Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper

« Previous | Main | Next »

Clinton's 1993 NAFTA Meeting

March 19, 2008 4:58 PM

One interesting event in Sen. Hillary Clinton's just-released schedules from the 1990s comes on Nov. 10 1993, when the former first lady was to serve as the closing act during a briefing on NAFTA, the trade agreement she now assails.

11:30 am -
11:45 am

NAFTA BRIEFING DROP-BY
Room 450, OEOB
CLOSED PRESS

PARTICIPANTS: Approx 120 expected to attend
(See briefing book for further info)

FORMAT:
- Alexis Herman intros HRC for brief remarks
-HRC concludes program

(pp. 1375 and 1376)

Two attendees of that closed-door briefing, neither of whom are affiliated with any campaign, describe that event for ABC News. It was a room full of women involved in international trade. David Gergen served as a sort of master of ceremonies as various women members of the Cabinet talked up NAFTA, which had yet to pass Congress.

"It wasn’t a drop-by it was organized around her participation," said one attendee. "Her remarks were totally pro-NAFTA and what a good thing it would be for the economy. There was no equivocation for her support for NAFTA at the time. Folks were pleased that she came by. If this is a still a question about what Hillary's position when she was First Lady, she was totally supportive of NAFTA.

That first attendee recalls that the First Lady's office in the East Wing put together "the invitation list, who was invited authorizations and all that stuff."

And what is this attendee's response to Clinton today distancing herself from NAFTA? "For people who worked hard to pass NAFTA and who support the importance of markets opening for the economy in the long term, they're very upset. A number of the women who were there are very upset. You need to have some integrity in your position. The Clintons when Bill Clinton was president took a moderate position on trade for Democrats. For her to repudiate that now seems pretty phony."

Recalls a second attendee, "they were looking for women in international trade who supported NAFTA. Senator Clinton came by at the end. And of course she asked for our support and help in passing NAFTA."

Women who attended that event, the second attendee says, have been incredulous to see Clinton distance herself from the trade agreement as she campaigns today. "They're all saying, 'What's this all about?' We all heard it firsthand." She says Clinton isn't being honest with voters today.

- jpt

UPDATE: The Clinton campaign has asked that I post this recent quote on CNN from Mr. Gergen, referenced above, saying, "I was actually there in the Clinton White House during the NAFTA fight and I must tell you Hillary Clinton was extremely unenthusiastic about NAFTA. And I think that’s putting it mildly. I’m not sure she objected to all the provisions of it but she just didn’t see why her husband and that White House had to go and do that fight. She was very unhappy about it and wanted to move on to health care. So I do think there’s some justification for her camp saying, you know, she’s never been a great backer for NAFTA."

It's long-established that Hillary Clinton wanted to tackle health care before NAFTA. I don't know that that necessarily undermines the idea that she supported NAFTA. But if she didn't, then why was she telling this room full of businesswomen how great it would be for the economy?

March 19, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (250)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

She is always laying.
Not a discovery.
Just take it and throw her out of race.
Our votes count.

Posted by: Luda | Mar 20, 2008 11:42:27 AM

I find it interesting that some people feel this story is not relevant. There are statements such as 'all politicians lie,' which seem to dismiss the doubletalk on this issue. Why should we accept that? It has been said before, but if Hillary wants to claim her First Lady years as experience, she needs to own up to all that happened, both positive and negative. Otherwise, she should have just left it alone. Obama is doing that; owning up to the negatives like Rezko and Wright. I can not trust someone who refuses to apologize for past behaviors or admit mistakes. That is what we have in George W. Bush.

This is a shining example of Hillary saying what others want to hear, saying something she does not believe in just to achieve a political goal. It reminds me this behavior did not just start during her run for the White House, it is a pattern of behavior she has engaged in for quite some time. Frankly, it is the type of behavior that turned me off politics since her husband's election.

I have identified myself as a Democrat since I was aware of the concept of President of the United States (Jimmy Carter era); campainged for Mondale/Ferraro in my grade school. But, the negativity and lies I have witnessed in my adult years have soured my thoughts of what democracy means. It wasn't until I heard the words of Barack Obama and realized a candidate who took no money from lobbyists could ever have a shot at becoming President that I have become excited about democracy again. Stories about how a candidate like Hillary Clinton
says things they don't mean remind me of my apathetic voting days that I hope will not return.

Posted by: Carol, WI | Mar 20, 2008 11:22:04 AM

I HAVE always known she was lying to her teeth when she said she never supported NAFTA.

Posted by: Kizeem | Mar 20, 2008 11:11:28 AM

This is race to nominate what might be the next President of the USA not a religious convention on morality. But, WE MUST JUDGE the candidates on the basis of what they say they stand for and if it is discovered that what they say is all lies it matters! We need to inject integrity back into the political process and not allow any candidate to get away with lying over and over and over again. TIME TO GO HILLARY! YES WE CAN!

Posted by: NewDay | Mar 20, 2008 10:39:40 AM

ALL POLITICIANS LIE! EVERY PERSON IN THE WORLD HAS TOLD MORE THAN ONE LIE IN HIS OR HER LIFETIME! WHY IS EVERYONE THROWING STONES WHEN THEY KNOW THAT EACH AND EVERY ONE OF ARE HYPOCRITES IN SOME SHAPE OR FASHION. "HE WHO IS WITHOUT SIN, CAST THE FIRST STONE." IT NEVER CEASES TO AMAZE ME HOW PEOPLE ARE SO QUICK TO JUDGE OTHERS YET FAIL TO LOOK AT THEMSELVES IN THE MIRROR!

Posted by: wake up | Mar 20, 2008 10:25:26 AM

Go go Obama....They can not stop you now....What we need is unity,love and peace and better economy we normal people are the loser..they dont know our problems when they are in the white house....we love and support u.....

Posted by: kibs | Mar 20, 2008 10:09:44 AM

Excuse me? Hillary's campaign asked you to update your reporting with a quote from one of her supporters and you comply? Nice going Jake!

Posted by: Chude | Mar 20, 2008 9:52:36 AM

Yeah that meeting that took place 15 years ago is really important / relevant.

Posted by: Bing! | Mar 20, 2008 9:15:36 AM

"She's a LIAR!"
"No, he's a liar!"
"No, she is!"
"No, he is! And he's a racist!"
"No, she's a racist!"
"I'm gonna tell on you!"
"I'm gonna tell on you first!"

So this is political dialog in our country? Within the same party, no less. Everyone grabs the nearest sound byte and clings to it for dear life.

Nice.

Posted by: Em | Mar 20, 2008 9:09:40 AM

HILLARY, MAKE YOUR HATERS YOUR MOTIVATORS!

GO HILLARY!!! HILLARY 08!!!

Posted by: Eric | Mar 20, 2008 9:03:43 AM

Liars? Seriously? Obama is the liar:
1) He lied about his stance on NAFTA to the OH voters - this has all been proven by the Canadian govt.
2. He lied last Friday when he said he didn't hear Wright's controversial statements, then he said he did in Tuesday's speech.
3. He lied about how much Rezcko gave to him in campaign funds (see court docs).

Are you seriously kidding me? There's something happening here and guess what? It's happening by the end of the week and Obama will step down. There is no way this liar and fraud will step foot in my WHITE HOUSE, period.

Posted by: Jenny | Mar 20, 2008 8:34:36 AM

The Democrat candidates, one of them are a liar, and the other is a racist, you can decide which one is which. BTW, if you believe for a minute that the whole Rev. Wright thing was exposed by anyone other than the Clinton campaign, you are being naive

Posted by: drock | Mar 20, 2008 7:45:57 AM

The topic is Clinton 1993 NAFTA meeting--yet many bloggers mention Obama. He hasn't changed his position on NAFTA, or the war. Let's discuss the topic! This slight of hand to change the discussion so that accountability is never addressed is how Bush/Cheney got re-elected. Clinton did support NAFTA that is the topic for discussion. If you support Clinton embrace her decisions!

Posted by: DQuinn | Mar 20, 2008 7:19:50 AM

The American people are getting exactly what they voted for, lots of boldfaced LIARS! Ron and Dennis were the only honest candidates running this time and both were soundly rejected by the voters. Don't pay any attention to anything the rest of them say and you'll never be disappointed. For example, if this so called "War on Terror" were really true, our borders would be secure. If NAFTA had really been a good thing, our jobs would still be located in America. Our country is now facing so many serious problems and this is what we vote for? These self promoting liars and con artists are the best we can do? This is exactly how we ended up looking for nonexistent WMD's with Bush. This is why our dollar is being destroyed and our rights under the constitution trashed. This is why we now openly torture people. This is why our wars never seem to end and our government must borrow money from our enemy's to fund our stupid foreign policy blunders. It's why our jobs have been shipped overseas with dumb trade policy deals like Clinton's NAFTA. Electing liars who promise "smaller government" is exactly why were nearing 10 trillion in debt. It's why the rest of the world is now shunning the dollar and laughs about the "Stupid Americans". What a sad joke this country is turning into and most Americans are too blind to see it. Perhaps a repeat of the great depression will help them to wake up. Perhaps when the dollar is completely worthless? Just what will it take? Unless a good Independent runs, I'll just sit this one out and prepare my family for the economic nightmare that's now facing our leaderless country.

Posted by: Stephen Clark | Mar 20, 2008 7:19:41 AM

The Clintons are both liars--well known for their ability to lie to the people of America. What will they do, if elected and back in the White House? I bet you know. The first thing, in view of how secrecy, like Bush, is they will lock up/hide all their papers coming from our house. If forced to release them, they will redact three quarters of them. You can bet Bush has plenty of bad embarrassing stuff about Hillary and Bill hiding in his briefcase and will hand over to McCain anything to help him win. The friendship with Poppy Bush was more than a nice little vacation in Maine--it was networking.

Hillary had some eight years as Senator from New York. The excuse that she has a right to change her mind after fourteen years is quite shallow, but understandable, as it seems, stretching the truth and spinning is a Clinton disease caught by their followers. If she were really against nafta, she could have addressed the people of New York with that and done something to help them. She did not. It is only to get votes in Ohio that she lied and no doubt would have told the same lie to the people of Michigan. Little wonder that her minions in Michigan pushed up their primary date in violation of the rules because at that time, the Clintons were running on name recognition and thought they would take the state early before the real issues of this primary were discussed.

Posted by: duck puddle | Mar 20, 2008 7:06:54 AM

Hillary's schedules are not the real issue! It is getting the Republican's out of power that is the most important thing right now. Obama no longer has a chance. The Republicans will scare everyone with Obama's pastor's words and videos. There is no way Obama can win the general election now. We need a revote in both Florida and Michigan in order for any chance for change from the Republican agenda. Obama may be putting his own interests above the countries if he opposes this effort.

Posted by: desertclair | Mar 20, 2008 6:47:41 AM

Hillary (America's Evita) will attempt to destroy the democratic party in her lust for power. Also, the bloggers here still going on about Rev Wright need to get a more interesting life. As a 50 something african american, black church life is filled with hypobole and that was not a "hate filled speech" It was received by the intended audience as a cautionary speech and is very much typical of black church presentations - so I am reading these blogs from people who took a snippet and made a thesis out of it - Give me a break!

Posted by: Ohioliberal | Mar 20, 2008 6:39:48 AM

It is a huge deal. Obama's entire candidacy is based on hope, peace, love and unity, and he is mentored for 20 years by a bigot, a racist, and Anti-White and Anti-American preacher, who was his spiritual adviser. And only when he is caught in a web of lies and deceit does he try and distance himself from his friend and mentor.
Forget about any secret agenda, I want to know, how does Obama really feel about the white race? Read his books, he considers himself black and shuns his white heritage. I want a president who I know is working for all people, not the people of his own race.
I was born and raised in Chicago, very near Mr. Obama's district. Since he was elected to the State Senate, he has done nothing for the people of Illinois, The City of Chicago, so what makes you think he will do anything for the USA & the entire world. He is a self-serving politician, only in this for power and his own political agenda.

Posted by: Jay | Mar 20, 2008 6:01:40 AM

It looks like there is an old fashion blood and guts brawl going on in the Democrat Party. It is also starting to look apparent that you seriously wounding your chances to win in November. Say what you will about John McCain. He is a gentlemen. He is stable. He has split his own blood in defence of this country. This may not be the blog forum to share this information, but you are snatching defeat from the jaws of victory...or something like that.

Posted by: bill | Mar 20, 2008 5:59:23 AM

Also, this Pastor Wright thing is just not a big deal. An angry black man that grew up in the 50s and 60s? Wow, I am shocked.

The people making this a big deal are engaging in the worst kind of racism. What, do you think that Obama has some sort of secret agenda to lead a black revolution and kill whitey? So, no one can run that ever knew someone that felt as though they had been prejudiced and spoke out against it? People are really grasping at straws in an effort to besmirch Obama. I'm not even a big fan, and will probably vote for Nader. But, seriously...how is this a big deal? Can someone explain it to me?

Posted by: Mike | Mar 20, 2008 5:54:07 AM

Post a comment





 

POLITICAL VIDEOS