“I don’t consider him a particularly reliable source of information.”
- Hillary Clinton on Dick Cheney

Washington Post has more on the “Return of Hillary Clinton“

It wasn’t the most stirring defense, but a defense it was, and it served as a reminder of Clinton’s relatively low-profile in the first months of her tenure. To an extent, that makes sense; it’s not the job of any Cabinet secretary to overshadow her boss, Obama has generally preferred to make major public announcements himself, and the White House is surely relieved that the Obama vs. Clinton storyline has been largely dormant since the Inauguration.

But Clinton is a bona fide celebrity, the only one in the administration — apologies to Hilda Solis and Shaun Donovan — other than Obama. So when the president needs a surrogate to step up and help deliver his message, and rebut the criticism of a major figure like Cheney, Clinton is the obvious choice.

Frankly, I’m not exactly sure why Cheney keeps going off on Obama. Some have speculated that he thinks Cheney is worried about prosecution, but I honestly don’t think that’s it. Obama isn’t going to risk a show trial. It just won’t happen.

No, I just think Cheney misses the limelight and wants to protect his legacy. And so his logorrhea.

Question: Is Dick Cheney the Republican’s Jimmy Carter?

Discuss.

Did Stevie Wonder feel like a freshman at the senior prom? (AP photo)

Barack Obama is now turning Wednesdays into his own upscale version of Chamber of Commerce/Rotary Club mixers, serving up cocktails, Maryland crab, Wagyu beef, Nantucket scallops and citrus salad — according to a recent Associated Press review of 2009 White House parties.

I confess to not knowing what Wagyu beef is, but I do know the Cardinal Law of Networking: Never act too excited or overeager, regardless of how powerful your potential contact is.

The last thing you want is to be perceived as a fan instead of a potential business partner.

Apparently, several congressmen who have been invited to nibble on Maryland crab this year have been too starstruck to care.

Check out what U.S. Rep Mike Honda (D-Calif.) told the AP about his experience being in the same room as Barack Obama:

“People like me felt comfortable in his presence,” said Rep. Mike Honda, D-Calif., a self-described “poor country boy” who said he felt like a “freshman going to the senior prom” when he attended a White House reception for leaders of the congressional caucuses.

“Sometimes when you’re in the presence of the most powerful person in the world, in the most powerful democracy in the world … I was in awe that I was comfortable,” said Honda, chairman of the Asian Pacific American Caucus. “I think that’s his style and how he grew up, who he is.”

OMG, Mike, please text me and let me know what you’re gonna wear the next time you meet the president!

U.S. Rep Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) is blown away that Obama watched a football game with him.

Smitten even more is U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), a guest at the same Super Bowl party.

“My favorite part was when he personally served us cookies — oatmeal raisin — when we were watching the game,” she said.

It is true that relationships and status can dramatically change when your colleague gets a big promotion. But Klobuchar served for two years in the Senate with Obama, likely rubbing elbows with him before at left-wing ice cream socials.

Now, she’s openly gushing about him serving her cookies.
**
Darren Garnick is a Boston-area freelance writer and documentary filmmaker. For more political schlock, visit www.cultureschlock.com

What a difference a day makes…

ALBANY – Gov. Paterson, defying the liberal wing of his Democratic Party, has chosen little-known, NRA-backed, upstate Congresswoman Kirsten Gillibrand to succeed Hillary Rodham Clinton as New York’s junior senator, it was learned last night.

The surprising – and, for many Democrats shocking – decision to pick the conservative Gillibrand, 42, from Hudson in Columbia County, was disclosed by the governor in calls to party officials and some members of the state’s congressional delegation, many of whom said they were unhappy with the selection, sources said.

Gillibrand, a mother of two occasionally resented by colleagues for being an aggressive self-promoter, was strongly backed for the post by Charles Schumer, the state’s senior senator, who said a woman and an upstater was needed on next year’s ticket.

This pick seems to make more sense than Kennedy because a conservative Dem will be more in line with Hillary’s centrist politics. Also, the fact that it’s ruffled some feathers in Manhattan isn’t the worst thing in the world.

More as it develops…

She tried to hold fundraisers to drive down the total, but after Bill’s post-presidency fundraising was revealed recently, I can understand why she put a stop to it and just ate the remaining.

But that doesn’t mean she’s out of the woods yet…

According to fillings with the Federal Election Commission, Mrs. Clinton forgave a total of $13,175,000 in personal funds that she lent to her campaign during the Democratic primary, plus interest.

Even so, Mrs. Clinton still owes millions to vendors, including her former top strategist, Mark Penn. Mr. Penn’s remaining fees represent the single biggest line item on the list of the senator’s unpaid debts, amounting to more than $5.3 million of almost $6.4 million remaining on the books as of the end of November.

The lesson here?

Running for President is an expensive business, but running badly for President is ridiculously expensive.

She doesn’t want to be involved in the “Stop Caroline” campaign in any way, and she’s making that crystal clear.

From Politico:

Prominent Clinton supporters, including Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.), union leader Stuart Applebaum and fundraiser Robert Zimmerman, recently expressed skepticism about the choice, suggesting that Clinton’s supporters would see naming Kennedy — a crucial Obama backer — as a slight.

All three “were told that their comments weren’t appreciated, and that if they have a candidate they prefer that is motivating their comments and actions, they need to make that crystal clear so that nobody thinks we’re behind it,” said a person close to the replacement talks.

Clinton is focused on her transition to the State Department, people close to her say, and being seen as meddling in the Senate choice would likely make her more enemies than friends.

“Sen. Clinton completely respects the privacy of his process so will not be commenting on it or any individual candidate, nor does any third party speak on her behalf,” said her spokesman, Philippe Reines.

By the way, wasn’t it Hillary who came to New York after having never lived there and used her celebrity to win the Senate seat?

Hello Senator Kennedy.

It’s official. She wants it.

And frankly, it could be refreshing to have somebody who hasn’t been a diehard political operative in that seat.

From Politico:

Her move raises the pressure on New York Governor David Paterson either to choose her or to select someone else soon, as Kennedy’s rivals for the seat have already begun to respond to the possibility of her entrance by raising questions about her qualifications and her role in defeating Clinton. But she’s a close ally of President-elect Barack Obama, and Paterson is not particularly indebted to the Clintons.

She’s also reportedly hired a political consultant, Josh Isay, close to Chuck Schumer; his presence indicates that Schumer — a key player here — at least doesn’t object to Kennedy’s bid.

That news about Schumer is important because he probably has a ton of pull when it comes to this pick too.

However, she’s facing some internal opposition because of her “superstar” status and support of Obama early on…

“This isn’t a jihad or anything, but I’d be lying to you if I said that supporters of Hillary don’t remember where she was in the primary,” said Democratic Rep. Anthony Weiner, a possible mayoral candidate who is close to the former first lady.

A senior Democrat said Clinton supporters had expressed their resentment over a possible Kennedy pick to people around Paterson, and that tacit resistance has opened the door to other members of the congressional delegation to violate party taboos and directly criticize a Kennedy.

“I don’t know what Caroline Kennedy’s qualifications are, except that she has name recognition, but so does J.Lo,” another Queens congressman, Gary Ackerman, quipped during a radio interview Monday. “I wouldn’t make J.Lo the senator unless she proved she had great qualifications, but we haven’t seen them yet.”

Manhattan Rep. Carolyn Maloney, who has hired a one-time Paterson consultant to lobby for the Senate appointment, was overheard complaining about Kennedy’s “complete lack of experience” to friends on the floor of the House on Wednesday, according to a member who was within earshot.

My question…is Hillary against Caroline? It seems like once you lose you just have to accept that the person who won has far more leverage and work with them instead of holding grudges. Hillary’s move to Foggy Bottom shows that this is probably her state of mind, so why hasn’t that POV translated to her supporters?

Still, with Edward Kennedy actively pushing Caroline, my guess is that she’s a lock for this position.

More as it develops…

Obama’s golden wordsmith, Jon Favreau, is the guy on the left, and while this is certainly a big nothingburger, he has still had to apologize for it.

From Wash Post:

Asked about the photos, Favreau, who was recently appointed director of speechwriting for the White House, declined comment. A transition official said that Favreau had “reached out to Senator Clinton to offer an apology.”

Favreau is not the first campaign aide whose online presence has proved awkward. Last March, John McCain aide Soren Dayton forwarded an anti-Obama YouTube video to his private Twitter feed linking Obama with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, leading to his suspension from the campaign. And in 2007, two bloggers hired by former North Carolina senator John Edwards stepped down after blog posts they had written before he hired them became a subject of controversy.

Favreau’s case seems unlikely to be so dire; Clinton senior adviser Philippe Reines cast the photos as evidence of increased bonhomie between the formerly rival camps.

“Senator Clinton is pleased to learn of Jon’s obvious interest in the State Department, and is currently reviewing his application,” he said in an e-mail.

Lesson Of The Day: Be careful what you post on social networks. Especially if you’re thinking about going into the government.

Not that this was ever really a realistic scenario, given that he’d have to give up his jet setting lifestyle to do a thankless job…but this was speculation we just couldn’t pass up.

From CNN:

Responding to such speculation, Clinton spokesman Matt McKenna tells CNN that “it’s completely false. President Clinton is excited to expand the work of his foundation which has more than 1,000 staff and volunteers in 44 countries advancing projects on HIV/AIDS, climate change, sustainable economic development and childhood obesity.”

Ultimately, history wasn’t behind this as it appears that the only former Presidents to go back to the legislature didn’t really have anything better to do…

Only two former presidents have made the move from the White House to Capitol Hill. President John Quincy Adams lost his re-election bid in 1828. Two years later he returned to Washington after winning election as a congressman from his home state of Massachusetts. He served in the House of Representatives until his death in 1848.

President Andrew Johnson, who served out the remainder of President Abraham Lincoln’s term, also served briefly in the Senate in 1875, seven years after Congress voted to impeach him.

And scene.

With Hillary Clinton headed to Foggy Bottom in January, speculation about her successor is heating up:

The task of choosing a successor falls to David Paterson, New York’s Democratic governor. Whomever he picks would serve for two years, before a special election in November 2010 to decide who fills the last two years of Clinton’s term.

Paterson has a strong bench to choose from. There are a number of contenders, including at least eight members of New York’s delegation in the House of Representatives, New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, Buffalo Mayor Byron Brown, Bronx Borough President Adolfo Carrion, Nassau County Executive Thomas Suozzi, Caroline Kennedy, and her cousin, Robert Kennedy Jr.

“This is not an election. This is not a campaign. It’s a constituency of one. David Paterson. It’s all about what the governor wants to do,” said political analyst Stuart Rothenberg, editor and publisher of The Rothenberg Political Report.

“Paterson has said he would prefer someone from upstate New York, or a woman or an Hispanic candidate,” Rothenberg said.

As for some of the more unconventional picks, Rothenberg said Paterson could “try to make a splash with a big name like Robert Kennedy Jr.” or a “quirky interesting pick” of someone like Caroline Kennedy, who is not a politician.

But some are suggesting the former president should take his wife’s seat.

In an op-ed column last week in The Washington Post, journalists Karl Meyer and Shareen Blair Brysac urged Paterson to “send Bill Clinton to the Senate.”

Personally, I can’t see it.

Even with the fact that his international activities are likely to be restricted once his wife takes office, it’s hard to see Bill Clinton becoming one man in a group of 100, and a junior member at that. Such a move has only happened twice before in American history; John Quincy Adams was elected to Congress from Massachusetts two years after losing a re-election bid to Andrew Jackson and Andrew Johnson became a Senator seven years after leaving office in disgrace.

It’s hard to see Bill Clinton joining that club.

And the team speaks…

I like all the picks, including Jones and Gates. Obama has to make sure the military understand that he’s a friend, and those two picks will do much to send that message.

The only problem? I think Obama will run into some controversy with Eric Holder. Still, after defending Alberto Gonzales for so long, I doubt Republicans will be make a credible case that the Marc Rich pardon should be grounds for Holder not getting the AG position.

More as it develops…

Is it me, or was this one of those moments during the campaign where the mood and momentum started to shift in Obama’s favor? Because right after this Obama won Iowa and then he was off to the races.

An interesting footnote if nothing else…

After all the lead up, Barack Obama has officially announced Hillary Clinton as his choice to be Secretary of State. Said Obama of Clinton:

She possesses an extraordinary intelligence and toughness, and a remarkable work ethic. … She is an American of tremendous stature who will have my complete confidence, who knows many of the world’s leaders, who will command respect in every capital, and who will clearly have the ability to advance our interests around the world.

This is Obama’s riskiest pick, not because Clinton isn’t acceptably qualified but because of the baggage she carries. We’ll see if No Drama Obama can manage the sometimes vaudevillian act that is the Clintons and their allies.

Meanwhile, Obama has also officially announced he will be keeping on Robert Gates as Secretary of Defenses and will appoint James Jones as National Security Adviser, Eric Holder as Attorney General and Janet Napolitano as Secretary of Homeland Security. He also announced his longtime foreign policy advisor Susan Rice as his appointment for UN Ambassador, a role Obama plans to upgrade to be a Cabinet position.

Obama is certainly moving quickly to get his team in place. And it’s a pretty solid team at that.

This was the last thing that needed to happen, and Bill agreed to it last night. But it looks as if the Obama administration will really try to keep the ex-President in check because there were more conditions. A lot more.

From NY Times:

CHICAGO — Former President Bill Clinton has agreed to disclose publicly the names of more than 200,000 donors to his foundation as part of an accord with President-elect Barack Obama that clears the way for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton to become secretary of state, Democrats close to both sides said on Saturday. [...]

The disclosure of contributors is among nine conditions that Mr. Clinton signed off on during discussions with representatives of Mr. Obama; all go beyond the requirements of law. Among other issues, he agreed to incorporate his Clinton Global Initiative separately from his foundation so that he has less direct involvement. The initiative, which promotes efforts to fight disease, poverty and climate change, would no longer hold annual meetings outside of the United States or accept new contributions from foreign governments.

Mr. Clinton also agreed to submit his future personal speeches and business activities for review by State Department ethics officials and, if necessary, by the White House counsel’s office.

In the end, this really isn’t asking much for an ex-President, and I hope Bill was very cooperative. He owes Hillary that and so much more.

10:40 a.m. ET to be exact.

We all know the names by now.

Gen. Jim Jones for National Security Adviser. Robert Gates for Defense Secretary. And Hillary Clinton for Secretary of State.

CNN has the other names…

Also, two sources close to the transition said Obama will nominate Susan Rice as United Nations ambassador, Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano as Homeland Security secretary and Eric Holder as Attorney General.

No surprises from the No Drama Obama team, and I have to think that this new “leaky” administration is the right way to go. Sure, on the campaign trail Obama’s team was all about strategy, so they kept their cards close to their chests, but it’s a different ball game now so the rules needed to change.

One thing’s for sure…Hillary Clinton will have no problem fitting in.

It hasn’t reached the mainstream media yet, but in the days since Hillary Clinton’s nomination to be Barack Obama’s Secretary of State became official, there’s been some discussion of a little-known provision in the Constitution that could bar Hillary Clinton from serving at Foggy Bottom:

[S]pecifically, Article One, Section Six, also known as the emoluments clause. (”Emoluments” means things like salaries.) It says that no member of Congress, during the term for which he was elected, shall be named to any office “the emoluments whereof shall have been increased during his term.” This applies, we’re advised, whether the member actually voted on the raises or not.

In Clinton’s case, during her current term in the Senate, which began in January 2007, cabinet salaries were increased from $186,600 to $191,300.

The language of the section itself would seem to be rather clear:

No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.

Since the salary for Cabinet Secretaries was increased while Hillary Clinton was a Senator, the Emolument Clause, as it’s called, would seem to apply pretty clearly.

There is a work around, but it’s Constitutionality is dubious:

That “fix” came in 1973, when President Nixon nominated Ohio Sen. William Saxbe (R) to be attorney general after the famed “Saturday Night Massacre” during the Watergate scandal. Saxbe was in the Senate in 1969 when the AG’s pay was raised.

(…)

Democrats in the past have inveighed against this sleight-of-hand. In the Saxbe case, 10 senators, all Democrats, voted against the ploy on constitutional grounds. Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.), the only one of them who remains in the Senate, said at the time that the Constitution was explicit and “we should not delude the American people into thinking a way can be found around the constitutional obstacle.”

Michael Stokes Paulson, a Law Professor who has written on the application of the Emoluments Clause in the past, says this regarding the Clinton appointment:

The Emoluments Clause of Article I, section 6 provides “No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time.” As I understand it, President Bush’s executive order from earlier this year “encreased” the “Emoluments” (salary) of the office of Secretary of State. Last I checked, Hillary Clinton was an elected Senator from New York at the time. Were she to be appointed to the civil Office of Secretary of State, she would be being appointed to an office for which “the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased” during the time for which she was elected to serve as Senator. The plain language of the Emoluments Clause would thus appear to bar her appointment … if the Constitution is taken seriously (which it more than occasionally isn’t on these matters, of course).

(…)

Unless one views the Constitution’s rules as rules that may be dispensed with when inconvenient; or as not really stating rules at all (but “standards” or “principles” to be viewed at more-convenient levels of generality); or as not applicable where a lawsuit might not be brought; or as not applicable to Democratic administrations, then the plain linguistic meaning of this chunk of constitutional text forbids the appointment of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State. I wouldn’t bet on this actually preventing the appointment, however. It didn’t stop Lloyd Bentsen from becoming Secretary of State [This appears to be a typographical error. Bentsen, of course, was Bill Clinton's first Secretary of the Treasury]. But it does make an interesting first test of how serious Barack Obama will be about taking the Constitution’s actual words seriously. We know he thinks the Constitution should be viewed as authorizing judicial redistribution of wealth. But we don’t know what he thinks about provisions of the Constitution that do not need to be invented, but are actually there in the document.

Paulson’s argument is certainly persuasive, and while it’s unlikely under present circumstances that any Court will entertain a lawsuit seeking to invalidate Clinton’s appoint, it’s fairly clear that if the words of the Constitution are supposed to mean what they say, then Hillary Clinton should not be Secretary of State.

It’s supposedly a done deal, so now the press can stop chattering about the Clintons being duplicitous and just accept the fact that Obama is genuinely forming a team of rivals.

From NY Times:

Mrs. Clinton came to her decision after additional discussion with President-elect Barack Obama about the nature of her role and his plans for foreign policy, said one of the confidants, who insisted on anonymity to discuss the situation. Mr. Obama’s office told reporters Thursday that the nomination is “on track” but Clinton associates only confirmed Friday afternoon that she has decided.

“She’s ready,” said the confidant. Mrs. Clinton was reassured after talking again with Mr. Obama because their first meeting in Chicago last week “was so general,” the confidant said. The purpose of the follow-up talk, he added, was not to extract particular concessions but “just getting comfortable” with the idea of working together.

A second Clinton associate confirmed that her camp believes they have a done deal. Senior Obama advisers said Friday morning that the offer had not been formally accepted and no announcement will be made until after Thanksgiving. But they said they were convinced that the nascent alliance was now ready to be sealed.

So the question is now…is Obama inviting drama into his White House? Because that’s what people claim the Clintons are almost genetically incapable of avoiding.

Well, we need to consider that when Hillary was a New York Senator, there was little to no drama coming out of her camp. Only when the presidential campaign spun up and Bill started running his mouth off did the drama start to reach a fever pitch. So it could be Bill who is actually the problem, and this shuts him down cold. Hillary is now the boss and Bill will be the sidekick. And I’m sure this is where she wanted him anyway.

Still, folks like Bob Woodward are baffled by this move…

Being president is about control, and tell me who ever controlled Bill or Hillary Clinton. They can’t control each other. … I think it’s because Warren Buffett and Paul Volcker and others have convinced Obama, ‘You’re going to have to focus like a laser on the economy. That’s issue Number One. And give Hillary and Bill the world.’ … I think people are fantasizing or smoking something if they think Joe Biden’s going to call Hillary Clinton up and say, ‘This is what we want you to do.’

OR…this will be a partnership between the three of them (Obama, Hillary & Joe) and they’ll work as a team.

Which scenario do you think is more plausible? Rogue Hillary or cooperative teamwork lead by Obama’s worldview?

Yes, that was rhetorical.

In any event…

I think Hillary should take this spot for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is this seems to be a good stepping stone towards the Presidency and one of the only ones Hillary really has left. And this way she a) doesn’t have to be responsible for passing bad legislation in the Senate for 4 to 8 years and b) strengthens her foreign policy credentials on the world stage during the second presidency in a post 9/11 world.

And sure, the Secretary of State position hasn’t been a good way to become President for a while now, but nobody had the star power nor the tens of millions of votes Hillary had. She’s in a completely different position and those who cite history as a judge of whether or not she’ll be viable in 2016 are ignoring the fact that she’s, well, Hillary Clinton.

Am I crazy here?

The will-she-or-won’t-she questions surrounding Hillary Clinton and the State Department took yet another turn this morning. Seems like Bill Clinton is willing to make some concessions to help his wife land the job:

Clinton has agreed to release the names of several major donors to his charitable foundation and will submit future foundation activities and paid speeches to a strict ethics review, said Democrats knowledgeable about the discussions.

They also said that Clinton would step away from day-to-day responsibility for his foundation while his wife serves and would alert the State Department any new sources of income and to his speechmaking. The Democrats spoke only on grounds of anonymity because of the private nature of the Cabinet-selection process.

If true, this development would seem to indicate Hillary Clinton wants the job, despite rumors to the contrary.

This has all devolved quickly into political theater, which is what you get whenever the Clintons are involved. I’m no longer even sure if Senator Clinton’s qualifications have anything to do with the possible State job. Is this just payback for her being a tireless Barack Obama booster and making sure her supporters didn’t bolt to John McCain? Is this just a way for Obama to kick Bill Clinton off the world stage (and a way for Hillary to finally get back at Bill by overtaking him in importance on the world stage)? Does this have anything to do with “change” or is this Chicago-style politics being played on the national stage?

In my mind, Senator Clinton’s qualifications for Secretary of State are quite average. Yes, she has traveled the globe and can leverage existing relationships with world leaders, but we have no proof that she’s exceptionally gifted in foreign policy or a particularly skilled diplomat. It’s like picking up a track star to play football. Sure, we know he can run, but can he catch too?

It’ll be interesting to see how this all plays out.

The air-tight campaign of Barack Obama has turned into the leak-a-minute transition of president-Elect Obama. Floating names is obviously important but, if things don’t work out, it can make Obama’s team look sloppy. Is that what’s about to happen with the whole Hillary Clinton at State scenario? Apparently, she may not be interested.

Hillary Rodham Clinton isn’t certain she would accept the Secretary of State post even if Barack Obama offers it to her, several people close to the former first lady say.

Press reports that portray Clinton as willing to accept the job – once the Obama transition team vets Bill Clinton’s philanthropic and business ventures – are inaccurate, one Clinton insider told Politico.

“A lot of the speculation and reporting is out ahead of the facts here,” said the person, who requested anonymity. “She is still weighing this, independent of President Clinton’s work.”

Politically, I can see why Clinton would turn down the invitation to join Obama’s cabinet. Despite all her talk during the campaign of being ready on day one, she’s not exactly a foreign policy maven. Her passion is domestic issues and she’d likely be of greater service from her position in the Senate. Plus, Secretary of State is a thankless job, particularly in the current mess that is international affairs. Does she want to risk damaging her image if things don’t go well on the world stage the next four years?

Whatever the outcome, I think it’s clear by this leak that Clinton wants to make this appear to be her decision, not something Obama lured her in to and not something her husband can facilitate or complicate by his oversized presence. Clinton’s not going to do anything at this point that’s not good for Clinton. If she ends up in Obama’s cabinet, you better believe it will appear to be as a favor to Obama (and duty to country). I don’t see it happening any other way.

Earlier today we heard that Bill Clinton is getting vetted just to make sure that nothing embarrassing comes out if Hillary says yes, and now we hear that she’s going to accept the position…so does this mean that the vetting of Bill is over or close to it?

In any event…from the Guardian…

Hillary Clinton plans to accept the job of secretary of state offered by Barack Obama, who is reaching out to former rivals to build a broad coalition administration, the Guardian has learned.

Obama’s advisers have begun looking into Bill Clinton’s foundation, which distributes millions of dollars to Africa to help with development, to ensure that there is no conflict of interest. But Democrats do not believe that the vetting is likely to be a problem. [...]

Although the two clashed during the election campaign over tax policy and withdrawal from Iraq, they have more in common than they have differences. They both favour the closure of the Guantánamo Bay detention centre, an increase in US troops to Afghanistan, immigration reform, stem cell research and measures to tackle climate change, and oppose torture and the widespread use of wire-tapping.

Actually, even though it hasn’t been historically the best way to the Presidency in recent years, we all know that Biden won’t be running in 2016, so this keeps Hillary on the world stage, keeps Bill in a cage and therefore helps Obama keep everybody in check.

A brutally smart move here at first glance, but we’ll obviously have to see how it pans out. But considering that Hillary has branded herself as “tough”, I’m sure she’ll bring that and more back to Foggy Bottom.