March 18th, 2008
03:30 PM ET
11 years ago

Archives to release Clinton's first lady schedules

[cnn-photo-caption image= caption=" The National Archives will release Hillary Clinton's schedules while first lady."]

WASHINGTON (CNN) - Over 11,000 pages of Hillary Clinton's schedule as first lady are set to be released to the public on Wednesday, the National Archives announced.

The documents are among those the Obama campaign has long said need to be made public in order to fully evaluate the New York senator's experience and tenure while First Lady.

In a statement Tuesday, the Archives said the documents are from the files of Patti Solis Doyle, the director of Clinton's scheduling while she was first lady, and later the manager of her presidential campaign. Doyle stepped down from managing the campaign earlier this year after a string of poor showings in primary contests.

“Arranged chronologically, these records document in detail the activities of the First Lady, including meetings, trips, speaking engagements and social activities for the eight years of the Clinton Administration,” the statement said.

The documents are among those that were the center of a legal battle between the Archives and Judicial Watch, a conservative public interest group that has long urged a speedier release of files from the Clinton White House years.

In a court motion earlier this month, the Archives promised to release the schedules by the end of the month, but said it will need "one to two years" to process remaining documents, including over 20,000 pages of call logs - an indication those documents won't be released by the November 4 presidential election.

According to the Archives statement, 4,746 of the schedules have redactions, information removed before being released, that largely relate to privacy concerns and include "social security numbers, telephone numbers, and home addresses."

The documents will be available for view on the Clinton Library's Web site.

- CNN Ticker Producer Alexander Mooney

Filed under: Hillary Clinton
soundoff (393 Responses)
  1. V Independent

    dana is correct Barack had nothing to do with what his preacher said yet the preacher is of great influence to him and to his church as he was also a spiritual advisor for his campaign. I do believe though church ought to be separate from state the words spoken in church do influence folks and their lives. The laundry is slowing being shown. Let see Obama experience records. Let's see everyone's taxes for that matter...that means us.

    March 18, 2008 04:03 pm at 4:03 pm |
  2. I wonder...

    The double standard is in play again. The Obama people have to conjure something out of thin air–oooh, she MUST be hiding something. Where are the details of his every moment in the last 12 years–like his meetings with Rezko and his so-called foreign policy experience.?How about just a voting record that doesn't include the word 'present' for every tough vote. Where are his tax returns? He doesn't even know how much Rezko contributed to his campaign–maybe he should pay more attention to his finances.

    March 18, 2008 04:04 pm at 4:04 pm |
  3. clairex

    The speech touched a lot of heart. YES that is what he wants. I AM THE VICTIM HERE. I don't buy Obama's speeches cos they are just words. He lied just few days ago and today the truth, he must be sleeping on friday when he went all out infull force denying ever been in the church or ever heard of those preachings from his mentor. He set the standard so high for himself and now he wants Americans to pity him. What has he got to say about the way President Bill Clinton was treated when this race issue came up in South Carolina. Today he wants to discuss race fully. SEN OBAMA IS A HYPOCRITE.

    March 18, 2008 04:04 pm at 4:04 pm |
  4. Darth Vadik, CA

    I see a pattern from the Hillary supporters:

    NO NO NO
    GO GO GO

    I know you are just one person writing this in in many different names, so just drop it, you're jig is up.

    March 18, 2008 04:04 pm at 4:04 pm |
  5. Alice in Fort Myers

    Hang it up, AA's. Your guy is toast. He can't win without the White vote even if every African American in the country votes for him – all 13.4% of you can knock yourselves out, and he will lose in November.

    March 18, 2008 04:05 pm at 4:05 pm |
  6. MARIA 2325


    March 18, 2008 04:06 pm at 4:06 pm |
  7. sue, NJ

    didn't you hear what the comedian (TRACEY MORGAN) say who the New President is josh, and other Obama haters!

    March 18, 2008 04:06 pm at 4:06 pm |
  8. JT in Dallas

    Obama told a bold faced lie to the American people over the weekend because he got caught in his real World. Not the front he puts on to hoodwink the zombies into voting for him. He gives ANOTHER speech and what do his supporters say......."Now let's get over it and on to the issues." ???? Once again, if the race card works for him his supporters run with it. When it hurts him they want to run from it. BHO and his supporters are naive hypocrites.

    Stop the speech preaching BHO!

    Anyone but a liar and a racist 08!

    March 18, 2008 04:07 pm at 4:07 pm |
  9. Don

    I think that the rev wrights statements are very bad but this came out along time ago so why are they brought up now sounds like to me that the clinton politics havent changed and it seems to me that they have gotten better at it as far as the clinton documents go she put it off as long as she could i wonder why only some not all will be released

    March 18, 2008 04:07 pm at 4:07 pm |
  10. What Experience

    It will only be another 2 or 3 years to "process" the information. Don't you mean to filter that information?

    McCain will walk all over Hillary's "experience" fairy tale.

    March 18, 2008 04:08 pm at 4:08 pm |
  11. darron

    People who bash the candidate they don't like and think it helps the candidate they do like have learned nothing from the divisiveness and negativity already weakening the Democrats' campaign.

    People who accuse one candidate of playing the gender card won't win me over with a candidate accused of playing the race card, who says "it isn't about race" but, judging from many of the fearmongering comments on this blog (and his pastor's), it is, still, in 2008, about race after all.

    In the same token, people who accuse one candidate of not having enough experience can't win me over without showing me the "35 years of" experience the other candidate claims (but only now is beginning to release to the public, and will not be fully disclosed before the election is over).

    In spite of all the media snippets being thrown our way today, no one seems willing or able to discuss the real issues: Senator Obama STILL leads in pledged delegates and short of a blow out in the remaining primaries will continue to lead at the convention. Florida isn't going to have a re-vote, and it looks very unlikely that the original Florida votes will be permitted to stand. The real questions for today are: how much will the Michigan re-vote affect the total count, were the superdelegates watching today's news events, and how are they going to respond? The superdelegates are most likely going to be the "decider" of the Democrat nomination, but only in the sense of providing enough votes to reach the 2,025 needed. People worry about the superdelegates taking the vote away from the American people, but Pelosi, the convention chair, has already hinted this won't happen by telling the media it would be bad for the superdelegates to go against the vote of the people.

    Pelosi's statement that Senators Clinton and Obama will not appear on the same ballot also appears to be not only a response to Clinton's "dream ticket" idea, but also a warning that dealmaking would not be permitted - the delegate count will most likely be how the superdelegates make their final decision.

    This seems to suggest most of the superdelegates will end up voting for whoever comes to the convention with the most delegates, which at this point appears to be Senator Obama, but, again, admittedly could change, although it is unlikely this will occur.

    But where's the blog thread on that?

    March 18, 2008 04:08 pm at 4:08 pm |
  12. DeVone

    oh no Hillary, you cant let Obama out do you this should have been done without the asking you want us to trust you be open
    now you want to do the right thing

    March 18, 2008 04:09 pm at 4:09 pm |
  13. blind

    people are blinded by hate:
    Mr.C wrote:

    " March 18th, 2008 2:14 pm ET
    I'm sorry but we need to see everything. Why erase about 5000 schedules? What Americans should be asking is " What are really in these 4000+ schedules that had been retracted. Scams of course. Why would anyone even vote for this woman."

    there are certain things which cannot be publicized. If you would read the full article, you would – maybe – notice that social security numbers will not be disclosed ( do you want to know them?) , phone numbers, and others -these are none of public business. You must agree with this.
    Also personal things, or national security issues cannot be disclosed. It is up to government to decide, not you.

    March 18, 2008 04:09 pm at 4:09 pm |
  14. Gisele

    Relax Joe,



    March 18, 2008 04:10 pm at 4:10 pm |
  15. Walt, Belton,TX

    Let's see the income tax returns so we can follow the money! That's where a lot of the lies are.

    March 18, 2008 04:10 pm at 4:10 pm |
  16. Anne

    Did you freaks READ the article?????

    The only things that are being edited are phone numbers, addresses and other personal information.

    GEEZ...give her a friggin' break already!


    March 18, 2008 04:11 pm at 4:11 pm |
  17. Kim

    Good for you Hillary, they will all be looking ridiculous in the end. I hope Obama release his records from the State Senate and since he has been in the Senate, as well as his Taxes from that time period, let's keep it fair and even.

    March 18, 2008 04:11 pm at 4:11 pm |
  18. Michael, PA

    Okay, all you ObamaBots, you are obviously not reading the ENTIRE article. It's not hillary that is releasing the documents, it's the National Archives.

    It is the National Archives that are saying that it will take one to two years to process the remainder of the documents for proper release!
    You are all so quick to judge, but you don't want to give proper procedure a chance to take place.

    It's no wonder Obama generally looks squeeky clean (until recently). He's got a horde of mindless automotons whom most can't even name one single accomplishment of Obama, doing the dirty work for him.

    You're all acting like a bunch of cattle being herded by Obama, but little do you know your being led to the salughter…

    March 18, 2008 04:13 pm at 4:13 pm |
  19. Diego

    transperant canidates is always good.
    go Hillary.

    March 18, 2008 04:13 pm at 4:13 pm |
  20. missouri

    Come on people, get realistic! These are official government papers with each having to be scrutinized to protect other people's privacy... other government officials from the US and around the World included. Eight years worth of schedules would take considerable time to wade through. You can't just release paperwork to the public that has social security numbers, addresses, phone numbers etc on them. How would you like your information released in documents to the public. That's exactly what they said was removed from the documents. The Clinton's have several years of tax documents released already, their campaign person has already stated the others will be released around April 15th, which is when they usually release them.

    March 18, 2008 04:13 pm at 4:13 pm |
  21. SONA





    March 18, 2008 04:14 pm at 4:14 pm |
  22. Brian

    Now we can finally know that it was Hillary that was the cause of all good in the world since '92. These docs will prove it.

    March 18, 2008 04:14 pm at 4:14 pm |
  23. Stephen

    "What took her so long????
    This should have been done a long time ago."

    "What is she hiding? Why was information removed?"

    What is it with people and their apparent inability to R-E-A-D... The National Archives controls the documents and when / how they can be released - it is up to them to release it, not the President / First Lady. Information was "redacted" (blacked out) for privacy reasons... phone numbers, addresses, social security numbers, etc.. Not a big deal.

    As for her tax returns... yes, she should release them, but enough of the harping. 20 years' worth of Clinton tax returns are already available to the public; Obama released *one* year of his tax returns, for 2006. Let me try an Obama nutjob's approach to this when I ask, "What is he hiding by not releasing ALL of his tax returns?!????!???"

    Chill out people.... Rabid pitbulls are more pleasant to be around than Obama supporters....

    March 18, 2008 04:14 pm at 4:14 pm |
  24. Gisele

    Dana you are absolutly right.


    We need him, he whole world needs this guy

    March 18, 2008 04:17 pm at 4:17 pm |
  25. jo

    Enough already about Rev. Wright.........Now to the issues that really matters. I believe Senator Obama and will continue to support his campaign and vote for him in Nov. Look out John McCain!!!!

    March 18, 2008 04:20 pm at 4:20 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16