizing Courage, Committee On Oversight
And Government Reform, U.S. House Of Representatives, Hearing, 5/8/13, p.17
25 White House Press Briefing, 9/14/12
26 Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 1112, 2012 Together With Additional Views, Senate Select Committee On Intelligence,
1/15/14, p. 16
27 Majority Interim Report: Benghazi Investigation Update, Committee On Armed
Services, U.S. House Of Representatives, 2/11/14 p. 13
28 Accountability Review Board Report, Department Of State, 12/18/12, p. 1
29 Accountability Review Board Report, Department Of State, 12/18/12, p. 1
30 Benghazi Timeline, Factcheck.org, 5/16/13; Jonathan Karl, Benghazi Talking
Points Underwent 12 Revisions, Scrubbed Of Terror Reference, ABC News, 5/10/13
31 Eric Schmitt, After Benghazi Attack, Talk Lagged Behind Intelligence, The New York
Times, 10/21/12
32 Secretary Hillary Clinton, Committee On Foreign Affairs, U.S. House Of
Representatives, Testimony, 1/23/13, p. 29
33 Eric Schmitt, After Benghazi Attack, Talk Lagged Behind Intelligence, The New
York Times, 10/21/12; Michael Morell, Permanent Select Committee On Intelligence,
U.S. House Of Representatives, Hearing, 4/2/14
34 Secretary Hillary Clinton, Committee On Foreign Affairs, U.S. House Of
Representatives, Testimony, 1/23/13, p. 29
35 Rachel Weiner, Susan Rice Withdraws Name From Consideration For Secretary Of
State, The Washington Post, 12/13/12
36 Benghazi Timeline, Factcheck.org, 10/26/12, Updated 5/2/14
37 Kerry Picket, Picket: (Audio) Father of Killed Navy SEAL - Hillary Told Me She
Would Have Filmmaker Arrested And Prosecuted, The Washington Times, 10/25/12
38 Secretary Hillary Clinton, Committee On Foreign Relations, U.S. Senate, Testimony,
1/23/13
39 Michael Birnbaum, Sensitive Documents Left Behind At U.S. Diplomatic Post In
Libya, The Washington Post, 10/3/12
40 Hassan Morajea and Abigail Hauslohner, Libyan Militias Led By Former General
Attack Parliament And Declare It Dissolved, The Washington Post, 5/18/14
41 Eli Lake, Jihadists Now Control Secretive U.S. Base In Libya, The Daily Beast,
4/23/14
42 Adam Goldman and Sari Horwitz, U.S. Efforts Stall In Capturing Suspects In 2012
Benghazi Attacks, Officials Say, The Washington Post, 12/5/13
43 Joby Warrick, Hillarys War: How Conviction Replaced Skepticism In Libya
Intervention, The Washington Post, 10/30/11
44 Helene Cooper and Steven Lee Myers, Obama Takes Hard Line With Libya After
Shift by Clinton, The New York Times, 3/18/11
45 Robert Gates, Duty, pp. 511-512
46 Helene Cooper and Steven Lee Myers, Obama Takes Hard Line With Libya After
Shift By Clinton, The New York Times, 3/18/11
47 Robert Gates, Duty, p. 512

Joby Warrick, Hillarys War: How Conviction Replaced Skepticism In Libya

Intervention, The Washington Post, 10/30/11
49 Joby Warrick, Hillarys War: How Conviction Replaced Skepticism In Libya
Intervention, The Washington Post, 10/30/11
50 Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes, HRC, p. 213
51 Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes, HRC, p. 213-224
52 Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes, HRC, p. 253
53 Corbett Daly, Clinton On Qaddafi: We Came, We Saw, He Died, CBS News,
10/20/11
54 Matt Gertz, Schoen Wrong On Hillary Clintons State Tenure, Media Matters Blog,
12/13/13
55 Joby Warrick, Hillarys War: How Conviction Replaced Skepticism In Libya
Intervention, The Washington Post, 10/30/11
56 Secretary Hillary Clinton, Remarks To Embassy Staff And Families, Tripoli, Libya,
10/18/11
57 CNNs, Larry King Live, 4/20/04
58 Secretary Hillary Clinton, Remarks With Prime Minister Elkeib After Their Meeting,
Washington, DC, 3/8/12
59 Joshua Foust, A Hollow Victory: The Slow Unraveling Of Libya, PBSs Need To
Know, 4/4/12
60 Nancy A. Youssef, Benghazi, Libya, Has Become Training Hub For Islamist
Fighters, McClatchy Newspapers, 12/12/13
61 Guy Taylor, U.S., Libya To Probe Violence After Slaying Of Ambassador, The
Washington Times, 9/12/12
62 Hillary Clinton, Hearing, Secretary Of State Confirmation, Committee On Foreign
Relations, U.S. Senate, 1/13/09
63 Gregory Hicks, Hearing, U.S. House of Representatives, Government Oversight And
Reform Committee, 5/8/13
64 Gregory Hicks, Hearing, U.S. House of Representatives, Government Oversight And
Reform Committee, 5/8/13
65 Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 1112, 2012 Together With Additional Views, Senate Select Committee On Intelligence,
1/15/14, p. 12-13.
66 Security Incidents Since June 2011, U.S. State Department, U.S. Embassy - Tripoli,
Libya, Regional Security Office, p. 29
67 Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 1112, 2012 Together With Additional Views, Senate Select Committee On Intelligence,
1/15/14, p. 26
68 Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 1112, 2012 Together With Additional Views, Senate Select Committee On Intelligence,
1/15/14, p. 9-10.
69 Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 1112, 2012 Together With Additional Views, Senate Select Committee On Intelligence,
1/15/14, p. 10.
70 Federal Research Division, Library of Congress, Al-Qaeda In Libya: A Profile, 8/12;
Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 11-12,
48

2012 Together With Additional Views, Senate Select Committee On Intelligence,

1/15/14, p. 9-10, 15
71 Flashing Red: A Special Report On The Terrorist Attack At Benghazi, United States
Senate Committee On Homeland Security And Government Affairs, 12/30/12, p. 5
72 Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 1112, 2012 Together With Additional Views, Senate Select Committee On Intelligence,
1/15/14, p. 15
73 Flashing Red: A Special Report On The Terrorist Attack At Benghazi, United States
Senate Committee On Homeland Security And Government Affairs, 12/30/12, p. 19
74 Secretary Hillary Clinton, Committee On Foreign Affairs, U.S. House Of
Representatives, Testimony, 1/23/13, p. 41
75 Secretary Hillary Clinton, Committee On Foreign Affairs, U.S. House Of
Representatives, Testimony, 1/23/13, p. 41
76 Secretary Hillary Clinton, Committee On Foreign Relations, U.S. Senate, Testimony,
1/23/13
77 White House Press Briefing, 9/14/12
78 Aaron Blake, Poll: Most Americans Dont Believe Hillary Clinton On Benghazi
Security, The Washington Post, 3/13/14
79 General Dempsey, Testimony, Senate Committee on Armed Services, 2/7/13
80 Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 1112, 2012 Together With Additional Views, Senate Select Committee On Intelligence,
1/15/14, p. 14
81 Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 1112, 2012 Together With Additional Views, Senate Select Committee On Intelligence,
1/15/14, p. 14
82 Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 1112, 2012 Together With Additional Views, Senate Select Committee On Intelligence,
1/15/14, p. 15
83 Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 1112, 2012 Together With Additional Views, Senate Select Committee On Intelligence,
1/15/14, p. 9
84 Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 1112, 2012 Together With Additional Views, Senate Select Committee On Intelligence,
1/15/14, p. 9
85 The Security Failures Of Benghazi, Committee On Oversight And Government
Reform, U.S. House Of Representatives, Hearing, 10/10/12, p. 166
86 Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 1112, 2012 Together With Additional Views, Senate Select Committee On Intelligence,
1/15/14, p. 20
87 Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 1112, 2012 Together With Additional Views, Senate Select Committee On Intelligence,
1/15/14, p. 20
88 The Security Failures Of Benghazi, Committee On Oversight And Government
Reform, U.S. House Of Representatives, Hearing, 10/10/12, p. 67

Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 1112, 2012 Additional Majority Views, Senate Select Committee On Intelligence, 1/15/14,
p. 1
90 Mark Mazzetti, Eric Schmitt, and David D. Kirkpatrick, Benghazi Attack Called
Avoidable in Senate Report, The New York Times, 1/15/14
91 Accountability Review Board Report, Department Of State, 12/18/12, p. 30
92 Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 1112, 2012 Together With Additional Views, Senate Select Committee On Intelligence,
1/15/14, p. 16
93 Admiral Michael Mullen, Briefing On The Accountability Review Board, Washington
D.C., 12/19/12
94 Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 1112, 2012 Together With Additional Views, Senate Select Committee On Intelligence,
1/15/14, p. 17
95 Sharyl Attkisson, U.S. Benghazi Compound Lease Renewed Without Security, CBS
News, 1/8/14
96 Flashing Red: A Special Report On The Terrorist Attack At Benghazi, United States
Senate Committee On Homeland Security And Government Affairs, 12/30/12, p. 13
97 Glenn Kessler, Barbara Boxers Claim That GOP Budgets Hampered Benghazi
Security, The Washington Post, 5/16/13
98 Guy Taylor and Shaun Waterman, Tears And Rage: Clinton Testily Defends
Depiction Of Benghazi Events, The Washington Times, January 23, 2013.
99 Glenn Kessler, Barbara Boxers Claim That GOP Budgets Hampered Benghazi
Security, The Washington Post, 5/16/13
100 The Security Failures Of Benghazi, Committee On Oversight And Government
Reform, U.S. House Of Representatives, Hearing, 10/10/12, p. 66.
101 U.S. Department of State Office of Inspector General, Audit of the Process to
Request and Prioritize Security-Related Activities at Overseas Posts, 3/14
102 U.S. Department of State Office of Inspector General, Audit of the Process to
Request and Prioritize Security-Related Activities at Overseas Posts, 3/14, p. 2
103 U.S. Department of State Office of Inspector General, Audit of the Process to
Request and Prioritize Security-Related Activities at Overseas Posts, 3/14, p. 8
104 U.S. Department of State Office of Inspector General, Audit of the Process to
Request and Prioritize Security-Related Activities at Overseas Posts, 3/14, p. 21
105 Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 1112, 2012 Together With Additional Views, Senate Select Committee On Intelligence,
1/15/14, p. 17
106 Libyan Doctor: U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens Died Of Severe Asphyxia,
CBS, 10/18/12
107 Dana Hughes, Kevin Dolak, and Enjoli Francis, Libya Consulate Hit With Two
Attacks That Lasted Nearly Five Hours, ABC News, 9/12/12
108 Esam Mohamed and Maggi Michael, US Ambassador Killed In Consulate Attack In
Libya, The Associated Press, 9/12/12
109 Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September
11-12, 2012 Together With Additional Views, Senate Select Committee On Intelligence,
1/15/14, p. 8
89

What They Said, Before and After the Attack in Libya, The New York Times,
9/12/12
111 Internal Email within the State Department, RE: Libya Update From Beth Jones,
released by Rep. Jason Chaffetz, 9/12/12
112 General Robert Lovell, Committee On Oversight And Government Reform, U.S.
House Of Representatives, Testimony, 5/1/14
113 Gregory Hicks, Hearing, U.S. House of Representatives, Government Oversight And
Reform Committee, 5/8/13
114 Majority Interim Report: Benghazi Investigation Update, Committee On Armed
Services, U.S. House Of Representatives, 2/11/14 p. 11-12
115 General Darryl Roberson, Transcript #1: DODs Preparation For The Terrorist
Attacks In Benghazi, Armed Services Committee, U.S. House Of Representatives,
Testimony, 5/21/13, p. 66
116 Flashing Red: A Special Report On The Terrorist Attack At Benghazi, United States
Senate Committee On Homeland Security And Government Affairs, 12/30/12, p. 22
117 Jonathan Karl, Benghazi Talking Points Underwent 12 Revisions, Scrubbed Of
Terror Reference, ABC News, 5/10/13
118 Jonathan Karl, Benghazi Talking Points Underwent 12 Revisions, Scrubbed Of
Terror Reference, ABC News, 5/10/13; Victoria Nuland, Committee on Foreign
Relations, U.S. Senate, Testimony, 7/11/13
119 Internal Email Within the United States Mission to the United Nations from
Redacted Personnel, SBUICLD-SEHDLD: OBUCI SVTS On Movie, Released White
House Emails, CNN, p. 94.
120 Eric Schmitt, After Benghazi Attack, Talk Lagged Behind Intelligence, The New
York Times, October 21, 2012.
121 Secretary Hillary Clinton, Committee On Foreign Relations, U.S. Senate, Testimony,
1/23/13
122 Secretary Hillary Clinton, Committee On Foreign Relations, U.S. Senate, Testimony,
1/23/13
123 Internal Email within the State Department, RE: Libya Update From Beth Jones,
released by Rep. Jason Chaffetz, 9/12/12
124 State Department Names Groups Behind Benghazi Strike, Fox News, 1/10/14
125 CNN Finds, Returns Journal Belonging To Late U.S. Ambassador, CNN, 9/23/12
126 Michael Birnbaum, Sensitive Documents Left Behind At U.S. Diplomatic Post In
Libya, The Washington Post, 10/3/12; Sensitive Documents Left Behind At US
Consulate In Benghazi, Libya, NBC News, 10/3/12
127 Michael Birnbaum, Sensitive Documents Left Behind At U.S. Diplomatic Post In
Libya, The Washington Post, 10/3/12
128 Michael Hastings, Libya Threatens Clintons Legacy And State Does Damage
Control, Buzzfeed, 9/23/12
129 Admiral Mike Mullen, Committee On Oversight And Government Reform, U.S.
House Of Representatives, Testimony, 9/19/13
130 Josh Rogin, Congress: Hillarys Benghazi Investigation Let Top Officials Escape
Blame, The Daily Beast, 9/15/13
131 Accountability Review Board Report, Department Of State, 12/18/12, p. 4
110

Gregory Hicks, Hearing, U.S. House of Representatives, Government Oversight And

Reform Committee, 5/8/13
133 Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 1112, 2012 Together With Additional Views, Senate Select Committee On Intelligence,
1/15/14, p. 1.
134 Maggie Haberman, Exclusive: Hillary Clintons Benghazi Chapter, Politico, 5/30/14
135 Maggie Haberman, Exclusive: Hillary Clintons Benghazi Chapter, Politico, 5/30/14
136 Amy Chozick, Once An Enemy Of Bill, Now A Friend Of Hillary, The New York
Times, 3/25/14
137 Maggie Haberman, Clinton Ally Pens E-Book: The Benghazi Hoax, Politico,
10/19/13
138 Dan Merica and Brianna Keilar, Clinton Knocks Those 'Who Exploit' Benghazi In
Memoir Chapter, CNN's Political Ticker, 5/30/14
139 U.S. Department Of State, Bureau Of Consular Affairs, 12/12/13
140 Carlotta Gall, Show of Power by Libya Militia in Kidnapping, The New York Times,
10/10/13; Libya: Government Versus Former Rebels Over Oil, The Africa Report,
1/10/14
141 Feras Bosalum and Julia Payne, Libyan Prime Minister Quits After One Month,
Citing Violence, Reuters, 4/13/14
142 United Nations Support Mission In Libya, Press Statement From The UN
Humanitarian Coordinator In Libya, On The Situation In The South, Press Release,
1/26/14
143 Nancy A. Youssef, Benghazi, Libya, Has Become Training Hub For Islamist
Fighters, McClatchy Newspapers, 12/2/13; The Security Failures Of Benghazi,
Committee On Oversight And Government Reform, U.S. House Of Representatives,
Hearing, 10/10/12, p. 65.
144 NBCs Nightly News, 5/18/14
145 Adam Goldman and Sari Horwitz, U.S. Efforts Stall In Capturing Suspects In 2012
Benghazi Attacks, Officials Say, The Washington Post, 12/15/13
146 Michael Birnbaum, Sensitive Documents Left Behind At U.S. Diplomatic Post In
Libya, The Washington Post, 10/3/12; Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S.
Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September 11-12, 2012 Together With Additional Views,
Senate Select Committee On Intelligence, 1/15/14, p. 41
147 Alexandra Sifferlin, Russias Adoption Politics: Defeated Families Caught In A
Diplomatic Tailspin, Time, 12/28/12
148 Thomas Grove and Steve Gutterman, Russia confirms Syria-bound ship carried
helicopters, Reuters, 6/21/12
149 Medvedev: Russia May Target U.S. Missile Defense Sites, The Associated Press,
11/23/11
150 Dana Hughes, Russia May Not Stop At Crimea, NATO Chief Warns, ABC News,
3/19/14
151 Karen Robes Meeks, Hillary Clinton Compares Valdimir Putins Actions In Ukraine
To Adolf Hitlers In Nazi Germany, Press Telegram, 3/4/14
152 Robert Burns, Russia A Diplomatic Test For US Secretary Of State, The Associated
Press, 3/6/09
153 Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes, HRC, p. 136-137
132

Mark Landler, Lost In Translation: A U.S. Gift to Russia, The New York Times,
3/6/09
155 Mark Landler, Lost In Translation: A U.S. Gift to Russia, The New York Times,
3/6/09
156 Michael Casey, Alleged Arms Smuggler Says US Framed Him, The Associated
Press, 3/6/09
157 US Slams Russian Moves To Block Meat Imports, The Associated Press, 4/28/09
158 Desmond Butler, As Russian FM Visits US, New Optimism, Old Tension, The
Associated Press, 5/7/o9
159 Anne Applebaum, Op-Ed, The Russia Reset Button Doesnt Work, The Washington
Post, 3/23/09
160 Mark Landler, Clinton Proposes Major Talks On Afghanistan, with a Place at the
Table For Iran, the New York Times, 3/6/09
161 NBCs Meet The Press, 7/26/09
162 C. J. Chivers and Olesya Vartanyan, Russia Keeps Some Troops in Georgia, Defying
Deal, The New York Times, 4/3/09; Desmond Butler, Lithuania Urges US Not To
Cozy Up To Russia, The Associated Press, 3/9/09
163 Desmond Butler, Lithuania Urges US Not To Cozy Up To Russia, The Associated
Press, 3/9/09
164 C. J. Chivers and Olesya Vartanyan, Russia Keeps Some Troops in Georgia, Defying
Deal, The New York Times, 4/3/09
165 Veronika Oleksyn, Diplomats Say Russia Blocks OSCE Georgia Plan, The
Associated Press, 5/13/09
166 Veronika Oleksyn, Diplomats Say Russia Blocks OSCE Georgia Plan, The
Associated Press, 5/13/09
167 Robert Burns, NATO Official: Russia Now and Adversary, The Associated Press,
5/1/14
168 Karen DeYoung, U.S. Envoy Indicates Flexibility With Russia On Missile Defense,
The Washington Post, 2/14/09
169 Peter Baker, David E. Sanger, and Thom Shanker, Obama Suggests U.S. May
Rethink Antimissile Plan, The New York Times, 3/3/09
170 Ellen Barry, U.S. Negotiator Signals Flexibility Toward Moscow Over New Round of
Arms Talks, The New York Times, 5/5/09
171 Mike Eckel, Analysis: Advantage To Russia In US Missile Move, The Associated
Press, 9/19/09
172 Peter Baker, White House Scraps Bushs Approach To Missile Shield, The New
York Times, 9/17/09
173 Nicholas Kulish, Judy Dempsey, and Clifford J. Levy, In Face of U.S. Shift, Europe
Reconsiders, The New York Times, 9/18/09
174 Ian Traynor, WikiLeaks Cables: Poland Wants Missile Shield To Protect Against
Russia, The Guardian, 12/6/10
175 Mike Eckel, Analysis: Advantage To Russia In US Missile Move, The Associated
Press, 9/19/09
176 Douglas Birch and Vladimir Isachenkov, US Ambassador: Arms Deal To Mention
Missile Shield, The Associated Press, 2/11/10
154

Douglas Birch and Vladimir Isachenkov, US Ambassador: Arms Deal To Mention

Missile Shield, The Associated Press, 2/11/10
178 Douglas Birch and Vladimir Isachenkov, US Ambassador: Arms Deal To Mention
Missile Shield, The Associated Press, 2/11/10
179 Medvedev: Russia May Target U.S. Missile Defense Sites, The Associated Press,
11/23/11
180 Adrian Croft and Steve Gutterman, Russia Says It Could Pre-Emptively Strike
Missile Shield, Reuters, 5/3/12
181 Vladimir Isachenkov, Russia Official: No Obstacles Over Iran Arms Deal, The
Associated Press, 1/28/10; Clinton Urges Russia To Delay Irans Nuclear Plant, The
Associated Press, 3/18/10
182 Sergei Venyavsky, Putin: Irans Nuclear Plant Launch Set For Summer, The
Associated Press, 3/18/10
183 Sergei Venyavsky, Putin: Irans Nuclear Plant Launch Set For Summer, The
Associated Press, 3/18/10
184 William Yong and Andrew Kramer, With Russian Aid, Iranians Open Their First
Nuclear Power Plant, the New York Times, 8/22/10
185 Mary Beth Sheridan, Putin Lectures U.S. On Trade, The Washington Post, 3/20/10
186 David E. Sanger, Mark Landler, and Neil MacFarquhar, U.S. Strikes Deal On New
Penalties By U.N. For Iran, The New York Times, 3/19/10
187 Edith Lederer, US Gets Tough But Not Crippling Iran Sanctions, The Associated
Press, 6/10/10
188 David Crawford, Richard Boudreaux, Joe Lauria and Jay Solomon, U.S. Softens
Sanction Plan Against Iran, The Wall Street Journal, 3/25/10; Paul Richter and Christi
Parsons, New Iran Sanctions Aim At Ships, Weapons, McClatchy-Tribune News
Service, 3/18/10
189 Katie Couric, Frances Sarkozy: Patience has its Limits, CBS, 4/12/10
190 Irans Riyal Hits Record Low, The Associated Press, 1/2/12; Mark Landler and
Steven Lee Myers, Obama And Congress In Step Over Iran Sanctions, The New York
Times, 8/1/12
191 Top Russian Diplomat Rejects Us Warnings Against Striking Oil Deal With Iran,
The Associated Press, 4/9/14
192 Top Russian Diplomat Rejects Us Warnings Against Striking Oil Deal With Iran,
The Associated Press, 4/9/14
193 Steve Gutterman, Iran Says Russia Could Build Nuclear Reactor In Exchange For
Oil, Reuters, 2/17/14
194 Peter Foster, White House Concerned About Russias Oil For Goods Deal With
Iran, The Telegraph, 1/14/14
195 UN Votes For New Sanction On Iran Over Nuclear Issue, BBC News, 6/9/10
196 Paul Richter and Meghan K. Stack, West Softens Proposed Iran Sanctions, Los
Angeles Times, 3/26/10
197 Paul Richter and Meghan K. Stack, West Softens Proposed Iran Sanctions, Los
Angeles Times, 3/26/10
198 Robert Burns, US State Department Plays Down Fallout In Spy Case, The
Associated Press, 6/29/10
177

Robert Burns, US State Department Plays Down Fallout In Spy Case, The
Associated Press, 6/29/10
200 Judy Dempsey, Russia Warns NATO Over The Size Of Libya Attacks, The New
York Times, 4/16/11
201 U.N. Security Council Talks Syria Peace As Deaths Mount, CNN, 2/1/12; Elise
Labott and Joe Vaccarello, Clinton Calls For Tougher U.N. Steps Against Syria, CNN,
4/20/12
202 Thomas Grove and Steve Gutterman, Russia Confirms Syria-Bound Ship Carried
Helicopters, Reuters, 6/21/12
203 Andrew Kramer, Russia Sending Missile Systems to Shield Syria, The New York
Times, 6/15/12
204 Death Toll In Syrias Civil War Above 150,000: Monitor, Reuters, 4/1/14
205 Anne Barnard, Syrian Opposition Group Is Open To Talks, With Conditions, The
New York Times, 2/15/13
206 Juan Forero, Venezuela Acquired 1,800 Russian Antiaircraft Missiles In 09, The
Washington Post, 12/12/10
207 Fabiola Sanchez, Putin Deepens Ties With Chavez On Venezuela Visit, The
Associated Press, 4/2/10
208 Romney: Russia Is Our Number One Geopolitical Foe, CNN, 3/26/12
209 Z. Byron Wolf, Was Mitt Romney Right About Detroit And Russia? CNN, 8/1/14
210 President Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, Presidential Debate, Boca Raton, FL,
10/22/12
211 Ashley Killough, Clinton criticizes Romneys remarks on Russia, CNN, 4/1/12
212 Putin Rejected Obamas White House Talks Offer: Kremlin, Agence France Presse,
5/29/12
213 Z. Byron Wolf, Was Mitt Romney right about Detroit and Russia? CNN, 8/1/14
214 Susan Cornwell, U.S.-Russia Ties Strained During Putin Political Campaign,
Reuters, 3/2/12
215 Kathy Lally, In Russia, Putin Allies Sharpen Anti-American Attacks Ahead Of
Elections, The Washington Post, 2/16/12
216 Jake Tapper, President Obama Asks Medvedev for Space on Missile Defense After My Election I Have More Flexibility, ABC News, 3/26/12
217 Alexandra Sifferlin, Russias Adoption Politics: Defeated Families Caught in a
Diplomatic Tailspin, Time, 12/28/12
218 International Adoptions By U.S. Parents Fell In 2012, Continuing Multi-Year
Decline, Huffington Post, 1/24/13
219 Ben Judah, Russian Gays Express Disappointment In Clinton, The Associated
Press, 10/14/09
220 Q&A: The Magnitsky Affair, BBC, 7/11/13
221 Hillary Clinton, Op-Ed, Hillary Clinton: Trade With Russia Is a Win-Win, The
Wall Street Journal, 6/19/12; Juleanna Glover, Magnitsky List: Powerful, if not
Perfect, Politico, 4/19/13; Jamison Firestone, Abandoning Sergei Magnitsky, Foreign
Policy, 6/21/12
222 Human Rights Watch, Country Summary, Russia, 1/31/13
223 Ashley Killough, Clinton Criticizes Romneys Remarks On Russia, CNN, 4/1/12
224 Barton Gellman, Aaron Blake and Greg Miller, Edward Snowden Comes Forward As
199

Source Of NSA Leaks, The Washington Post, 6/9/13

225 Will Englund, Snowden Stayed At Russian Consulate While In Hong Kong, Report
Says, The Washington Post, 8/26/13
226 Ellen Barry, While N.S.A. Leader Stays In Hiding, Russian TV Builds A Pedestal For
Him, The New York Times, 6/28/13
227 Emma Roller, Hillary Clinton: Edward Snowdens Leaks Helped Terrorists,
National Journal, 4/25/14
228 Mark Landler and Amy Chozick, Unfinished Business Complicates Clintons
Diplomatic Legacy, The New York Times, 4/16/14
229 Philip Rucker, Hillary Clintons Putin-Hitler Comments Draw Rebukes As She
Wades Into Ukraine Conflict, The Washington Post, 3/5/14
230 Philip P. Pan, Ukraines Extension Of Russian Base Lease May Challenge U.S. Goals
In The Region, The Washington Post, 4/28/10
231 Secretary Clinton, Press Conference With Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych,
Kiev, Ukraine 7/2/10
232 Sangwon Yoon, Daryan Krasnolutska and Katerina Choursina, Russia Stays In
Ukraine As Putin Channels Yanukovych Request, Bloomberg News, 3/4/14
233 Lesley Clark, President Obama Announces Sanctions Against Russian And
Ukrainian Officials, McClatchy Newspapers, 3/7/14
234 Clinton Global Initiative, President Obama And President Clinton To Hold
Conversation On Health Care At 2013 CGI Annual Meeting, Press Release, 9/20/13
235 President Barack Obama, Press Conference At G-20 Summit, London, UK, 4/2/09
236 President Barack Obama, Remarks On A New Beginning, Cairo, Egypt, 6/4/09
237 Bill Keller, Reverberations As Door Slams On Hope Of Change, The New York
Times, 6/13/09
238 Laura Secor, The Iranian Vote, The New Yorker, 6/13/09
239 Robert Talt, Iran Election Turnouts Exceeded 100% In 30 Towns, Website Reports,
The Guardian, 6/17/09
240 Laurent Lozano, Iranian Elections Deal Blow To Obamas Hopes For Dialogue,
Agence France-Presse, 6/13/09
241 Abbas Milani, The Green Movement, United States Institute For Peace, Accessed
5/1/14
242 Human Rights Watch, Iran: Halt the Crackdown, Press Release, 6/19/09
243 Anna Johnson and Nasser Karimi, Clashes Erupt For 2nd Day In Tehran Over Vote,
The Associated Press, 6/14/09
244 Robert Worth and Nazila Fathi, Iranian Judiciary Official Acknowledges Torture of
Some Protestors After Election, The New York Times, 8/9/09
245 Robert Worth and Nazila Fathi, Defiance Grows As Irans Leader Sets Vote Review,
The New York Times, 6/16/09
246 Robert Burns, Clinton: US Intent On Direct Talks With Iran, The Associated Press,
6/18/09
247 Lachlan Carmichael, US Asks Twitter To Maintain Service After Iran Vote: Official,
Agence France-Presse, 6/16/09
248 Glenn Kessler, U.S. Disinvites Iranian Diplomats From July 4 Events at U.S.
Embassies, The Washington Post, 6/25/09

Mark Landler, Clinton Outlines Obamas Agile Agenda On Rights, The New York
Times, 12/15/09
250 Farah Stockman, US Funds Dry Up For Iran Rights Watchdog, The Boston Globe,
10/6/09
251 The Arab Spring: A Year Of Revolution, NPR, 12/17/11
252 Kareem Fahim, Slap To A Mans Pride Set Off Tumult In Tunisia, The New York
Times, 1/21/11
253 Kareem Fahim, Slap To A Mans Pride Set Off Tumult In Tunisia, The New York
Times, 1/21/11
254 State Department Press Briefing, 1/5/11
255 State Department Press Briefing, 1/10/11
256 State Department Press Briefing, 1/21/11
257 J. Scott Carpenter, Help Tunisia First, Foreign Policy, 2/14/11
258 J. Scott Carpenter, Help Tunisia First, Foreign Policy, 2/14/11
259 Secretary Hillary Clinton, Remarks At U.S. Embassy Tunis, 3/17/11
260 BBC, 6/1/09
261 Secretary Hillary Clinton, Interview With Al Arabiya, 3/2/09
262 Sudarsan Raghavan, Egyptian Reform Activists Say U.S. Commitment Is Waning,
The Washington Post, 10/9/09
263 Sudarsan Raghavan, Egyptian Reform Activists Say U.S. Commitment Is Waning,
The Washington Post, 10/9/09
264 AP News In Brief, The Associated Press, 1/25/11
265 Anti-Mubarak Protests Grow Violent In Egypt, The Associated Press, 1/26/11
266 Bradley Klapper, US Sees Egypt's Gov't As Stable Despite Protests, The Associated
Press, 1/25/11
267 Hamza Hendawi, Egyptians Denounce Mubarak, Clash With Riot Police, The
Associated Press, 1/26/11
268 Peter Nicholas, Adam Entous, and Carol E. Lee, Hillary Clinton's Legacy at State
Dept.: A Hawk With Clipped Wings, The Wall Street Journal, 5/30/14
269 CNNs State Of The Union, 1/30/11
270 Fox News Fox News Sunday, 1/30/11
271 Fox News Fox News Sunday, 1/30/11
272 Michael Slackman, Omar Suleiman: A Choice Likely To Please The Military, Not The
Crowds, The New York Times, 1/30/11
273 Michael Slackman, Omar Suleiman: A Choice Likely To Please The Military, Not The
Crowds, The New York Times, 1/30/11
274 President Barack Obama, Remarks On The Situation In Egypt, Washington, DC,
2/1/11
275 William Douglas and Warren P. Strobel, Obama Officials Urge Egyptians To Back
Slow-Motion Change, McClatchy Newspapers, 2/5/11
276 William Douglas and Warren P. Strobel, Obama Officials Urge Egyptians To Back
Slow-Motion Change, McClatchy Newspapers, 2/5/11
277 William Douglas and Warren P. Strobel, Obama Officials Urge Egyptians To Back
Slow-Motion Change, McClatchy Newspapers, 2/5/11
249

Egypt Unrest: US Disowns Envoy Comment On Hosni Mubarak, BBC, 2/5/11; Josh
Rogin, The Inside Story On The Exploding Egypt Envoy, Frank Wisner, Foreign
Policys The Cable, 2/7/11
279 Josh Rogin, The Inside Story On The Exploding Egypt Envoy, Frank
Wisner, Foreign Policys The Cable, 2/7/11
280 Mark Landler, Helene Cooper, and David D. Kirkpatrick, Diplomatic Scramble As
Ally Is Pushed To The Exit, The New York Times, 2/1/11
281 Egypt Unrest: US Disowns Envoy Comment On Hosni Mubarak, BBC, 2/5/11
282 Josh Rogin, The Inside Story On The Exploding Egypt Envoy, Frank
Wisner, Foreign Policys The Cable, 2/7/11
283 Indira A. R. Lakshmanan and Hans Nichols, Obama Leadership Tested By FastChanging Egypt Crisis, Bloomberg, 2/14/11
284 David D. Kirkpatrick, Egypt Erupts in Jubilation as Mubarak Steps Down, The New
York Times, 2/11/11
285 Bradley Klapper, US Sees Egypt's Gov't As Stable Despite Protests, The Associated
Press, 1/25/11; President Barack Obama, Remarks on the Situation in Egypt,
Washington, D.C., 2/1/11; William Douglas and Warren P. Strobel, Obama Officials
Urge Egyptians To Back Slow-Motion Change, McClatchy, 2/5/11. Josh Rogin, The
Inside Story On The Exploding Egypt Envoy, Frank Wisner, Foreign Policys The
Cable, 2/7/11
286 David E. Sanger, As Mubarak Digs in, U.S. Policy in Egypt Is Complicated, The
New York Times, 2/5/11
287 Peter Nicholas and Paul Nicholas, Obama Seeks A New Policy In The Middle East,
Los Angeles Times, 2/26/11
288 ABC News, This Week, 2/20/11
289 Secretary Hillary Clinton, Interview With Al Arabiya, 3/2/09
290 Rory McCarthy, Top US Officials Dispatched To Syria As Clinton Pursues Middle
East Peace On Many Fronts, The Guardian, 3/3/09
291 Andy Soltis, Hill Buddies Up To Syria, New York Post, 3/3/09
292 Secretary Of State Hillary Clinton, Interview With Fox News James Rosen, 4/25/09
293 Karen DeYoung, Iraq Militant Groups Pipeline Through Syria Revived After Long
Gap, The Washington Post, 5/11/09
294 Arthur MacMillan, Iraqi, Syrian Leaders At Loggerheads Over Terror
Claims, Agence France Press, 8/31/09
295 Elizabeth A. Kennedy, US Technology Executives In Syria, The Associated Press,
6/15/10
296 US To Appoint New Ambassador To Syria: Official, Agence France Presse, 6/24/09
297 Elise Labott, U.S. To Send Ambassador Back To Syria, CNN, 6/23/09
298 Secretary Hillary Clinton, Press Conference With Palestinian Authority Prime
Minister Salam Fayyad, 7/24/09
299 CNNs Newsroom, 7/27/09
300 Sharon Otterman, U.S. Opens Way To Ease Sanctions Against Syria, The New York
Times, 7/28/09
301 State Department Press Briefing, 11/17/09
302 US Envoy Stresses Syria Role In Mideast Peace, Agence France Presse, 1/20/10
278

Tim Lister, Wikileaks: Syria Accused Of Supplying SCUD Missiles To

Hezbollah, CNN, 12/7/10
304 Albert Aji and Elizabeth A. Kennedy, Syria, Iran Affirm Ties Despite US Calls, The
Associated Press, 2/25/10
305 Albert Aji and Elizabeth A. Kennedy, Syria, Iran Affirm Ties Despite US Calls, The
Associated Press, 2/25/10
306 Robert Burns, US Lifts Sanctions Against Russians Linked To Iran, The Associated
Press, 5/21/10
307 U.S. Says Syria Very Interested In Pursuing Peace Talks With Israel, Haaretz,
9/28/10
308 Assad Visits Iran To Boost Ties, Al Jazeera, 10/3/10
309 Jay Solomon, U.S. Moves to Shut Embassy in Syria, The Wall Street Journal,
1/21/12
310 Death Toll In Syrias Civil War Above 150,000: Monitor, Reuters, 4/1/14
311 Thousands March To Protest Syria Killings, The New York Times, 3/24/11
312 CBSs Face The Nation, 3/27/11
313 Karen DeYoung, Iraq Militant Groups Pipeline Through Syria Revived After Long
Gap, The Washington Post, 5/11/09
314 Charles Levinson and Jay Solomon, Syria Gave Scuds To Hezbollah, U.S. Says, The
Wall Street Journal, 4/14/10
315 Assad Visits Iran To Boost Ties, Al Jazeera, 10/3/10
316 Editorial, Can Syrias Dictator Reform? The Washington Post, 3/29/11
317 Paul Richter and Patrick J. McDonnell, U.S. Pulls Its Ambassador From Syria, Los
Angeles Times, 10/24/11
318 James Ball, Obama Issues Syria A Red Line Warning On Chemical Weapons, The
Washington Post, 8/20/12
319 Dana Hughes, Clinton: Assads Chemical Weapons A Red Line For Us, ABC
News, 12/4/12
320 Joby Warrick, More Than 1,400 Killed In Syrian Chemical Weapons Attack, U.S.
Says, The Washington Post, 8/20/13
321 Paige Lavender, Hillary Clinton Supports Obamas Call To Congress To approve
Military Action In Syria, The Huffington Post, 9/3/13
322 Mark Landler and Jonathan Weisman, Obama Delays Syria Strike To Focus On A
Russian Plan, The New York Times, 9/10/13
323 Shushannah Walshe and Dana Hughes, Hillary Clinton Supports White House on
Syria, ABC News, 9/9/13
324 Noah Schachtman and Christopher Dickey, Western Intelligence Suspects Assad
Has A Secret Chemical Stockpile, The Daily Beast, 5/2/14
325 Noah Schachtman and Christopher Dickey, Western Intelligence Suspects Assad
Has A Secret Chemical Stockpile, The Daily Beast, 5/2/14
326 Noah Schachtman and Christopher Dickey, Western Intelligence Suspects Assad
Has A Secret Chemical Stockpile, The Daily Beast, 5/2/14
327 Anne Barnard, Syria Death Toll Reported To Rise By 10,000 In Less Than 2
Months, The New York Times, 5/19/14
328 Hillary Clinton, Op-Ed, Security and Opportunity for the Twenty-first Century,
Foreign Affairs, 11-12/07
303

Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu, Clinton Sidesteps Her United Jerusalem' Pledge, Arutz
Sheva, 9/5/10
330 David Morgan, Clinton Says U.S. Could Totally Obliterate Iran, Reuters, 8/22/08
331 Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu, Clinton Sidesteps Her United Jerusalem Pledge, Arutz
Sheva, 9/5/10
332 Elizabeth Dias, Jimmy Carter Talks About Iran, Campus Rape, Jesus Christ and the
Paintings of W., Time, 4/10/14
333 Joel Greenberg, Israel, U.S. At Odds Over Red Line For Iran, The Washington
Post, 9/10/12
334 Vaughn Hillyard, Hillary Clinton Touts Record on Iran, Israel, NBC News, 5/14/14
335 Vaughn Hillyard, Hillary Clinton Touts Record on Iran, Israel, NBC News, 5/14/14
336 Katie Glueck, Hillary Clinton defends Israel record, Politico, 5/14/14
337 Mark Landler, Kerry Takes Personal Approach To Mideast Peace, The New York
Times, 11/7/13
338 Katie Glueck, Hillary Clinton Defends Israel Record, Politico, 5/14/14
339 Katie Glueck, Hillary Clinton Defends Israel Record, Politico, 5/14/14
340 Mark Landler and Amy Chozick, Hillary Clinton Struggles To Define A Legacy In
Progress, The New York Times, 4/16/14
341 Mark Landler, Kerry Takes Personal Approach To Mideast Peace, The New York
Times, 11/7/13
342 Secretary Hillary Clinton, Press Availability With Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed
Ali Aboul Gheit, Washington, DC, 5/27/09
343 Howard LaFranchi, Hillary Clinton To AIPAC: New Israeli Settlements Complicate
US Goals On Iran, The Christian Science Monitor, 3/22/10
344 Secretary Hillary Clinton, Remarks At 2010 AIPAC Policy, Conference,
Washington, DC, 3/22/10
345 Glenn Kessler, Clinton Rebukes Israel Over East Jerusalem Plans, Cites Damage To
Bilateral Ties, The Washington Post, 3/13/10
346 Glenn Kessler, Clinton Rebukes Israel Over East Jerusalem Plans, Cites Damage To
Bilateral Ties, The Washington Post, 3/13/10
347 Mark Landler and Steven Lee Myers, Obama Sees 67 Borders As Starting Point For
Peace Deal, The New York Times, 5/19/11
348 Israel Not Invited To NATO Summit In Chicago, The Associated Press, 5/11/12
349 Anti-Defamation League, ADL Urges Secretary Clinton: Find Way To Include Israel
In NATO Summit After Highly Politicized Veto By Turkey, Press Release, 5/3/12
350 Josh Rogin, Why Did The U.S. Exclude Israel From The New Counterterrorism
Forum? Foreign Policys The Cable, 6/12/12
351 Josh Rogin, Why Did The U.S. Exclude Israel From The New Counterterrorism
Forum? Foreign Policys The Cable, 6/12/12
352 Ron Kampeas, Clinton: Undivided Jerusalem, Jewish Telegraph Agency, 9/12/07
353 Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu, Clinton Sidesteps Her United Jerusalem Pledge, Arutz
Sheva, 9/5/10
354 Secretary Hillary Clinton, Interview With Amira Hanania Rishmawi of Palestine TV
and Udi Segal of Israel Channel 2, U.S. State Department, 9/3/10
355 Hillary Clinton, Remarks At The Women of the World Conference, New York, NY,
4/3/14
329

Gary Thomas, Effectiveness Of Proposed UN Sanctions On Iran Debatable, Voice Of

America, 5/24/10
357 Gary Thomas, Effectiveness Of Proposed UN Sanctions On Iran Debatable, Voice Of
America, 5/24/10
358 Secretary Hillary Clinton, Committee On Foreign Affairs, U.S. House Of
Representatives, Testimony, 4/22/09, p. 41
359 Secretary Hillary Clinton, Remarks At Joint Press Availability With Colombian
President Alvaro Uribe, 6/9/10
360 UN Sanctions Against Iran, BBC, 7/26/10
361 Neil MacFarquhar, U.S. Circulates New Iran Sanctions Draft, The New York Times,
3/4/10
362 Major Powers Wrap Up Constructive Talks On Iran Sanctions, Agence FrancePresse, 4/15/10
363 Major Powers Wrap Up Constructive Talks On Iran Sanctions, Agence FrancePresse, 4/15/10
364 Paul Richter and Megan Stack, Officials To Withdraw Toughest Sanctions Against
Iran, McClatchy-Tribune News Service, 3/25/10
365 Edith Lederer, China Wants Changes To Iran Sanctions Proposal, The Associated
Press, 4/21/10
366 Edith Lederer, China Wants Changes To Iran Sanctions Proposal, The Associated
Press, 4/21/10
367 Glenn Kessler and Colum Lynch, U.S., Partners Agree To Sanctions On Iran, The
Washington Post, 5/19/10
368 Paul Richter and Christi Parsons, New Iran Sanctions Aim At Ships, Weapons,
McClatchy-Tribune News Service, 5/18/10
369 Edith Lederer, US Gets China, Russia On Board For Iran Sanctions, The Associated
Press, 5/19/10
370 David Crawford, Richard Boudreaux, Joe Lauria, and Jay Solomon, U.S. Softens
Sanction Plan Against Iran, The Wall Street Journal, 3/25/10
371 Matthew Lee and Edith Lederer, Clinton Iran Sanctions Will Be Toughest Ever, The
Associated Press, 6/8/10
372 Neil MacFarquhar and David Sanger, Sanctions Effort May Open Door To Press Iran
Central Bank, The New York Times, 5/20/10
373 Paul Richter, U.N. Adopts New Sanctions Against Iran, McClatchy-Tribune News
Service, 6/9/10
374 Glenn Kessler, U.N. Vote On Iran Sanctions Not A Clear-Cut Win For Obama, The
Washington Post, 6/9/10
375 Editorial, Hillary Clinton At The Buzzer, The Wall Street Journal, 5/19/10
376 Gabriel Debenedetti, Hillary Clinton Defends State Department Record Amid
Criticism, Reuters, 5/14/14
377 David Crawford, Richard Boudreaux, Joe Lauria and Jay Solomon, U.S. Softens
Sanction Plan Against Iran, The Wall Street Journal, 3/25/10; David Sanger and Mark
Landler, Major Powers Have Deal On Sanctions For Iran, The New York Times,
5/18/10
378 Colum Lynch, Power Players: Handful Will Decide Whether, And How, To Sanction
Iran, The Washington Post, 3/4/10
356

Obama, Hu In Iran Sanctions Breakthrough: US, Agence France-Presse, 4/13/10

Katie Couric, Frances Sarkozy: Patience Has Its Limits, CBS News, 4/12/10
381 Robert Burns, US Lifts Sanctions Against Russians Linked To Iran, The Associated
Press, 5/21/10
382 Robert Burns, US Lifts Sanctions Against Russians Linked To Iran, The Associated
Press, 5/21/10
383 Robert Burns, US Lifts Sanctions Against Russians Linked To Iran, The Associated
Press, 5/21/10
384 Joby Warrick, Diplomacy And Pressure Bring Mixed Results, The Washington
Post, 9/25/12
385 David E. Sanger, Obama Order Sped Up Wave of Cyberattacks Against Iran, The
New York Times, 6/1/12
386 How Close is Iran to having a nuclear bomb? The Economist, 6/26/13
387 Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes, HRC, p. 187
388 Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes, HRC, p. 187-188
389 Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes, HRC, p. 188-191
390 Matthew Lee, Congress Looks To Bolster Iran Sanctions, The Associated Press,
4/29/09
391 Rep. Berman Introduces Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act, Press Release,
5/8/09
392 US Lawmakers Press Obama On Iran, Agence France-Presse, 7/20/09
393 Robert Burns, US: No Snap Judgment This Week On Iran Nukes, The Associated
Press, 9/29/09
394 Bridget Johnson, House Iran sanctions letter going to be sent to Obama On
Monday, The Hill, April 17, 2010.
395 Paul Richter, White House Seeks To Soften Some Iran Sanctions, McClatchyTribune News Service, 6/10/10
396 Paul Richter, White House Seeks To Soften Some Iran Sanctions, McClatchyTribune News Service, 6/10/10
397 Matthew Lee, Congress Seeks Tough Iran Sanctions, The Associated Press, 6/22/10
398 US Senate Passes Sweeping New Iran Sanctions, Agence France-Presse, 6/24/10
399 Matthew Lee, US Hits Iranian Energy Firm With Sanctions, The Associated Press,
9/30/11
400 Paul Richter, U.S. Announces First Penalty Under New Sanctions Against Iran,
McClatchy-Tribune News Service, 9/30/10
401 Hillary Clinton and Timothy Geithner, Press Conference, 11/21/11
402 Hillary Clinton and Timothy Geithner, Press Conference, 11/21/11
403 U.S. To Impose New Sanctions On Iran Over Nuclear Program, Terrorism,
McClatchy-Tribune News Service, 11/21/11
404 U.S. To Impose New Sanctions On Iran Over Nuclear Program, Terrorism,
McClatchy-Tribune News Service, 11/21/11; Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Ros-Lehtinen Says
New Iran Sanctions Positive, But More Pressure Needed, Press Release, 11/21/11
405 Donna Cassata, Senate Clears Way For Passage Of Big Defense Bill, The Associated
Press, 12/1/11
406 Josh Rogin, Menendez Livid At Obama Teams Push To Shelve Iran Sanctions
Amendment, Foreign Policy, 12/1/11
379

380

Josh Rogin, Menendez Livid At Obama Teams Push To Shelve Iran Sanctions
Amendment, Foreign Policy, 12/1/11
408 Josh Rogin, Menendez Livid At Obama Teams Push To Shelve Iran Sanctions
Amendment, Foreign Policy, 12/1/11
409 Josh Rogin, Menendez Livid At Obama Teams Push To Shelve Iran Sanctions
Amendment, Foreign Policy, 12/1/11
410 Carol E. Lee and Keith Johnson, U.S. Targets Irans Central Bank, The Wall Street
Journal, 1/4/12
411 US To Exempt EU, Japan On Iran Sanctions, Agence France-Presse, 3/20/12
412 US Exempts India, But Not China, From Iran Sanctions, Agence France-Presse,
6/12/12
413 Secretary Hillary Clinton, Statement Regarding Significant Reductions Of Iranian
Crude Oil Purchases, Press Release, 6/28/12; Rick Gladstone, U.S. Exempts Singapore
And China On Iran Oil, The New York Times, 6/28/12
414 Bradley Klapper and Matthew Lee, US Clears China, Singapore From Iran Oil
Sanctions, The Associated Press, 6/28/12; Rick Gladstone, U.S. Exempts Singapore
And China On Iran Oil, The New York Times, 6/28/12
415 Irans Riyal Hits Record Low, The Associated Press, 1/2/12
416 Keith Bradsher and Clifford Krauss, Pressed By U.S., Asian Countries Look For
Ways To Reduce Purchases Of Iranian Oil, The New York Times, 1/7/12
417 Keith Bradsher and Clifford Krauss, Pressed By U.S., Asian Countries Look For
Ways To Reduce Purchases Of Iranian Oil, The New York Times, 1/7/12
418 Nasser Karimi and Ryan Lucas, Iran Feels Pinch Of New EU Oil Sanctions, The
Associated Press, 7/1/12
419 Brian Murphy, Iran Clings To Asian Oil Market As Sanctions Bite, The Associated
Press, 8/22/12
420 Mark Landler and Steven Lee Myers, Obama And Congress In Step Over Iran
Sanctions, The New York Times, 8/1/12
421 Brian Murphy, Iran Clings To Asian Oil Market As Sanctions Bite, The Associated
Press, 8/22/12
422 Mark Landler and Steven Lee Myers, Obama And Congress In Step Over Iran
Sanctions, The New York Times, 8/1/12
423 Thomas Erdbrink and Clifford Krauss, Oil Backed Up, Iranians Put It On Idled
Ships, The New York Times, July 4, 2012.
424 Indira A. R. Lakshmanan and Laura Litvan, Senate Votes to Add Iran Sanctions as
White House Objects, Bloomberg, 11/30/12
425 Indira A. R. Lakshmanan and Laura Litvan, Senate Votes to Add Iran Sanctions as
White House Objects, Bloomberg, 11/30/12
426 Joel Greenberg, Israel, U.S. At Odds Over Red Line For Iran, The Washington
Post, 9/10/12
427 Joel Greenberg, Israel, U.S. At Odds Over Red Line For Iran, The Washington
Post, 9/10/12
428 Michael Gordon, Accord Reached With Iran To Halt Nuclear Program, The New
York Times, 11/23/13
429 Dan Merica, Hillary Clinton Walks Tightrope On Iran, Defends State Record,
CNN's Political Ticker Blog, 5/14/14
407

David Willman, Backing Obama, Hillary Clinton Opposes New Iran Sanctions, Los
Angeles Times, 2/2/14
431 Hillary Clinton, Letter to Senator Carl Levin, 1/26/14
432 Hillary Clinton, Letter to Senator Carl Levin, 1/26/14
433 Margaret Chadbourn, Bob Menendez Accuses Obama Administration Of FearMongering Iran Sanctions, Reuters, 11/27/13
434 Elizabeth Dwoskin, Hillary Clinton's Business Legacy At The State Department,
BusinessWeek, 1/10/13
435 Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes, HRC, p. 128
436 Raymond Hernandez, Weiners Wife Didnt Disclose Consulting Work She Did
While Serving In State Dept., The New York Times, 5/16/13
437 Elizabeth Dwoskin, Hillary Clinton's Business Legacy At The State Department,
BusinessWeek, 1/10/13
438 U.S. State Department, Fiscal Year 2012 Agency Financial Report, p. 47
439 John Hudson, Two More Top Officials Leaving State Dept. Economics Team,
Foreign Policy The Cable, 6/26/13
440 Maggie Haberman, Group pushes Hillary Clintons economic ideas, Politico, April
7, 2014.
441 Jeff Gerth and Don Van Natta Jr, Her Way The Hopes And Ambitions Of Hillary
Rodham Clinton, 2007, p. 81, 113-114
442 Alec MacGillis, Scandal At Clinton Inc., The New Republic, 9/22/13
443 Alec MacGillis, Scandal At Clinton Inc., The New Republic, 9/22/13
444 Elizabeth Dwoskin, Hillary Clintons Business Legacy at the State Department,
BusinessWeek, 1/10/13
445 Rosalind S. Helderman, For Hillary Clinton And Boeing, A Beneficial Relationship,
The Washington Post, 4/13/14
446 Rosalind S. Helderman, For Hillary Clinton And Boeing, A Beneficial Relationship,
The Washington Post, 4/13/14
447 Rosalind S. Helderman, For Hillary Clinton And Boeing, A Beneficial Relationship,
The Washington Post, 4/13/14
448 Secretary Clinton, Remarks At USA Pavilion at Shanghai Expo, Shanghai, China,
11/16/09
449 Rosalind S. Helderman, For Hillary Clinton And Boeing, A Beneficial Relationship,
The Washington Post, 4/13/14
450 Rosalind S. Helderman, For Hillary Clinton And Boeing, A Beneficial Relationship,
The Washington Post, 4/13/14
451 MSNBCs First Read, 4/14/14
452 Amy Davidson, The Coming Hillary Clinton Train Wreck, The New Yorkers Close
Read Blog, 9/24/13
453 Michael Hastings, Libya Threatens Clintons Legacy And State Does Damage
Control, Buzzfeed, 9/23/12
454 Hillary Clinton Aide Tells Reporter To Fuck Off And Have A Good Life, Buzzfeed,
9/24/12
455 Emails Show State Department Official Urged Benghazi Contractor To Avoid
Media, Fox News, 12/12/13
430

Gregory Hicks, Hearing, U.S. House of Representatives, Government Oversight And

Reform Committee, 5/8/13
457 Gregory Hicks, Hearing, U.S. House of Representatives, Government Oversight And
Reform Committee, 5/8/13
458 Review Of The Terrorist Attacks On U.S. Facilities In Benghazi, Libya, September
11-12, 2012 Together With Additional Views, Senate Select Committee On Intelligence,
1/15/14, p. 1.
459 State Department Memo Reveals Possible Cover-Ups, Halted Investigations, CBS
News, 6/10/13
460 John Hudson, Exclusive: Whistleblower Says State Department Trying To Bully Her
Into Silence, Foreign Policy, 6/17/13
461 Eli Lake, State Blocks Auditor From Iraq Police Training, The Washington Times,
6/2/11
462 Guy Taylor, Hillary Clinton Blamed In USAID Memos Outlining Chaos In
Afghanistan Aid, The Washington Times, 4/20/14
463 Matthew Rosenberg and Azan Ahmed, US Aid To Afghans Flows On Despite
Warnings Of Misuse, The New York Times, 1/30/14
464 Guy Taylor, Hillary Clinton Blamed In USAID Memos Outlining Chaos In
Afghanistan Aid, The Washington Times, 4/20/14
465 Justine Sharrock, Exclusive: Years After Manning Leaks, State Department Cable
System Lacks Basic Security, Buzzfeed, 10/2/13
466 Justine Sharrock, Exclusive: Years After Manning Leaks, State Department Cable
System Lacks Basic Security, Buzzfeed, 10/2/13
467 United States Senate Office Of Public Records, Accessed 12/20/13
468 Justine Sharrock, Exclusive: Years After Manning Leaks, State Department Cable
System Lacks Basic Security, Buzzfeed, 10/2/13
469 Justine Sharrock, Exclusive: Years After Manning Leaks, State Department Cable
System Lacks Basic Security, Buzzfeed, 10/2/13
470 Justine Sharrock, Exclusive: Years After Manning Leaks, State Department Cable
System Lacks Basic Security, Buzzfeed, 10/2/13
471 Justine Sharrock, Exclusive: Years After Manning Leaks, State Department Cable
System Lacks Basic Security, Buzzfeed, 10/2/13
472 Justine Sharrock, Exclusive: Years After Manning Leaks, State Department Cable
System Lacks Basic Security, Buzzfeed, 10/2/13
473 Justine Sharrock, Exclusive: Years After Manning Leaks, State Department Cable
System Lacks Basic Security, Buzzfeed, 10/2/13
474 Justine Sharrock, Exclusive: Years After Manning Leaks, State Department Cable
System Lacks Basic Security, Buzzfeed, 10/2/13
475 Justine Sharrock, Exclusive: Years After Manning Leaks, State Department Cable
System Lacks Basic Security, Buzzfeed, 10/2/13
476 Justine Sharrock, Exclusive: Years After Manning Leaks, State Department Cable
System Lacks Basic Security, Buzzfeed, 10/2/13
477 Management Alert (Contract File Management Deficiencies), State Departments
Inspector General, 3/20/14, p.1
478 Karen DeYoung, State Departments Inspector General Issues Alert Over $6 Billion
In Contracting Money, The Washington Post, 4/3/14
456

Management Alert (Contract File Management Deficiencies), State Departments

Inspector General, 3/20/14, p. 1
480 Management Alert (Contract File Management Deficiencies), State Departments
Inspector General, 3/20/14, p. 1
481 Audit Of Bureau Of Diplomatic Security Worldwide Protective Services Contracts Task Order 5 For Baghdad Movement Security, State Departments Office Of Inspector
General, 3/13, p. 1
482 Audit Of Bureau Of Diplomatic Security Worldwide Protective Services Contracts Task Order 5 For Baghdad Movement Security, State Departments Office Of Inspector
General, 3/13, p. 5
483 Audit Of Bureau Of Diplomatic Security Worldwide Protective Services Contracts Task Order 5 For Baghdad Movement Security, State Departments Office Of Inspector
General, 3/13, p. 6
484 Audit Of Bureau Of Diplomatic Security Worldwide Protective Services Contracts Task Order 5 For Baghdad Movement Security, State Departments Office Of Inspector
General, 3/13, p. 2
485 Audit Of Bureau Of Diplomatic Security Worldwide Protective Services Contracts Task Order 5 For Baghdad Movement Security, State Departments Office Of Inspector
General, 3/13, p. 14
486 Audit Of The Process To Request And Prioritize Security-Related Activities At
Overseas Posts, Department Of State And The Broadcasting Board Of Governors Office
Of Inspector General, 3/14, p. 1
487 Audit Of The Process To Request And Prioritize Security-Related Activities At
Overseas Posts, Department Of State And The Broadcasting Board Of Governors Office
Of Inspector General, 3/14, p. 2
488 Audit Of The Process To Request And Prioritize Security-Related Activities At
Overseas Posts, Department Of State And The Broadcasting Board Of Governors Office
Of Inspector General, 3/14, p. 1
489 Senator Hillary Clinton, Clinton Introduces Legislation to Prevent Contractors That
Violate Criminal Laws From Obtaining Federal Contracts, Press Release, 4/25/08
490 Senator Hillary Clinton, Clinton Calls On Colleagues To Support Moratorium On
Abusive And Unchecked No-Bid Contracts, Press Release, 3/13/08
491 Senator Hillary Clinton, Clinton Calls On Colleagues To Support Moratorium On
Abusive And Unchecked No-Bid Contracts, Press Release, 3/13/08
492 USASpending, Accessed 3/19/14
493 Senator Hillary Clinton, Senator Clinton Cosponsors Legislation To Ban Use Of
Private Security Contractors In Iraq And Afghanistan, Press Release, 2/28/08
494 Andrew Quinn, As Soldiers Leave, U.S Diplomats Face Huge Iraq Challenge,
Reuters, 12/18/11
495 Senator Clinton, Senator Clinton Calls On Wasteful, Unaccountable Government
Contracts, Press Release, 4/9/08
496 Infra.
497 Andrew Quinn, As Soldiers Leave, U.S Diplomats Face Huge Iraq Challenge,
Reuters, 12/18/11
498 Ibid.
479

Senator Clinton Cosponsors Legislation to Ban Use of Private Security Contractors

in Iraq and Afghanistan, Press Release, 2/28/08
500 USASpending, Accessed 3/25/14
501 Top Donors To Clinton Foundation Include Saudis, Blackwater, The Associated
Press, 12/18/08
502 Jason Ukman, Ex-Blackwater Firm gets A Name Change, Again, the Washington
Post, 12/12/11
503 Jack Quinn, Academi, Accessed 3/26/14
504 Jack Quinn, Academi, Accessed 3/26/14
505 Clinton Foundation, Accessed 3/26/14
506 Yochi J. Dreazen, Senate Probe Exposes Embassy Security Failures, The Wall
Street Journal, 6/11/09
507 Yochi J. Dreazen, Senate Probe Exposes Embassy Security Failures, The Wall
Street Journal, 6/11/09
508 U.S. Senate, Committee On Homeland Security And Governmental Affairs, Ad Hoc
Subcommittee On Contracting Oversight, Hearing, 6/11/09
509 The Project On Government Oversight, Letter To Secretary Hillary Clinton, 9/1/09
510 The Project On Government Oversight, Letter To Secretary Hillary Clinton, 9/1/09
511 The Project On Government Oversight, Letter To Secretary Hillary Clinton, 9/1/09
512 The Project On Government Oversight, Letter To Secretary Hillary Clinton, 9/1/09
513 U.S. Senate, Committee On Armed Services, Inquiry Into The Role And Oversight Of
Private Security Contractors In Afghanistan, Report, 9/28/10
514 U.S. Senate, Committee On Armed Services, Inquiry Into The Role And Oversight Of
Private Security Contractors In Afghanistan, Report, 9/28/10
515 Katz, Marshall and Banks, LLP, Former ArmorGroup North America Director Of
Operations Files False Claims Act Whistleblower Retaliation Law Suit Against
ArmorGroup, Press Release, 9/10/09
516 The Commission On Wartime Contracting, Hearing, 9/14/09
517 U.S. State Department Press Briefing, 9/1/09; U.S. State Department Press Briefing,
9/3/09
518 Ginger Thompson and Mark Landler, Company Kept Kabul Security Contract
Despite Record, The New York Times, 9/11/09
519 USASpending, Accessed 10/29/13
520 U.S. Senate, Committee On Armed Services, Inquiry Into The Role And Oversight Of
Private Security Contractors In Afghanistan, Report, 9/28/10
521 Adam Zagorin, Mutiny In Kabul, Foreign Policy, 1/17/13
522 Adam Zagorin, Mutiny In Kabul, Foreign Policy, 1/17/13
523 Adam Zagorin, Mutiny In Kabul, Foreign Policy, 1/17/13
524 Adam Zagorin, Mutiny In Kabul, Foreign Policy, 1/17/13
525 Management Review of Youth Programs Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs
U.S. Department of State, State Department Inspector General, 10/09
526 Anna Schecter, Critics Blame State Department For Turning A Blind Eye On Sex
Abuse, NBC, 3/14/12
527 Anna Schecter, Critics Blame State Department For Turning A Blind Eye On Sex
Abuse, NBC, 3/14/12
499

Anna Schecter, Critics Blame State Department For Turning A Blind Eye On Sex
Abuse, NBC, 3/14/12
529 Management Review of Youth Programs Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs
U.S. Department of State, State Department Inspector General, 10/09
530 Ibid.
531 Holbrook Mohr and Mitch Weiss, Foreign Exchange Student Protection Plan
Scrapped By State Department, The Associated Press, 3/14/12
532 Holbrook Mohr and Mitch Weiss, Foreign Exchange Student Protection Plan
Scrapped By State Department, The Associated Press, 3/14/12
533 Anna Schecter, Foreign Exchange Students Sexually Abused In Program Overseen
By State Department, NBC, 3/13/12
534 Holbrook Mohr and Mitch Weiss, Foreign Exchange Student Protection Plan
Scrapped By State Department, The Associated Press, 3/14/12
535 Holbrook Mohr and Mitch Weiss, Foreign Exchange Student Protection Plan
Scrapped By State Department, The Associated Press, 3/14/12
536 Holbrook Mohr and Mitch Weiss, Foreign Exchange Student Protection Plan
Scrapped By State Department, The Associated Press, 3/14/12
537 Holbrook Mohr and Mitch Weiss, Foreign Exchange Student Protection Plan
Scrapped By State Department, The Associated Press, 3/14/12
538 Anna Schecter, State Dept: Fifty Teens Allegedly Sexually Abused Or Harassed By
Host Parent Last Year, NBC, 3/15/12
539 Anna Schecter, State Dept: Fifty Teens Allegedly Sexually Abused Or Harassed By
Host Parent Last Year, NBC, 3/15/12
540 State Department Memo Reveals Possible Cover-Ups, Halted Investigations, CBS
News, 6/10/13
541 State Department Memo Reveals Possible Cover-Ups, Halted Investigations, CBS
News, 6/10/13
542 S.A. Miller and Geoff Earle, Officials At Hillary Clintons State Dept. Accused Of
Covering Up Sexual Misconduct, New York Post, 6/11/13
543 The Center For Responsive Politics, Accessed 9/12/13
544 S.A. Miller and Geoff Earle, Officials At Hillary Clintons State Dept. Accused Of
Covering Up Sexual Misconduct, New York Post, 6/11/13
545 John Hudson, US Ambassador To Belgium Denies Accusations He Had Sex With
Minors, Foreign Policy, 6/11/13
546 State Department Memo Reveals Possible Cover-Ups, Halted Investigations, CBS
News, 6/10/13
547 James Rosen, Did Senior State Department Security Officials Commit Perjury, Fox
News, 6/18/13
548 Guy Taylor, Clinton Confidante At Center Of Benghazi Damage-Control Tied To
Probe Of Suspected Diplomat Crimes, The Washington Times, 6/13/13
549 Management Alert (Contract File Management Deficiencies), Department Of State
And The Broadcasting Board Of Governors Office Of Inspector General, 3/20/14, p.1
550 Audit Of The Process To Request And Prioritize Security-Related Activities At
Overseas Posts, Department Of State And The Broadcasting Board Of Governors Office
Of Inspector General, 3/24, p. 21
528

Anna Schecter, Foreign Exchange Students Sexually Abused In Program Overseen

By State Department, NBC, 3/13/12; Holbrook Mohr and Mitch Weiss, Foreign
Exchange Student Protection Plan Scrapped By State Department, The Associated
Press, 3/14/12
552 Mark Leibovich, Hillary Speaks! (Not Really), The New York Times, 5/20/14
553 Josh Rogin, Hillary Clinton Celebrates The Iran Sanctions That Her State
Department Tried To Stop, The Daily Beast, 5/15/14
554 Juleanna Glover, Magnitsky List: Powerful, If Not Perfect, Politico, 4/19/13;
Jamison Firestone, Abandoning Sergei Magnitsky, Foreign Policy, 6/21/12
555 Josh Rogin, Hillarys State Department Refused To Brand Boko Haram As
Terrorists, The Daily Beast, 5/7/14
551