« Previous | Main | Next »

White House Blames Clintons for Document Delay

Share

February 27, 2008 1:02 PM

ABC News' Rick Klein Reports: The White House on Wednesday blamed the Clintons for a month-long delay in the release of some 11,000 pages of records relating to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's years as first lady, despite Sen. Clinton's contention at Tuesday night's debate that she has "urged that the process [of releasing documents] be as quick as possible."

White House Press Secretary Dana Perino said that Clinton representatives have known since Jan. 31 that the documents -- Hillary Clinton's daily public schedule during her husband's presidency -- have been deemed ready for public release by the National Archives.

But under a November 2001 exectuive order, the White House can't make them available to the public until approval is given by a designated representative of former President Bill Clinton.

"Presently, we have not received notice that the Clinton representative has reached a decision on the release or withholding of any of Mrs. Clinton's schedules," Perino said, adding that the White House has not objected to approval of any of the more than 550,000 pages of documents released so far from the Clinton years.

"It is our intent and has been the practice to act on any requests as quickly as possible," Perino said.

On Tuesday, Clinton was asked about the backlog by debate moderator Tim Russert. She said she had urged both her husband's representatives and the Bush administration to move as quickly as possible in releasing the records.

"I've urged that the process be as quick as possible," said Clinton, D-N.Y. "And I have urged that our end of it move as expeditiously as we can. Now, also, President Bush claims the right to look at anything that is released, and I would urge the Bush White House to move as quickly as possible."

Pressed by Russert whether, after a month, the documents could be sent to the White House for final review "immediately," Clinton responded: "As soon as we can, Tim. I've urged that, and I hope it will happen."

Perino said Wednesday that the backlog exists entirely on the Clintons' end.

"There are none that are ripe for White House action that we know of," she said. "And, no, to my knowledge we have not been contacted by Mrs. Clinton or anyone else about moving more quickly with the review and release of Clinton material, specifically, her schedules."

UPDATE: In response to the comments from the White House, the Clinton Foundation issued this statement from Bruce Lindsey -- the former president's point person for reviewing documents for public release -- indicating that the documents will be sent to the White House for final review within the next two weeks:

"To be clear, there is no delay. After a six month review, [the National Archives and Records Administration] finished the first step of the process of reviewing 11,000 pages of First Lady Hillary Clinton schedules on January 31, 2008.  I have been reviewing those schedules and expect to complete that part of the process within the 45 day window allotted by NARA. More importantly, because of President Clinton's commitment to make public a full record of his presidency, I will be recommending that NARA release more information than they currently have designated for release."

February 27, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (165)

User Comments

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

Another clintonian talk, no honest words, what a shame, how media or anybody right thinking can treat Hillary differently? That is another shameful situation.

Posted by: BKMC | Feb 27, 2008 1:12:57 PM

After all Bush and his white house we should all care what they are saying.

Posted by: Bishop | Feb 27, 2008 1:16:37 PM

Again, she is not telling the truth. she plays games and think people are stupid, she is hiding a lot of things. she is not trustworthy at all.she is fake, mean and thirsty of power. this is dangerous for American people.

Posted by: john smith | Feb 27, 2008 1:16:51 PM

Well lets all go down to washington and see if we find one person in the white hous who tells the truth get real

Posted by: Bishop | Feb 27, 2008 1:18:47 PM

Huh. Now we'll see who people believe less - the Bush administration or the Clintons.

Posted by: Paul | Feb 27, 2008 1:19:00 PM

Let's follow Obama's lead from last night's debate as we, too, take her "at her word" and assume that she has indeed tried to urge the federal bureaucracy to release those papers. However,if she is unsuccessful at making this happen,why should we believe that she will be able to get anything done in Washington?

Posted by: Liz Delfs | Feb 27, 2008 1:36:19 PM

OK HRC ball is in your court. This could turn the tide for you, get those papers out and let the reports write volumes on your experience before next Tuesday, hole a press conference about it. This is it, this is yoru moment to show how heavily your experience weighs in.

Posted by: Louis | Feb 27, 2008 1:40:52 PM

Well, if you are going to be in front of the national TV on a debate that you requested, get real and tell the truth. why would she lie publically and advertise herself that she is the best candidate? why can't she reveal her tax return? she is trying to mislead people by trying to play the gender race over and over. she does not believe in anything. she cares about her ambition, going back to white house. Power hungry that is it.

Posted by: john smith | Feb 27, 2008 1:41:46 PM

Why are we wasting our time with this nonsense?

Why isn't the American media doing its job and asking the important questions of BOTH candidates.

Why hasn't Obama addressed the fact that there were straw donations made to his campaign by an Iraqi businessman?

Why hasn't anyone asked about Obama's lack of leadership in the Senate committee on European affairs that he chairs?

Why didn't Tim Russert or Brian Williams press him on the monstrous things that Farrakhan has said about gay and white Americans?

Why didn't Tim Russert or Brian Williams address the fact that it took Hillary Clinton to push Obama to answer the question about whether he REJECTED Farrakhan's support or whether he would just pander to black Democrats?

Posted by: Alex | Feb 27, 2008 1:45:46 PM

In last debate, Clinton could not face the questions honestly. Here eyes not meeting Tim who raised about her tax returns and records of her. If she is nominee who needs her tax return and who is going to blow that.

Posted by: Jay | Feb 27, 2008 1:46:03 PM

Peck, peck, peck, like a flock of chickens on the hunt for microscopic bugs. Have fun!

Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | Feb 27, 2008 2:03:24 PM

Same old HILL/BILL!

Posted by: Casilda | Feb 27, 2008 2:04:26 PM

Oh come on! Do you guys really believe anything the Bush administration says! Man you people are gullable! Don't you realized you are getting snowed. It is no coincidence that Republicans are voting in open primaries for BHO, not because they like him. They don't want her to be the nom. They are going to tear BHO apart if he is the nom. Yea, the Republicans say they would love for Hillary to get the nom., but they are not going to tell the truth, that is not part of their game plan. HILLARY 2008!

Posted by: Heather | Feb 27, 2008 2:05:34 PM


I think things do take a while to get done in govt.

What was going on with Tim Russert?? He appeared aggressive in the way he asked the questions. Brian Williams was calm, what happened to Russert all of a sudden?

Overall I thought the debate was great! I do believe some media coverage has been slanted towards helping Obama, even Stepanopoulos said he has seen this when talking on GMA today. Howard Kurtz of CNN also said the media is not scrutinizing Obama. Maybe we as consumers can encourage them to look closer at his record??

Posted by: fergie | Feb 27, 2008 2:17:50 PM

how can Obama be responsible of Louis Farakhan actions? two different people, two different ideologies and religions. he made it explicit last night that he has denounced him and rejected him. what else do you want. Making false accusations, this is the strength of Hillary supporters. he did not receive any money from an Iraqi businessman. when she loses, she cannot accept it. when she was the front runner at the beginning people did not through these kind of negative accusations on her. she is controlling and mean. be real.

Posted by: john smith | Feb 27, 2008 2:20:33 PM

I love all the questions after the 20th daggone debate....why can't we smear Obama more, but what is the REAL issue?
Since you can't find anything of substance, then you wish to create something. Who cares if its false?! The responses on Rezko apparently haven't been enough, so you just keep pushing, for what? Until someone figures out how to effectively create something with Rezko, or anybody else for that matter, that you all can believe in?!?! And now we have Farrakhan...you, black man must denounce this other black man before we will vote for you....otherwise we will call you anti-semitic and a threat to jews everywhere. Apparently that is the only group of people actually worth anything...no other group could come close.

So let's just keep beating him up with Rezko, beat him with Farrakhan, until someone changes a word in a sentence that will totally give new meaning in order to justify more distortions and making something stick!

But you call Obama sleazy...

Greed and Ignorance is killing this country.

Posted by: LA in Indiana | Feb 27, 2008 2:22:55 PM

Obama gives me the creeps.
I DON'T TRUST HIM.
He does not make me feel good!
If he wins the presidency,
he'll be a big disappointment.
His own words.

Posted by: JJ | Feb 27, 2008 2:43:01 PM

More of her lies and deceit. She came across last night at the debate as though she was mad. Didn't do her much good because Obama came right back at her - when she told him he was passing out fliers with untruths in them. She just can't stand it when someone backs her into a corner with the truth. You just can't trust Hillary. Then to get mad claiming that she is always the first one to answer a question. Did she ever think everyone is treating her with respect in placing her first as a woman. Which is more respect that she has given Obama. Obama stood up to her as usual and gave very good answers.

Posted by: Judy | Feb 27, 2008 2:45:01 PM

Hillary is smarter THAN ALL 3 OF THOSE MEN PUT TOGETHER at last nights debate. Go figure. I never saw a debate handled so poorly. And, to have Obama smirk and wink at Russert.


Posted by: maria | Feb 27, 2008 2:59:48 PM

Seems they're having a hard time with those tax returns too.

Sorry, but how hard is it to get those in order?

Enough lies, enough excuses and enough time wasted on a candidate that should never have been considered as a credible candidate for president. What a shame so many more worthy Democratic candidates were all but ignored because of the 'Clinton brand'.

Posted by: Terri | Feb 27, 2008 2:59:53 PM

Post a comment