Political News



KFOR provides you the lastest political news from ABC.

A   A   A
Share

Rep. Jason Chaffetz's Business Card Lists His Gmail Address


ABC News(WASHINGTON) -- Hillary Clinton isn’t the only official who uses a non-government email address. A business card obtained by ABC News shows that Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, lists his Gmail address on his official House card. After it was revealed on Tuesday that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton conducted all of her government business from personal email accounts, personal email has been the topic du jour, and Chaffetz is at the forefront. Chaffetz, who chairs the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, announced Tuesday that his panel would join in an investigation of Clinton’s email use.“Violations of the Federal Records Act within federal agencies is something we take very seriously,” Chaffetz said Tuesday in a statement. “The House Oversight Committee will work with [Rep. Trey] Gowdy and the Select Committee on Benghazi to further explore Hillary Clinton’s use of personal emails while at the State Department.” Chaffetz told ABC News that his business card was not paid for with government funds and that Congress is not subject to the Federal Records Act. He said that he uses both a Gmail account and a government email account.Follow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

Hillary Clinton Ignores Email Controversy at Emily's List Gala


Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images(WASHINGTON) -- Speaking to one of the friendliest possible audiences -- at an event Tuesday night sponsored by the pro-Democrat, pro-women PAC Emily’s List -- the likely 2016 presidential candidate vowed to “beat this drum as long and as loud as it takes” to pass policies like paid family leave and equal pay for women.  “We’ve heard Republicans try to sing out of the same hymnal, talking about income inequality – it’s like watching the end of Casablanca,” Clinton lamented.The former first lady, who admitted she was “still kind of in the grandmother glow” following the birth of her granddaughter, Charlotte, addressed 2016 speculation only indirectly.“Along life’s way, you get the chance to make millions of decisions. Some of them are big, like, do you run for office?” she said, to tumultuous applause.“Others are even bigger,” she continued, “like the ones that Gabby Giffords and her husband, Mark, confronted, like, what do you do when a murderer attacks you and you survive?”But, “don’t you someday want to see a woman president?” she asked the audience. Clinton did weigh in on one important issue: the infamous white and gold/blue and black dress that recently created a firestorm on social media. “Now, I want to answer one question right at the start before it stirs up Twitter. People have read a lot of different things into my pantsuits,” Clinton quipped. “Despite what you might think, this outfit is not actually white and gold.” Some had speculated that the Clinton email controversy would cast a pall over the night’s festivities, but the other politicians who spoke at the event struck a positive, even defiant tone. New mother and Iraq war veteran Rep. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., recalled when her opponent slammed her for worrying too much about fashion.“Yes, I do sometimes look at the clothes I wear…for most of my adult life, I’ve worn one color -- it’s called camouflage," she said.Follow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

House Sends Clean DHS Bill to President Obama


iStock/Thinkstock(WASHINGTON) -- The Department of Homeland Security will be funded through the end of September, with the House voting on final passage of a clean bill on Tuesday.The final vote was 257 to 167, with just 75 Republicans supporting the bill alongside 182 Democrats. All opposition to the measure was cast by Republicans.The bill now heads to the White House for President Obama to sign into law.Follow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

White House Won't Say if Hillary Clinton Broke Law by Using Personal Email at St


State Dept photo(WASHINGTON) -- The White House on Tuesday repeatedly declined to say whether it was appropriate for Hillary Clinton to use solely her personal email account while serving as secretary of state. “Very specific guidance has been given to agencies all across the government, which is specifically that employees in the Obama administration should use their official e-mail accounts when they're conducting official government business,” White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest told reporters at a livelier-than-usual press briefing. In an exchange with ABC News, Earnest would not say whether or not Clinton violated that policy or broke the law by using only her personal account. “I was not in a position to review Secretary Clinton’s personal email. That was the responsibility of Secretary Clinton and her team,” Earnest said. “They say that they turned over thousands of pages and thousands of emails...and that is entirely consistent with the requirements of the Federal Records Act.” Earnest added that he could not say whether the White House was aware that Clinton was not conducting her business on an official email account. “When there are situations in which personal email is used to conduct official U.S. business, those emails are official government records and should be turned over to the State Department, which is what I understand Secretary Clinton’s team has done,” he said. Earnest did not know if any other Cabinet secretaries are using only their personal email accounts and referred reporters to the individual agencies. Follow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

Senators Want Investigation Into Federal Agency Overseeing Guardrail Safety


iStock/Thinkstock(WASHINGTON) -- Half a dozen U.S. senators are requesting a government investigation into the federal agency charged with keeping America’s highways safe, amid concerns over a popular guardrail system linked to multiple deaths and dismemberments across the country. Sens. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., Cory Booker, D-N.J., Ed Markey, D-Mass., Mark Warner, D-Virginia, Sheldon Whitehouse, D-Rhode Island, and Tim Kaine, D-Virginia, sent a joint letter Tuesday to the Government Accountability Office, which audits and investigates federal agencies, following what they called in a press release “troubling developments regarding the FHWA’s evaluation of defective ET-Plus guardrail and end terminals.” “In recent months, we have witnessed a host of troubling developments that call into question the safety of certain roadside devices known as highway guardrail end terminals,” the letter reads. “We are committed to looking closely at this issue.” “FHWA, as the guardian of federal taxpayer dollars, has a unique and vital role and responsibility in ensuring that roadside hardware has been properly vetted for safety purposes and is eligible for reimbursement with federal funds,” it says. The ET-Plus guardrail system, which is made by Trinity Industries in Texas and used in states throughout the U.S., was the subject of an ABC News 20/20 investigation last year. ABC News obtained an internal Trinity email from 2005 in which a Trinity official estimated that making a modification to its widely-used guardrail system -- reducing a piece of metal in the end terminal from five inches to four -- would save the company $2 per end terminal, or $50,000 a year. The company made the change that year, but didn’t notify the FHWA. The modification went unnoticed by the federal agency until 2012, when questions were raised by a competitor of Trinity’s. The FHWA then approved that modified design for continued installation. But critics claimed the modification made the guardrail more dangerous in certain types of crashes, and late last year Trinity was found to have committed fraud by failing to notify government officials about the guardrail modification earlier. Now 42 states have ceased installing the ET-Plus, pending the final report on new government crash tests conducted in December and January. Last month, Sen. Blumenthal told ABC News the FHWA “cannot be considered blameless” in the ongoing controversy. “The Federal Highway Administration has in effect disregarded the claims about lack of safety here, it has condoned sham testing and paid lip service to testing. It bears a major part of the responsibility for the crashes, injuries and some deaths that have occurred,” Blumenthal told ABC News. In their letter, the senators are asking the GAO to address a number of issues, including how transparent FHWA has been in the testing of highway devices for safety. While the letter notes serious safety concerns with the controversial guardrail as prompting the senators’ action, it questions more generally the structure of the agency itself and its ability to properly implement one of its primary purposes. “The developments over the past several months raise serious questions about the effectiveness of the current framework for evaluating the reliability and integrity of roadside hardware products, including guardrail end terminals,” it reads. At a congressional hearing on Tuesday, Blumenthal highlighted the letter to Department of Transportation chief Anthony Foxx. The FHWA is an agency within the DOT. FHWA officials did not immediately respond to ABC News for comment. The letter does not mention Trinity Industries by name. In defense of its product, Trinity has continually noted that it has an “unbroken chain of eligibility” with FHWA, meaning the device has met safety criteria in order to be eligible for federal aid reimbursement when sold to states for use on highways. Of the new ET-Plus crash tests, the government said it passed its first four crash tests, but the analysts have not released the results of the last four. It’s the very last one, the eighth, that has proved controversial already after critics said the crash appeared to severely damage the driver’s side of the car. The senators’ press release Tuesday linked to an ABC News report about questions surrounding the eighth and final crash test, video of which “has raised considerable concern by members of Congress and their constituents,” the release reads. Blumenthal previously told ABC News he found the video “hideously shocking.” “Long term, we're going to insist on an overhaul of the Federal Highway Administration's standards, methods and approach to testing because this experience, particularly the latest test showing shocking damage to the passenger's side of the vehicle, indicates that there is a need for a review of this agency's performance and its approach to safety,” Blumenthal said. Trinity disputes what it calls conclusions made far too early surrounding the eighth test, and a spokesman told ABC News any comments other than what is released by FHWA after its evaluation is “pure speculation.” Results of the final four tests are expected to be released in the coming weeks.Follow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

Obama: Netanyahu's Speech 'Nothing New'


Pete Souza / The White House(WASHINGTON) -- President Obama thought Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech before Congress Tuesday morning was “nothing new.”Speaking to reporters at the White House, the president said Netanyahu offered no “viable alternatives” to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. “The alternative that the prime minister offers is ‘no deal,’ in which case Iran will immediately begin once again pursuing its nuclear program…without us having any insight into what they’re doing and without constraint,” Obama said.In contrast, the president adamantly defended the U.S.-led nuclear negotiations.“If we are successful in negotiating then, in fact, this will be the best deal possible to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Nothing else comes close. Sanctions won’t do it, even military action would not be as successful,” he said.“That’s demonstrable and Prime Minister Netanyahu has not offered any kind of viable alternative that would achieve the same verifiable mechanism to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon,” he continued.Obama noted that the case Netanyahu outlined on Tuesday was the same argument he made before the current interim deal and “even officials in his own government have had to acknowledge that Iran has in fact maintained their end of the bargain.”Asked if the speech was appropriate, Obama said “what I’m focused on right now is solving this problem. I’m not focused on the politics of it and I’m not focused on the theater of it.”The president spoke to reporters as he met with Defense Secretary Ash Carter in the Oval Office.Follow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

What White House Said in 2011 that May Not Look Good for Hillary Clinton


Scott Olson/Getty Images(NEW YORK) -- Hillary Clinton is under fire for using a private email account during her four-year tenure at the State Department, though the White House press secretary said in 2011 that all the administration’s work was being conducted on official government email accounts.Amid questions over whether Clinton's email practices potentially violated federal archival requirements, Clinton's spokesman, Nick Merrill, said, "both the letter and spirit of the rules permitted State Department officials to use non-governmental email."But in June 2011, when Clinton was still secretary of state, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said, point blank, "all of our work is conducted on work email accounts; that’s part of the Presidential Records Act."Here's the full exchange:REPORTER: What is the U.S. government’s policy towards personnel having private Gmail accounts?CARNEY: Well, the U.S. government policy -- certainly, the administration policy that is effective here is that we -- all of our work is conducted on work email accounts; that’s part of the Presidential Records Act. So the issue in terms of, as I mentioned, our work accounts, we have no evidence to suggest that any of those accounts were accessed or compromised.REPORTER: But is it the policy that you’re not allowed to have a Gmail account for private use --CARNEY: No.REPORTER: -- or another nongovernmental --CARNEY: No, that’s not the policy.REPORTER: So there’s no policy in place that would say certain members of the government, senior officials, are not allowed to use Gmail accounts at all for private use?CARNEY: Well, again, if you’re talking about private use that’s just different from work use. We are definitely instructed that we need to conduct all of our work on our government accounts as part of the Presidential Records Act. I’m not aware of any law or rule that suggests that government workers cannot have separate private email accounts.Follow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

House Speaker John Boehner: DHS Shutdown Is Not 'An Option'


DHS(WASHINGTON) -- After all the bluster about using Homeland Security funding to force President Obama to undo his immigration execution action, GOP sources tell ABC News that House Speaker John Boehner plans to go forward with a vote on exactly what the White House requested -- full funding for Homeland Security with no strings attached.There will likely be a vote later Tuesday on a clean bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security until the end of the fiscal year, sources say.At a closed-door meeting with House Republicans Tuesday morning, Boehner said a shutdown is simply not an option.“With more active threats coming into the homeland, I don’t believe that’s an option," Boehner said, according to a source at the meeting. "Imagine if, God forbid, another terrorist attack hits the United States.”The vote on the full funding bill will likely happen Tuesday afternoon.Boehner told his Republican colleagues the fight will continue in the courts:“I am as outraged and frustrated as you at the lawless and unconstitutional actions of this president. ...I believe this decision -- considering where we are -- is the right one for this team, and the right one for this country. The good news is that the president’s executive action has been stopped, for now. This matter will continue to be litigated in the courts, where we have our best chance of winning this fight."Follow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

Netanyahu: United States Can't Let Iran Get Nuclear Bomb


ABC News(WASHINGTON) -- Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is addressing a jam-packed joint meeting of Congress at this hour, telling lawmakers that the United States cannot afford to allow Iran to construct a nuclear bomb.Dozens of Democrats are skipping the address Tuesday, although every seat on the floor and gallery is filled, with more than 1,100 people listening to the prime minister in the chamber."Iran's regime poses a great threat, not only to Israel, but also to the peace of the entire world," he said.House Speaker John Boehner invited Netanyahu to address Congress without consulting the White House or Congressional Democrats shortly after the president delivered his State of the Union address. Some Democrats complained that the invitation was inappropriate given the Israeli elections just two weeks away, and a deadline to strike a nuclear deal with Iran that looms at the end of the month.Republicans however, contend that the invitation comes at a critical juncture in foreign policy.“The prime minister’s address coincides with an increasingly aggressive Iranian campaign to expand its sphere of influence across the Middle East,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, said Tuesday. “It represents a threat to both our countries. It represents a threat to moderate Sunni allies, and it represents a threat to the international community at large. That’s why Prime Minister Netanyahu is here today.”World News Videos | US News VideosFollow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

Former CIA Head David Petraeus to Plead Guilty


ISAF via Getty Images(WASHINGTON) -- Decorated war veteran and former CIA director David Petraeus has come to an agreement with federal prosecutors in which he would plead guilty to misdemeanor charges for mishandling classified information.Specifically, the charges are improper retention of classified materials and obstruction of justice by allegedly making misleading statements to the FBI, sources familiar with the case told ABC News.The charges stem, in part, from documents the former director allegedly provided to his mistress.Following the agreement, the Justice Department issued a statement:“Three documents – a criminal Information, a plea agreement, and a statement of facts – were filed today in the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina’s Charlotte Division in the case of United States v. David Howell Petraeus. The criminal Information charges the defendant with one count of unauthorized removal and retention of classified material. ... The plea agreement and corresponding statement of facts, both signed by the defendant, indicate that he will plead guilty to the one-count criminal Information."Follow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

Who Should Get Obamacare Subsidies: Supreme Court Hears Major Challenge


ABC News(WASHINGTON) -- The Affordable Care Act, a.k.a. Obamacare, dodged a bullet in 2012 when the Supreme Court upheld the individual mandate. Wednesday, it faces a second major legal challenge; this one to the taxpayer-funded premium subsidies that underpin the entire law.The nine justices will hear arguments over whether it’s legal to give out the subsidies in 34 states where the federal government established and runs the insurance exchange, HealthCare.gov.The debate centers on interpretation of a four-word phrase buried in the 2,000-page law that says financial aid is available through “exchanges established by the state.”The stakes are high: About 7.5 million Americans have received subsidies to purchase health insurance coverage in those 34 states.If the court strikes them down, the “vast majority” will be forced out of coverage almost immediately because their premiums will become prohibitively expensive, experts say."There could be chaos," said Abbe Gluck, a Yale Law School professor who specializes in health law.An average American receiving Obamacare subsidies pays just $105 a month out of pocket for insurance, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. Take away the aid and the cost spikes to $373 a month – for many, a price out of reach.“The horror stories will be real,” Republican Sen. Ben Sasse of Nebraska warned in the Wall Street Journal. “Chemotherapy turned off for perhaps 12,000 people, dialysis going dark for 10,000.”Experts are also sounding alarm bells about a broader impact: the upending of individual insurance markets and a likely “death spiral.” Premiums would skyrocket for everyone in those 34 states, not just those who purchased Obamacare, a study in the New England Journal of Medicine found.And if you think the states, Congress or the Department of Health and Human Services could enact a quick, even temporary, fix, then think again. There has been little-to-no preparation for a court decision striking the subsidies down.There will be just 25 days to look at those options after the court releases its opinion, which is expected in June, leaving precious little time for lawmakers and those relying on subsidized Obamacare insurance to act to come up with an alternative plan.Follow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

Hillary Clinton's State Department Email: What We Know About Her Use of a Privat


Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images(WASHINGTON) -- What happened?Hillary Clinton used a private email account to communicate while serving as secretary of state, The New York Times revealed.Clinton's team has confirmed that she used a personal email account for government business but maintained that it works within "both the letter and the spirit" of State Department rules, though the State Department, itself, has not commented on the matter.Did she have a government email account that she just didn't use?The Times reported that she did not have an email account, which would have ended with a federal government domain -- in this case, state.gov.Such emails are automatically stored on government servers and kept as federal records.What email account did she use instead?While some guessed that she might be using a personalized email account at AOL or Hotmail, that was not the case. Instead, The Washington Post reported, the domain "clintonemail.com" was registered the week before she was sworn in as secretary of state in 2009. Clinton's team has not confirmed that she used an email at that address.Is that legal?There hasn't been enough information released yet to determine exactly what rules were broken, if any, but there are clear disclosure and security concerns.Government email accounts have their messages automatically stored as part of the Federal Records Act, and while it's clear that Clinton's personal account would not have fallen under that umbrella, her team noted that much of her correspondence still was covered, as a result."For government business, she emailed them on their department accounts, with every expectation they would be retained," Clinton's spokesman Nick Merrill said in a statement.However, as The Times noted, emails to accounts outside the U.S. government would not be covered by the same rules.Could that account have been hacked?We don't know the extent of the security measures taken with her external account and whether they matched the measures taken by her colleagues who used government email accounts. Government accounts have their messages encrypted, for instance.Is she the first high-ranking government official to have done this?According to her spokesman, no. He said that "secretaries of state before her" also used their own email accounts while "engaging with department officials." That response, however, does not say whether those secretaries of state used both government and private email accounts or just private email accounts like Clinton did, and it doesn't specify whether those secretaries of state were operating under earlier sets of rules governing government employees' email conduct.How was this discovered?The New York Times reported that Clinton's use of a personal account was first discovered during a House committee's investigation into the 2012 attack on the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya. However, the State Department apparently just handed over a selection of about 300 emails to the committee two weeks ago.Rep. Elijah Cummings of Maryland, the ranking Democrat on the Benghazi Select Committee, issued a statement Tuesday morning saying that it has been known "for several years that Secretary Clinton used her personal email account, apparently following the pattern of previous secretaries of state."On top of that, anyone who received an email from her after she took over the State Department in 2009 would have recognized at the time that they were receiving an email from a non-state.gov address.Will this be an issue in the 2016 race?To quote another famous female politician, you betcha. Though Clinton has not yet announced her candidacy, her likely opponent, Jeb Bush, has already slammed her secretive move, saying that it lacked transparency. Transparency matters. Unclassified @HillaryClinton emails should be released. You can see mine, here. http://t.co/wZbtwd8O2j— Jeb Bush (@JebBush) March 3, 2015 Follow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

White House Steps Up Pressure on Netanyahu over Speech to Congress


iStock/Thinkstock(WASHINGTON) -- In the lead-up to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s controversial speech before a joint session of Congress Tuesday, White House officials continued to point to what they see as politically divisive and diplomatically damaging theater.White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said the president probably won’t even watch the speech. “I haven’t looked at the president’s schedule for tomorrow,” White House spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters Monday. “I doubt that he will spend his whole time watching the speech.”Netanyahu was invited by House Republican leadership to address a joint session of Congress Tuesday, where he will speak out against President Obama’s plan to seek a nuclear weapons deal with Iran. The White House has said the partisanship resulting from the invitation would be “destructive” to the U.S./Israeli relationship.Earnest warned Netanyahu not to divulge any top secret information about the negotiations that the U.S. may have shared with Israelis, who have received detailed briefings on the negotiations. “Releasing that information would betray the trust that exists between two allies,” Earnest said. He accused Israel of trying to “cherry pick” negative pieces of information gleaned from those briefings in an attempt to undermine the process.Speaking Monday at a conference in Washington, D.C., hosted by the largest U.S. pro-Israel lobby, AIPAC, Netanyahu insisted his speech “is not intended to show any disrespect to President Obama” and that the Israeli alliance with the U.S. is stronger than ever. “Ladies and gentlemen, the purpose of my address to Congress tomorrow is to speak up about a potential deal with Iran that could threaten the survival of Israel.”Speaking at that same conference later in the day, National Security Advisor Susan Rice said abandoning the talks in favor of immediate sanctions would not stop Iran from producing weapons. Sanctions have not stopped Iran in the past, she said.And on Sunday, Secretary of State John Kerry said the negotiations with Iran have actually benefited Israel. “Israel is safer today because of the interim agreement that we created,” he said on ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos. “The 20 percent enriched uranium has been reduced to zero. We have stopped the centrifuge production. We are inspecting inside of their facilities. We have stopped the Arak plutonium reactor in its tracks.”Kerry warned that Netanyahu’s speech runs the risk of becoming a “political football.” Samantha Power, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations -- and the administration’s choice to speak directly before Netanyahu at AIPAC -- also warned about playing politics. “This partnership should never be politicized,” Power said. “The bond between the United States and Israel is still a national commitment. It should never be a partisan matter."Many Republicans and some Democrats support further sanctions on Iran before any potential deal on nuclear weapons is made. More economic sanctions would mostly likely put an end to negotiations, which the State Department is trying to complete before the deadline this summer. Secretary Kerry is in Geneva, Switzerland, this week trying to keep the negotiations alive.Follow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

Most Young Republicans Favor Marijuana Legalization


Hemera/Thinkstock(WASHINGTON) -- Although the Republican Party as a whole has not been at the forefront of supporting marijuana legalization, younger people who identify themselves with the GOP may force traditionalists to change their views.A Pew Research Center survey says that close to two-thirds of people ages 18-to-34 who claim to be Republican back legalizing the possession and sale of pot while 47 percent of those 35-to-50 feel the same way.As expected, a higher number of younger Democrats are in favor of doing away with criminal penalties for owning or selling marijuana: 77 percent in the 18-to-34 age group and 61 percent of those 35-to-50.Nonetheless, Republicans running for president and other state and local offices are cognizant of the shift in attitudes about pot as they vie for the votes of young people, who have generally sided with Democrats in more recent elections.Interestingly, Pew says that more liberal opinions about marijuana among millennials are in synch with their growing acceptance of same-sex marriage. Just over six in ten Americans in that generation who identify themselves as Republican also back the rights of gays and lesbians to wed legally.Follow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

National Security Adviser Susan Rice Talks Relationship with Israel, Iran Negoti


Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images(WASHINGTON) -- Speaking at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee on Monday, National Security Adviser Susan Rice called the relationship between America and Israel an "alliance...rooted in the unbreakable friendship between our two peoples."That enduring relationship has been tested somewhat in recent weeks, with Democrats griping about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Tuesday speech before a joint session of Congress. Nonetheless, Rice noted, "the relationship between the United States and the State of Israel is not a partnership between individual leaders or political parties." That relationship, she noted, "has deepened and grown through different presidents and prime ministers for nearly 70 years."Netanyahu has spoken out in recent weeks against a deal with Iran that would leave them with the capability to one day produce a nuclear weapon. "I want to be very clear," Rice said Monday about the ongoing negotiations with Iran, "a bad deal is worse than no deal." What makes a good deal? Rice says "a good deal is one that would invariably cut off every pathway for Iran to produce enough fissile material for a single nuclear weapon."As far as how those negotiations are proceeding, Rice said that "significant gaps remain between the international community and Iran." She also echoed comments made by President Obama that "we are keeping all options on the table to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon."Follow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

Report: Hillary Clinton's Personal Email Use May Have Violated Federal Requireme


Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images(NEW YORK) -- Hillary Clinton used a personal email account exclusively while serving as secretary of state, and may have violated federal requirements, The New York Times reported late Monday. According to the Times, Clinton did not have a government email address during her four years at the State Department, and her aids took no action to preserve her emails – which is required by law under the Federal Records Act.These new revelations raise questions about transparency, legality, and certainly security. It is not clear whether any encryption protection existed on her private email account, as is required on government emails.A spokesperson for Clinton has not responded to a request for comment.In an effort to comply with federal record-keeping laws, aides to the former secretary of state turned over 55,000 emails to the State Department two months ago, according to the Times report.“The State Department has long had access to a wide array of Secretary Clinton’s records – including emails between her and Department officials with state.gov accounts. Last year, the Department sent a letter to representatives of former secretaries of state requesting they submit any records in their possession for proper preservation as part of our effort to continually improve our records preservation and management,” State Department Deputy Spokesperson Marie Harf told ABC News in a statement early Tuesday. “In response to our request, Secretary Clinton provided the Department with emails spanning her time at the Department. After the State Department reviewed those emails, last month the State Department produced about 300 emails responsive to recent requests from the Select Committee.”“From the moment that the Select Committee was created, the State Department has been proactively and consistently engaged in responding to the Committee’s many requests in a timely manner, providing more than 40,000 pages of documents, scheduling more than 20 transcribed interviews and participating in several briefings and each of the Committee’s hearings," the statement continued.The State Department also says they are in the process of updating their records preservation policies to bring them up to speed with 2013 National Archives and Records Administration guidance. “These steps include regularly archiving all of Secretary Kerry’s emails to ensure that we are capturing all federal records,” Harf said.Kerry is the first secretary of state to rely primarily on a state.gov email account.The matter is expected to become a campaign issue. Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, a potential 2016 candidate for the White House, released more than 275,000 emails last month from his time as governor in the name of “transparency.” Bush tweeted late Monday “Transparency matters. Unclassified @HillaryClinton emails should be released. You can see mine, here. Jebbushemails.com.” Transparency matters. Unclassified @HillaryClinton emails should be released. You can see mine, here. http://t.co/wZbtwd8O2j— Jeb Bush (@JebBush) March 3, 2015Senior administration officials declined to comment on whether any cabinet member or senior staffer operated without a government email address during the Obama administration. They also would not say whether White House officials corresponded with Clinton on her private email address on official business, or whether there were concerns about emailing a non-governmental account.Follow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

"NYT": Hillary Clinton Only Used Personal Email for Correspondence While Secreta


Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images(WASHINGTON) -- Hillary Clinton exclusively used a personal email address during her time as secretary of state, the New York Times reported Monday.During her four-year tenure at the State Department, Clinton did not have a government email address, the Times says. By using her personal email account to conduct government business, Clinton may have been in violation of federal requirements that officials' correspondence be retained as part of the agency's record.Additionally, the Times reported, Clinton's aides did not take action to preserve her emails on department servers, which is required by the Federal Records Act.State Department deputy spokesperson Marie Harf said in a statement on Monday night that the department "has long had access to a wide array of Secretary Clinton's records -- including emails between her and Department officials with state.gov accounts."Harf noted that the State Department sent a letter to representatives of former secretaries of state "requesting they submit any records in their possession for proper preservation as part of our effort to continually improve our records preservation and management." In response, Harf said, Clinton provided a number of emails.The State Department's statement noted that current Secretary of State John Kerry is the first secretary of state "to rely primarily on a state.gov email account."A spokesperson for former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush provided a statement on the story to ABC News on Monday night, saying that Clinton "should release her emails. Hopefully she hasn't already destroyed them.""Governor Bush believes transparency is a critical part of public service and of governing," the statement added. Bush also tweeted on Monday night, posting a link to his publicly released emails. Transparency matters. Unclassified @HillaryClinton emails should be released. You can see mine, here. http://t.co/wZbtwd8O2j— Jeb Bush (@JebBush) March 3, 2015 Senior administration officials declined to comment on whether any cabinet member or senior staffer operated without a government email address during the Obama administration. They also would not say whether White House officials corresponded with Clinton on her private email address on official business, or whether there were concerns about emailing a non-governmental account.Follow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

Director of National Intelligence on Killing of Putin Critic: 'History Has Been


Photo by Bryan Thomas/Getty Images(WASHINGTON) -- In remarks made to the Council on Foreign Relations on Monday, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper seemed to question the investigation launched by the Russian government into the death of Boris Nemtsov, an opponent to Russian President Vladimir Putin, last week.Asked about the possibility that Putin and his allies had perpetrated the killing, Clapper said that such talk was "an obvious theory." The DNI noted that "there are some Russian Kremlin officials who have suggested we did it, just to create hate and discontent in the political fabric of Russia."Clapper said U.S. intelligence did not have any insight into who committed the murder. "I would venture the history has been we never do find out," he said, adding, "I'm sure that Putin himself is going to investigate."Follow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

On Iran, a Question of Whether Obama and Netanyahu Really Have the Same Goal


Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images(WASHINGTON) -- When it comes to nuclear negotiations with Iran, President Obama has said America's goal is to prevent Iran from ever producing a nuclear weapon, while Israel has described a different one: denying Iran the capability of ever getting there."Our goal here is to be able to verify that Iran does not have a nuclear weapon," Obama said after a meeting with the emir of Qatar last week.Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has a different take."We must prevent Iran from having the capability to produce nuclear weapons. And I want to reiterate that point. Not just to prevent them from having the weapon, but to prevent them from having the capacity to make the weapon," Netanyahu said last year when he spoke at the 2014 American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) conference in Washington.So do the U.S. and Israel really want the same thing?"I guess you could make the case that there is [a difference in goals]. I'm happy for someone else to do that if they would like to," White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said Monday."No one else has laid out a strategy for how to accomplish what apparently the prime minister has laid out as his goal. He hasn't even laid out a strategy for how to accomplish his goal," Earnest said.Here's Earnest's full response, in which he defended the White House's aims in pursuing the nuclear talks that have sparked so much controversy (transcript via FedNews):KARL: Actually, the Israeli prime minister has articulated a different goal than what you did at this briefing. You said that the United States is committed to a position where Iran will never acquire a nuclear weapon. What Bibi Netanyahu said today, and what he's been saying all along is the goal, is to make sure Iran doesn't get the capability to build a nuclear weapon.EARNEST: Mm-hmm.KARL: Which he says, and is, a different view. So, what do you say about his view, that the whole point of this effort is to ensure not just that Iran doesn't get a weapon, but that Iran doesn't get the ability to build a weapon?EARNEST: Well, I assume that the -- the prime minister will have an opportunity to elaborate on what he means when he says the ability to acquire a nuclear weapon.KARL: I can tell you what he means.EARNEST: OK.KARL: He's referring to an enrichment capability. He's also talked about the fact that they have a ballistic missile program that would enable a delivery system for a nuclear weapon. That's what he's talking about. When Iran has the ability to produce highly enriched uranium, it is the fuel to make a nuclear bomb. He believes that's a threat to Israel's survival because it puts them on a path to getting or to building a bomb.EARNEST: And has he laid out a strategy for how to prevent them from -- how to accomplish the goal that he has laid out? I guess the point is, you don't have to speak for him any longer. The point is, he has not -- he has not laid out that strategy. The president has laid out a clear strategy that we are working to achieve that would prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. And that is a clearly stated foreign policy goal and it is a priority that this president has made because it's in the clear national security interest of the United States. It also happens to be in the national security interests of our closest ally in the region, Israel.KARL: So is he correct, though, to say that your goal, then, is not to prevent Iran from getting the capability to build a bomb. It's to prevent them from getting a bomb.EARNEST: Well, the... [CROSSTALK]EARNEST: Well, if he says that there's a difference there, he's allowed to do that. The point that I'm making...KARL: You don't think there's a difference between those two positions?EARNEST: Well, I guess you could make the case that there is one. I'm happy for someone else to do that if they would like to. The point is that we believe -- the president has made a strategic decision about what he believes is clearly in the best interests of the United States. And it happens to be in the best interests of Israel. No one else has laid out a strategy for how to accomplish what apparently the prime minister has laid out as his goal. He hasn't even laid out a strategy for how to accomplish his goal. And by the way, I'm not even sure that the military option that some people consider to be an alternative to the president's strategy would even accomplish his goal because it would require not just a detailed destruction of Iran's infrastructure, but it also would require the removal of knowledge that Iran has already obtained.So, the fact is the goal that the president has set out that would ensure that -- or that is consistent with our national security imperatives here in this country, is to ensure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon. And the best way for us to do this is at the negotiating table. Those negotiations are underway even as we speak. But the other thing that I have not mentioned so far in this briefing that's important for everybody to realize is it continues to be the case that our likelihood of success when it comes to reaching a deal in the context of these negotiations is only at best 50-50. There are difficult decisions that need to be made by the Iranian government in terms of their willingness to sign onto this agreement. And this president has made clear that he's not going to sign a bad deal.World News Videos | US News VideosFollow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

2016 Campaign Playlist: Potential Presidential Candidates Pick Their Theme Songs


ABC News(WASHINGTON) -- Though none of the potential 2016 candidates has yet to formally announce a presidential campaign, each contender has likely spent plenty of time thinking about what their campaign platforms will look like.But what will their campaigns sound like?ABC News recently asked prospective Republican candidates what they might choose as their campaign theme song.Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal said he’d probably go with one of his favorite tunes, “Eye of the Tiger” by Survivor.“It’s about an underdog taking on big challenges,” Jindal said in an interview at the Conservative Political Action Conference. “I think we need a candidate who’s going to fight for us, fight for our principles, and have fun doing it.”Former neurosurgeon Dr. Ben Carson, on the other hand, chose an American classic: “The Star-Spangled Banner.”Former 2012 candidate Rick Santorum said it would be hard to beat his previous campaign song from 2012, “Game On.” The tune was written and performed by two teenage girls who were inspired by a speech Santorum gave at the Iowa caucuses.“I’m still partial to that,” the former senator from Pennsylvania said. “That’s a pretty cool little song.”Business mogul Donald Trump said he’d probably go with the song “Dream,” but clarified that it wouldn’t be the theme of his campaign. “My campaign theme would be ‘Make America great again,’ because that’s what we have to do,” Trump said.And Hewlett-Packard executive Carly Fiorina said she has yet to think about what her campaign song would be. “I don’t have anything in mind yet,” she said.World News Videos | US News VideosFollow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

Obama Unlikely to Watch Netanyahu Speech Tuesday


Uriel Sinai/Getty Images(WASHINGTON) -- Amid frustration with a speech that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is scheduled to give to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday, President Obama is unlikely to watch, the White House says.White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said as much during Monday's press briefing. "I haven't looked at the president's schedule for tomorrow," Earnest admitted, while saying that he "[doubts] he will want to spend his whole time watching the speech."Netanyahu was invited to give the speech by House Speaker John Boehner, without consulting with the administration. That fact bothered some Democrats, who also have voiced concern about the speech coming so near Netanyahu's bid for reelection.Netanyahu has voiced concerns over ongoing nuclear negotiations with Iran, a topic on which Earnest warned against releasing information. "Releasing that information would betray the trust that exists between two allies," he said Monday. Earnest noted that the White House has kept Israel apprised of the Iran negotiations, and that the administration was not particularly happy with the instances in which Israeli officials have chosen to "cherry pick" tidbits of information to criticize the U.S. stance.Follow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

Obama: Now Is the Time to Change Policing


Jahi Chikwendiu/The Washington Post(WASHINGTON) -- Receiving a report Monday from his post-Ferguson, Missouri task force on policing, President Obama said now is the time to make changes in law enforcement practices.“A lot of our work is going to involve local police chiefs, local elected officials, states recognizing that the moment is now for us to make these changes,” Obama said, appearing briefly with his Task Force on 21st Century Policing earlier Monday.“We have a greater opportunity, coming out of some great conflict and tragedy, to really transform how we think about community law enforcement relations so that everybody feels safer,” he said.The president noted a need for more data -- specifically on how often police shootings occur.“We do not have a good sense…of how frequently there may be interactions with police and community members that result in death, result in a shooting,” Obama said.The task force’s report will be made available online.Follow @ABCNewsRadio Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

Bill Clinton's Portrait Artist Secretly Includes Monica Lewinsky


Brendan Smialowski/Getty Images(PHILADELPHIA) -- Here's one issue the Clintons may -- or may not -- want to brush off.In a recent interview with the Philadelphia Daily News, the artist who painted the official portrait of President Bill Clinton that hangs in the National Portrait Gallery in Washington, D.C., revealed a surprise -- the portrait “subtly” incorporated Monica Lewinsky.Artist Nelson Shanks told the newspaper that the shadow on the left side of the portrait was cast by a mannequin in a blue dress -- a nod to the president’s affair with his 22-year-old intern.Shanks, who described Clinton as “the most famous liar of all time,” told the Philadelphia Daily News that the shadow represents a metaphorical “shadow on the office he held.”Shanks painted the portrait while standing in the Oval Office.He says he placed a mannequin in a blue dress to cast a shadow on the mantle while he was painting. However, the mannequin and the president were never in the room at the same time, he noted.According to Shanks, the Clintons are pressuring the National Portrait Gallery to remove the painting. However, a museum spokesperson told ABC News that they have not received any requests from the Clintons to remove the portrait.The portrait is currently not on display, but it is in the museum’s gallery of collection.The portrait originally stirred controversy when it was released in 2006 for the notable absence of a wedding ring on the president’s hand.Shanks did not immediately respond to request for comment from ABC News.Follow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

Obama Praises Sen. Mikulski's Career


Pete Souza / The White House(WASHINGTON) -- President Obama praised Sen. Barbara Mikulski's career on Monday, after she announced she was retiring to fight for the people of Maryland."Senator Mikulski is more than just a legendary senator for the people of Maryland, she’s an institution in the United States Senate. Barbara’s service to the people of Maryland spans decades, but her legacy will span generations," Obama said in a statement."Barbara is the longest serving woman in Congress, and her leadership serves as an inspiration to millions of women and girls across the globe to stand up and lead," the president continued.At a news conference Monday, Mikulski, D-Md., said she doesn't want to spend her time "campaigning for me. I want to campaign for the people."Mikulski, 78, who was first elected to the Senate in 1986, added, "I'm gonna be around. I'm Senator Barb."Read President Obama's full statement on Sen. Barbara Mikulski below:Senator Mikulski is more than just a legendary senator for the people of Maryland, she’s an institution in the United States Senate. Barbara’s service to the people of Maryland spans decades, but her legacy will span generations. Barbara is the longest serving woman in Congress, and her leadership serves as an inspiration to millions of women and girls across the globe to stand up and lead. As the Chairwoman and now Vice Chairwoman of the Senate’s Appropriations Committee, Barbara has always known that our budgets should reflect our deepest held values. In that spirit, Barbara has wielded her gavel and used her booming voice to advocate on behalf of paycheck fairness, childcare, health care, education, women’s rights and countless issues that have contributed to the strength of America’s families. Thanks to her leadership, more women excel in their careers, more children have access to quality education, more families have health insurance and more people are treated fairly under the law. I look forward to working with Senator Mikulski over the course of the next two years, and Michelle and I extend our warmest wishes to Barbara in her next endeavors.Follow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

Sen. Barbara Mikulski to Retire


United States Senate(WASHINGTON) -- Sen. Barbara Mikulski will announce her retirement Monday at a press conference in Maryland after five terms in the Senate, a source close to Mikulski confirms. Mikulski, D-Md., is the longest serving female senator and is considered the dean of the women senators.The 78-year-old was the first woman ever to chair the Senate Appropriations Committee.Follow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.

Report: Hillary Clinton to Announce Candidacy for President in April


Feng Li/Getty Images(NEW YORK) -- Supporters of Hillary Clinton for president may not have to wait much longer for the former secretary of state to declare her intentions.The Wall Street Journal reported Sunday evening that Clinton, 67, and her close advisers are dropping strong hints to potential donors that she may announce her candidacy for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination as soon as April.In this way, Clinton, the presumed Democratic frontrunner, can get a jump on raising an estimated $1 billion her campaign feels will be necessary to win the nomination and presidency.An April launch will put her supporters’ minds at ease as there have been rumors that Clinton might opt out of a second run White House due to physical concerns and other family considerations.According to the WSJ, Clinton insider John Podesta, who was part of the Obama White House, is expected to have a major role in the campaign to elect the former first lady.Follow @ABCNewsRadio !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs");Copyright © 2015, ABC Radio. All rights reserved.