text:
White House Press Secretary

The White House press secretary is a senior White House official whose primary responsibility is to act as spokesperson for the executive branch of the United States federal government, especially with regard to the president, senior aides and executives, as well as government policies.

The press secretary is responsible for collecting information about actions and events within the president's administration and issues the administration's reactions to developments around the world. The press secretary interacts with the media and the White House press corps on a daily basis, generally in a daily press briefing. The press secretary serves by the appointment and at the pleasure of the president of the United States; the office does not require the advice and consent of the United States Senate; however, because of the frequent briefings given to the global media, who in turn inform the public, the position is a prominent non-Cabinet post.

On May 13, 2022, Karine Jean-Pierre replaced Jen Psaki and became the 35th White House press secretary.

Early press relations

During the United States' early years, there was not a single designated staff person or office responsible for managing the relationship between the president and the growing number of journalists and media entities that were covering him. It was not until after President Abraham Lincoln's administration that Congress formally appropriated funds for a White House staff, which at first consisted merely of a secretary. Ulysses S. Grant's White House staff officially numbered six people at a cost of $13,800, though he supplemented with personnel from the War Department. Fifty years later under the Coolidge administration, the staff had increased to just fewer than fifty people at a cost of nearly $100,000.

As presidents increasingly hired more staff, some showed a tendency to pick aides and confidantes who had backgrounds in the field of journalism. One of Abraham Lincoln's private secretaries, John G. Nicolay, had been an editor and owner of a newspaper in Illinois before he worked for the president in the White House. While the modern equivalent of a private or personal secretary to the president of the United States would be more narrowly concerned with the care and feeding of the president, the small size of the White House staff at that point meant that Nicolay interacted with the press occasionally in carrying out his duties. He was occasionally asked to verify stories or information that various members of the press had heard. Though the title and establishment of the roles and responsibilities of the press secretary job was still decades in the future, the small and growing White House staff was increasingly interacting with a growing number of professional journalists and mass media entities covering the president and the White House. Andrew Johnson was the first president to grant a formal interview request to a reporter, sitting down with Col. Alexander K. McClure from Pennsylvania. Although various presidents and reporters had participated in conversations or dialogues prior to Johnson, the exchanges had been less formal.

Cleveland and McKinley administrations
Prior to the 1880s and the presidency of Grover Cleveland, the relationship between the president, his administration, and the small but growing number of newspapers covering him was such that there was little need for a formal plan or designated spokesperson to manage it. The relationship between government and the press was not as inherently adversarial and arms length as in modern times. In fact, prior to the establishment of the U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), some newspapers were awarded contracts to print government publications and often supported the president in exchange. For example, the Gazette of the United States won an early U.S. Treasury contract and was supportive of then-president Washington. In general, though coverage of the president could be harsh and opinionated, newspapers were to some degree extensions of the political party apparatus and subsequently not seen as entities requiring specific, sustained management by the White House or administration.

The media had changed significantly by 1884, when Grover Cleveland was elected as president of the United States. Between 1776 and 1884, the United States had quadrupled in size and increased in population from 2.5 million to 56 million. The number of newspaper publications in active circulation had increased from 37 to more than 1,200 dailies, in addition to the many new monthly magazines. The rapid growth in journalism as a booming industry resulted in an increase in reporters covering the activities of the president.

Grover Cleveland married 21-year-old Frances Folsom in 1886. The growing number of reporters and the increasing aggressiveness of their style of coverage led to frustrations when the president and his new bride were unable to rid themselves of reporters who followed them to their honeymoon in Deer Park, Maryland. President Cleveland relied on his private secretary, Daniel Lamont, who had once been an editor of the Albany Argus, to keep the reporters at bay. The controversy surrounding coverage of the trip resulted in a public debate about the balance between the right of the president and his family to privacy and the role of the press in covering the country's most public figure. In an editorial, the New York World defended the right of the press to cover the president at all times: "The idea of offending the bachelor sensitiveness of President Cleveland or the maidenly reserve of his bride has been far from anybody's thought...We must insist that the President is public property; that it is perfectly legitimate to send correspondents and reporters to follow him when he goes on a journey, and to keep watch over him and his family."

White House press corps
At the end of the Cleveland administration, a new feature of press coverage of the White House materialized. William W. Price, a southern reporter, auditioned for a job at the Washington Evening Star by stationing himself at the White House to seek out stories. He interviewed guests coming and going from meetings or events with the president and ultimately reported a story in a piece carrying the headline "At the White House". Competitor newspapers responded by sending their own reporters to cover the White House in a daily, sustained way and soon the White House had reporters dedicated to covering the "White House beat". Some point to this as the early origins of a more formal White House Press Corps.

When President Cleveland was elected to a second, non-consecutive term in 1893, George B. Cortelyou, formally trained as a stenographer, was named confidential stenographer at the White House and later named executive clerk. Though he was not given the formal title of private secretary to the president until later and the term press secretary had not yet been conceived, Cortelyou was highly respected by the press and William McKinley's biographer, Margaret Leach, called Cortelyou "the first of the presidential press secretaries". President Cleveland's successor, William McKinley, kept Cortelyou on during the transition and later formally named him private secretary to the president, though he had been informally doing the job for some time prior. Under McKinley, Cortelyou became notable for his popularity with journalists covering the White House. The correspondents relied on him for information and his tenure as private secretary was noteworthy for some of the same working traits modern press secretaries have become popular for, including providing information to reporters later in the evening if events had transpired in the afternoon, offering advance copies of remarks prepared for the president, and ensuring reporters received transcripts of unprepared remarks made by the president while traveling, which were recorded by a stenographer. Cortelyou also circulated noteworthy stories to the president and other staffers (by this point the White House staff numbered approximately 18), which is similar to the exhaustive news summaries formally distributed to the White House staff in the modern era. The nascent press corps' appreciation for Cortelyou's responsiveness is similar to how a modern White House press secretary's responsiveness to the press corps can shape their positive or negative view of him or her.

Working space in the White House for the press corps
The White House "beat" concept that had been started during the Cleveland administration by reporter William Price was continued during the McKinley administration. Around the time of the outbreak of the Spanish–American War in 1898, the reporters covering the White House were invited into the mansion itself and provided with space to write, conduct interviews, and generally cover the White House. Now reporting from inside the White House, the reporters used their new location to interview guests entering or leaving the White House or confirm pieces of information from the president's secretaries as they passed through in the course of their duties. Reporters working in the White House did, however, honor an unspoken rule and refrain from asking the president himself a question if he happened to walk through their working area.

The long-term presence of the White House Press Corps in the White House was cemented by Theodore Roosevelt, who asked that planners include permanent space for the press corps in the executive office building now called the West Wing, which he had ordered built in the early 1900s. It is the West Wing that ultimately housed the Office of the Press Secretary and the now-famous James S. Brady Press Briefing Room, which was renovated by the George W. Bush administration in 2007.

Woodrow Wilson administration
When Woodrow Wilson was elected governor of New Jersey in 1910, he asked Joseph P. Tumulty to serve as his private secretary. When he was elected president two years later, he brought Tumulty with him to the White House, where Tumulty served as private secretary to the president. As private secretary, Tumulty dealt extensively with the press. At the outset of the administration, Tumulty convinced Wilson, who was known for his distaste of the press, to hold news conferences on a regularized schedule, sometimes as much as twice every week. During the first such news conference, over one hundred reporters crowded into Wilson's office to ask him questions. Wilson often requested that reporters not publish answers given in these settings and on one occasion threatened to cancel the news conferences when a reporter revealed comments he had given regarding Mexico. The press conferences were later discontinued after the sinking of British liner Lusitania, and despite attempts to revive them during his second term were held only sporadically during Wilson's final years in office.

Joseph Tumulty also put into place a more regular schedule of briefing the press. He gave daily briefings to the press in the morning, which were attended by as many as thirty reporters. By formalizing the press briefing process, Tumulty laid the groundwork for what would later be called the White House Press Briefing. Tumulty also worked to clarify embargo rules for the press, ordering that the exact time a press embargo was lifted be noted on the confidential information that was being released.

Calvin Coolidge and Herbert Hoover administrations
Despite being nicknamed "Silent Cal", many reporters covering the White House found President Calvin Coolidge to be fairly accessible once he took office in 1923 following the death of President Warren G. Harding. During his over five years in office, Coolidge held approximately 520 press conferences, which averaged out to nearly 8 per month. The term "White House spokesman" was used extensively for the first time during the Coolidge administration, as press conference rules mandated that reporters could attribute quotes or statements only to a "White House spokesman" and not directly to the president himself. Former Associated Press editor W. Dale Nelson suggests that this practice was a precursor to the more modern use of "senior administration official" offering statements or quotes not directly attributable to a specific person, which was used frequently by Henry Kissinger during the Nixon administration.

When Herbert Hoover assumed the presidency in 1929, he brought his longtime aide George E. Akerson to Washington with him as his private secretary. Akerson did not have the formal title of "press secretary", but was the designated person to speak on behalf of President Hoover. Hoover asked the White House Correspondents Association to form a committee to discuss matters pertaining to coverage of the White House and formalized news conferences, dividing presidential news into three different categories:

 * Announcements directly attributable to the president of the United States,
 * Statements attributable to official sources, but not to the president himself, and
 * Background information for the reporter's knowledge but not specifically attributable to the president nor the White House

George Akerson continued the tradition of meeting daily with reporters, and though usually of jovial temperament, was not known for the precision that was the hallmark of some of his predecessors, such as Cortelyou. On one occasion, he incorrectly stated that sitting Supreme Court justice Harlan Stone had been elevated to be chief justice, only to have to issue a statement later that the actual nominee was Charles Evans Hughes. Akerson also struggled at times with his role in a growing White House staff. Akerson was one of three secretaries to the president, and some speculated that Hoover's closeness to his other secretary, Lawrence Richey, a former detective and Secret Service agent, made it difficult for Akerson to obtain the kind of information he needed to effectively do his job. As poor coverage made President Hoover appear detached and out of touch amidst a worsening depression, Richey and Akerson disagreed about the most effective press strategy, with Akerson promoting the idea that Hoover should leverage the increasingly influential platform of radio, and Richey arguing that the radio strategy was not worthy of the presidency. Akerson resigned not long thereafter, and Theodore Joslin, a former reporter, was named as the new secretary. Relations between the Hoover administration and the press continued to decline.

Roosevelt administration, Steve Early, and the first "White House press secretary"
During the administration of presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt, journalist Stephen Early became the first White House secretary charged only with press responsibilities. The manner in which Early approached his portfolio and increasingly high-profile nature of the job have led many to state that Early is the first true White House press secretary, both in function and in formal title. Prior to joining the Roosevelt campaign and administration Early had served as an editor to the military paper Stars and Stripes and also as a reporter for the Associated Press. When Roosevelt was nominated on James Cox's ticket as the vice presidential nominee in 1920, he asked Early to serve as an advance representative. As an advance representative, Early traveled ahead of the campaign, arranged for logistics and attempted to promote positive coverage for the candidates.

When President Roosevelt won the presidency in 1932, he chose Early to be his secretary responsible for handling the press, or as the role was becoming known, "the press secretary". After accepting the job, Early laid out for Roosevelt his vision of how the role should be conducted. He requested having unfettered access to the president, having his quotes and statements directly attributable to him as press secretary, and offering as much factual information to the press as it became available. He also convinced Roosevelt to agree to twice-weekly presidential press conferences, with the timing of each tailored to the different deadline schedules of the White House Press Corps. Early also made himself available to the press corps as often as he could, and though he was not known for a lighthearted or amiable demeanor, he earned a reputation for responsiveness and openness, even having his own telephone number listed unlike some of those who held the job after him.

Despite the unpopularity of press conferences by the end of the Hoover administration, Roosevelt continued the tradition. He did away with written questions submitted in advance and mandated that nothing he said in press conferences could be attributed to him or the White House, but was instead intended for reporters' general background information. Many reporters found this helpful as it allowed the president to be forthright and candid in his assessments and answers their questions. Unlike some of his predecessors who filled the role, Early routinely prepared Roosevelt for press conferences, bringing the president's attention to issues that might come up, suggesting the appropriate answers, and even planting questions or issues with certain reporters. Press conferences also began a tradition where the senior wire reporter concludes the session by stating, "Thank you, Mr. President", signaling that the time for questioning is over, a tradition that continues today. Roosevelt held well over 300 press conferences during his first term.

Though some reporters were unsatisfied with the amount of real news or new information they were getting from the press conferences, the Roosevelt administration under Early's leadership was considered by many to be effective at managing the White House's relationship with the press. During the administration, U.S. News reported that "The machinery for getting and giving the news runs about as smoothly as could be wished from either side."

The Roosevelt White House was also marked by a significant increase in the number of White House staff supporting the president and bureaucracy in general, largely as a result of increased New Deal funding. Early was criticized at times for attempting to closely manage press officers at various department and agencies across the government, and gave out a number of such jobs to journalists who he knew, instead of party loyalists who had traditionally received such appointments. A congressional investigation several years later revealed that across government, fewer than 150 employees were engaged in public relations along with an additional 14 part-time workers. This is a significant increase given that White House staff numbered at 11 in total when Roosevelt took office.

Early was involved in Roosevelt taking advantage of the radio medium through his fireside chats, an idea some say he got from George Akerson who had unsuccessfully tried to convince President Hoover to do something similar. Early also came under fire for the rules surrounding African American journalists not being allowed to attend presidential press conferences. Some have said that Early used enforcement of the standing rule, which had been to only allow regular Washington journalists to attend the press conferences, to deny press conference access to black reporters. Since many if not most black publications at the time were weeklies, they were restricted as a result of the rules. When African American reporters from daily publications requested access to the conferences, Early reportedly told them to seek accreditation from Capitol Hill press officers, which was another sometimes insurmountable challenge. African American reporters did not gain formal approval to attend White House news conferences until 1944.

Early's tenure as press secretary was also marked by stringent restrictions on photographers, largely aimed at hiding the severity of FDR's polio and worsening immobility. Photographers were not permitted to be closer than 12 ft of FDR, or 30 ft in larger events.

As a result of the increasingly high-profile nature of the job and Early's sole responsibility of managing the White House press operations, it was during the Roosevelt administration that Early and the position he held began to be formally referred to as the press secretary. As a result, many point to Steve Early as the first White House press secretary.

Eisenhower administration, James Hagerty, press secretary role evolves
As a candidate for president, Dwight D. Eisenhower tapped James Hagerty, a former reporter for the New York Times, to be his press secretary. Hagerty had previously been press secretary for New York governor Thomas E. Dewey during his two tries for the presidency. After he won election, Eisenhower appointed Hagerty to be White House press secretary.

Hagerty's experience as a journalist helped him perform his role more effectively: "Having spent years as a reporter on the other side of the news barrier, he was not blinded to the reporter's dependence on deadlines, transmission facilities, prompt texts of speeches and statements and the frequent necessity of having to ask seemingly irrelevant and inconsequential questions", wrote John McQuiston in the New York Times".

At Hagerty's first meeting with White House reporters on January 21, 1953, he laid down ground rules that are still largely a model for how the press secretary operates. He said:

 * I would like to say to you fellows that I am not going to play any favorites, and I'm not going to give out any exclusive stories about the president or the White House.

 * When I say to you, 'I don't know,' I mean I don't know. When I say, 'No comment,' it means I'm not talking, but not necessarily any more than that.

 * Aside from that, I'm here to help you get the news. I am also here to work for one man, who happens to be the president. And I will do that to the best of my ability.

The practice of regularly scheduled presidential news conference was instituted during the Eisenhower administration. Hagerty abolished the longstanding rule that the president could not be directly quoted without permission—for the first time, everything that the president said at a press conference could be printed verbatim.

In 1955, during the Eisenhower administration, newsreel and television cameras were allowed in presidential news conferences for the first time.

When President Eisenhower suffered a heart attack in Denver in September 1955, and underwent abdominal surgery the following year, Hagerty brought news to the nation in a calm and professional manner. "His performances in both crises won him more respect from newsmen than any presidential press secretary in memory", said a New York Times writer.

Hagerty remained press secretary for eight years, still the record for longest time served in that position. Eisenhower grew to trust Hagerty to such a degree that the role of press secretary was elevated to that of a senior advisor to the president.

Evaluations
Michael J. Towle weighs four factors determining the success and popularity of all seven press secretaries 1953 to 1980. Experts generally agree that James C. Hagerty, under Eisenhower, set the standard by which later press secretaries are judged. Under Carter, Jody Powell followed the Hagerty model, and was also judged successful. For Towle the first factor is the importance and centrality of the press secretary to the administration. Insiders who participate in high-level decision-making do better at explaining policy; the press has less confidence in outsiders, Towle concludes. The second factor is how tightly the office is controlled by the president. The media pays more attention to secretaries who are allowed to elaborate, and expound on the president's thoughts, and answer probing questions. Third, does the president signal confidence in the press secretary. Fourth is the respect the secretary has won from the press in terms of knowledge, credibility, clarity, promptness and ability to provide information on a wide range of policies.

Towle concludes that history had judged Hagerty and Salinger as successful. Lyndon Johnson confided in Salinger but distrusted the media and hobbled his next three press secretaries. Nixon throughout his career saw the press as the enemy, and the media responded in hostile fashion, leaving the young inexperienced Ronald Ziegler with a hopeless challenge. President Ford's first secretary was Jerald F. terHorst – he resigned in protest when Ford pardoned Nixon. Next came Ronald Nessen, who quickly acquired a reputation as inept, uninformed or noncredible, especially on foreign affairs. At the opposite extreme, the successful Jody Powell had been a close advisor to Carter for years, and could explain clearly how the president reasoned about issues. Carter said he "probably knows me better than anyone except my wife."

Responsibilities

The press secretary is responsible for collecting information about actions and events within the president's administration and around the world, and interacting with the media, generally in a daily press briefing. The information includes items such as a summary of the president's schedule for the day, whom the president has seen, or had communication and the official position of the administration on the news of the day.

The press secretary traditionally also fields questions from the White House press corps in briefings and press conferences, which are generally televised, and "press gaggles", which are on-the-record briefings without video recording, although transcripts are usually made available.

The position has often been filled by individuals from news media backgrounds:

 * Roosevelt administration – Stephen Early, a reporter for United Press International and correspondent for the Associated Press
 * Truman administration – Jonathan W. Daniels, a newspaper editor who was in the Franklin Roosevelt administration in multiple agencies and on various boards just prior to becoming press secretary; Charlie Ross, a journalist who received the Pulitzer Prize in 1932; Early; Joseph Short, a newspaper editor; and Roger Tubby, a reporter and editor turned Democratic National Committee spokesman before becoming White House press secretary
 * Eisenhower administration – James Hagerty, a reporter for The New York Times
 * Kennedy administration – Pierre Salinger, a reporter and editor for the San Francisco Chronicle
 * Johnson administration – appointed George Christian, a reporter for International News Service and PBS commentator Bill Moyers
 * Ford administration – appointed Jerald terHorst, a newspaper veteran; and Ron Nessen, an NBC News correspondent
 * Reagan administration – Larry Speakes, a newspaper editor; and Marlin Fitzwater, a newspaper editor
 * George H. W. Bush administration – Marlin Fitzwater
 * George W. Bush administration – Tony Snow, a veteran journalist and Fox News Channel anchor
 * Obama administration – Jay Carney, Time journalist.
 * Trump administration – Kayleigh McEnany, Fox News Channel political commentator.
 * Biden administration – Jen Psaki, CNN political commentator.

List of press secretaries
Notes

title: White House Press Secretary


text:
Talk:Royal Military College of Canada

Copyright Information
From the copyright page of this articles source website (1 or 2):
 * Non-commercial Reproduction

 * Information on this site has been posted with the intent that it be readily available for personal and public non-commercial use and may be reproduced, in part or in whole and by any means, without charge or further permission by the Department of National Defence. We ask only that:

 * Users exercise due diligence in ensuring the accuracy of the materials reproduced;

 * The Department of National Defence be identified as the source department; and

 * The reproduction is not represented as an official version of the materials reproduced, nor as having been made, in affiliation with or with the endorsement of the Department of National Defence.

This is not compatible with the GFDL which allows anyone to alter the text of a Wikipedia article. Further, the GFDL under which Wikipedia is licensed, does not forbid commercial use, e.g. burning Wikipedia onto DVD-ROM and selling it. The license of the DND forbids this:

 * Reproduction of multiple copies of materials on this site, in whole or in part, for the purposes of commercial redistribution is prohibited except with written permission from the Government of Canada’s copyright administrator, Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC).

Therefore, this article has to be rewritten from scratch or be deleted. Same for the flag. -- JeLuF 21:21, 29 Jul 2003 (UTC)
 * The above seems to be referring to an earlier version of this page. I'm guessing it reappeared when the page was recreated.  -- Cjrother 15:12, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Copyright of images
The new images on the page are copyrighted. Is that acceptable on wikipedia? I thought only public domain images were ok. Cjrother 19:26, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Copyrighted images are OK, as long as the holder of the copyright has granted the public a licence to use them under terms compatible with the GFDL. This is the situation with many images that have been created specifically for Wikipedia:  they are copyrighted, but licensed under the GFDL.  The other situation where copyrighted images are OK is under fair use.  I have no idea what the situation is for the images in this article.--Indefatigable 03:41, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Pierre Berton
Pierre Berton was listed as a notable professor, but I haven't found any evidence that he actually was an RMC professor. He taught courses at RMC during the Second World War, but this was at a time when RMC was used as a training centre. It had ceased operating as a military college in 1942 and did not resume that function until 1948. Eron 03:01, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I removed the reference to Pierre Berton as a notable professor. VictoriaEdwards 13:42, 17 October 2006 (UTC) My sources had included [www.cbc.ca/news/obit/berton_pierre/, www.randomhouse.ca/catalog/display.pperl?0385659385],

[www.craigmarlatt.com/canada/history&people/berton.html], and [www.bookclubs.ca/catalog/display.pperl?0385658427].

Lists

 * A fair number of the lists that dominate this article seem to be fairly irrelevant. While certainly notable professors and alumni should be included, I'm not sure what the need is to include lists of the Governors General, Honorary members, and so forth, it doesn't add much (if anything) to the article itself, and I think the article would be much more improved if we were to focus on information about the school itself. -- Chabuk [ T • C ] 17:40, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

CopyEdit and references
I just did a fairly thorough copyedit of the article, minor grammar things, removed a couple useless charts. I also tried to standardize the references though there are a fair number missing. I tried to find references for the chart info and some of the other claims (including the ontario law) but couldn't find most of them. I'll look again later, if anyone else wants to help find references, please do! -- Chabuk [ T • C ] 19:37, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

First Year Orientation Period
I added a section on the First Year Orientation Period experienced by all cadets. Feel free to edit the section. I hope not too much information will be removed due to irrelevance. I am sure that all information is accurate as I experienced it first hand. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by OCdt24550 (talk • contribs) 07:26, 18 March 2007 (UTC).

Trivia
As far as the weathervane and the torpedo trivia, is it provable that the torpedo points in a random direction, and the weathervane does not point to the all-girl dormitory? 64.228.222.85 00:20, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * These are legends passed down each year at the college. It would be hard to prove them exactly: besides, what if they were placed under that intention but incorrectly?  Psyklek 13:21, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Challenge coin
I'd like to see a photo of the Challenge coin mentioned on this article, uploaded if possible. --JAYMEDINC 00:33, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I lost mine... -Germ (talk) 00:18, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Encyclopedia standard
I've tried to combine various sections and give the whole article a bit more flow. I think there's more of a logical development, although I'm stuck on some of the tables (mainly the History one). I know that's how I learned it, but it seems like it could be written in sentences/paragraphs and be much more appealing.69.156.144.214 14:16, 4 May 2007 (UTC) (AN RMC OCDT)
 * Have you deleted information from the page? Reviewing the edit history, it seems some info is missing.   Andrew 647  14:27, 4 May 2007 (UTC) (Another RMC OCdt)

GA Failed
I'm sorry, but I have to fail this article for it's review for Good Article status. I'll explain why, using the definition of a good article:
 * 1) It is well written? Mostly. Some general capitalisations according to the WP:MOS might need to be reviewed, especially with your lists. Some minor general copyediting is required in parts, particularly in your paragraphs that preceded a list (one of note is the Admission Requirements section). This line "The older, historic buildings, located on the 41 hectare peninsula in Kingston, Ontario, blend with the modern academic, athletic and dormitory facilities." suggests taste, and is possibly contentious. It's in your lead, so it shouold be aptly referenced also, which it's not. Another issue with the Manual of Style is the reference formatting. You've simply got the websites/URLs for many of these entries. These should be formatted to a consistent standard. If you want to find a standard method of citation that suits the content of the page, have a look at Special:Cite and put any Wikipedia page in there. It will give you several different examples of how to cite a Wikipedia page. Pick one, format your footnote references all to that standard and stick with it.
 * 2) It is factually accurate and verifiable. Factually accurate? Sure, the references confirm this, but for the average reader, if they want to confirm the reference, or seek outside information, it's tough to find citations. There's a small handful, but inline citations are sparse. A lot more is required to pass GA.
 * 3) It is broad in its coverage. Yes, broad in coverage. Perhaps more depth could be explored in parts, but for the purposes of being a Good Article, it's certainly broad enough, but this will need to be adressed further before reviewing for WP:FAC.
 * 4) It is neutral. I don't believe it's completely neutral. There does seem to be a sway of bias towards the article, which is natural for a page editor, but there needs to be tightening up in this area, for instance the lead, as I mentioned in Point 1, could be worded it a way that doesn't suggest any bias. The term "blend" generally refers to something that has been effective. Should this be effective, then it should be referenced by a third party source. Generally, that doesn't seem to be an issue, as there's a blend of first party sources (i.e. the College's own website) and third parties.
 * 5) It is stable. This is the one regard this page is its strongest (which is perplexing as this is where most tertiary istitution pages seem to suffer). Keep the consistency of editing as it is, and the page will perform well.
 * 6) Images. Appropriate with fair use rationale. Appropriate? Selectionwise, yes. The selection of images is good, however the tininess of the thumbnails almost nullifies their existence. Increase their size and they'll be more useful to the viewer. Though one can click the image to view its own page and see the image in its full size, it's more appropriate to have the image large enough at a glance so as to be able to avoid this.

One last thing I'll address is the length of the lead. I'd like more volume in the lead, given the length of the article, it should be 2-3 paragraphs long. Have a look at WP:LEAD for more information.

On the volume of work to be done (as well as the fact that such a volume as this, with the small team of editors working on it) I have to fail this. Once these items are addressed, feel free to re-nominate the article. If you have any questions, feel free to comment on my talk page and I'll respond promptly. -- linca linca  13:15, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I think that mentioning that it is the college numbers that precede people's names is necessary, noting the significance of the college number, and description of the S,H, designations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.217.99.148 (talk) 09:03, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Some images were added and their are truly useless like the foil and the canex logo. Also, there is quite a lot of junk in the article. Is it really necessary to know that distance learning is taught in a classroom, by a correspondance course, by a CD or by internet. This sort of junk has to go. -Unsigned

Honours degrees confusions

 * "The Faculty of Science, in conjunction with the Faculty of Arts, also offers three joint honours degrees: Computer Science and Business Administration, Chemistry and Psychology, and Space Science and Military and Strategic Studies"

I've got this old brochure published by RMC, and rather than CompSci+Business, the Honours degree was in CompSci+Mathematics. Has this changed in the past couple years? I just want to verify this, because none of these other ones seem familiar. For example, in the current brochure there is no 'Chemistry' program described, only a Chemical Engineering one. We know the engineering type courses are different from the science ones. Tyciol (talk) 07:51, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm a student at RMC, and haven't heard anything along these lines. I have seen double-majors between Physics and Space Science, but nothing else. And Chemistry degrees are granted by the Department of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, which I think falls under the Engineering Faculty. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.54.3.28 (talk) 00:36, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Article size issues
I have added toolong to this article, as its length (over 100KB) makes it difficult to edit; according to the guidelines at WP:Article size, an article of over 60KB should 'probably' be split into smaller articles, and one of over 100KB 'almost certainly' should be. That is what should happen here; certain sections, such as 'Features and buildings of the RMC' and 'History of the RMC' could make good articles in their own right. Terraxos (talk) 01:43, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

RMC role in the investigation into disappearance and death of Cadet Grozelle.
I think any article on the RMC should deal in a frank and forthright manner with the RMC's role relating to the disappearance of Joe Grozelle and the disputes involving the manner in which his death was investigated.TD TinkersDam (talk) 16:07, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

I think that it is a matter that has been dealt with by the authorities, and don't necessairly have anything to do with the college by itself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.93.54.239 (talk) 03:51, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Bad Links
There seem to be bad links within the "External Links" section. Including:
 * "Joining Instructions - First Year Officer Cadets" goes to a 404 Error.
 * "A video about the first weeks of a Cadet at RMC" results in a You Tube Page with "This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by a third party. " on it.
 * "The Division of Continuing Studies at RMC" has been redirected to http://www.rmc.ca/aca/dcs-dep/co-cc-eng.asp
 * "RMC Museum" results in a HTTP 404 Not Found Error.
 * "Royal Military College of Canada, Massey Library" results in a HTTP 404 Not Found Error.

I will remove all 404 and Copyright links that were included. I will update the link with the redirect.

Also, a error message "Cite error: REF tags exist, but no REFERENCSE tag was found" is appearing at the bottom of the page. I am unable to locate the error to correct. Medic48 (talk) 19:08, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Accuracy
I'm concerned that User:Victoriaedwards may have left as much of a mess here as she has at Thomas Fuller (architect), in terms of adding erroneous architectural information. I'm not going to place an accuracy tag here, as I haven't looked through the buildings thoroughly, but the first one I checked, building 5, had info that appears to be contradicted by its Heritage Character Statement, and which I've attempted to correct. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:39, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Article size issues revisited
As mentioned before, this article is way too long. I have re-added toolong to this article, as its length (over 100KB) makes it difficult to edit; according to the guidelines at WP:Article size, an article of over 60KB should 'probably' be split into smaller articles, and one of over 100KB 'almost certainly' should be.-- BC talk to me  20:05, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

 * I've tried to remove a bunch of things that don't contribute anything/are repetitive/aren't neutral/aren't up to date and were too date specific, but there is still the massive both history and buildings pages that I think perhaps should be made in to their own articles --Navathehut (talk) 14:43, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

 * Yes, the page has become unwieldy. Great that you've started this. Lots of garbage here. I think a good place to start is with stuff that is time/date specific and trivial/not notable or encyclopedic. And there is tons of stuff with no source. There is also a problem with OR. If transferring stuff to their own articles, we have to make sure that the stuff is notable; some stuff isn't worth transferring. For instance, is the intricate detail about the buildings important enough to warrant an article on RMC buildings? I'm not so sure.-- BC talk to me  17:47, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Royal Military College of Canada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110503204432/http://www.goarmysports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=11100&KEY=&ATCLID=576395 to http://www.goarmysports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=11100&KEY=&ATCLID=576395

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at Sourcecheck).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 07:58, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 19 external links on Royal Military College of Canada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://www.rmc.ca/cam/mus/index-eng.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080615232554/http://www.cfls-elfc.forces.gc.ca/hq/engraph/home_e.asp to http://www.cfls-elfc.forces.gc.ca/hq/engraph/home_e.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090109142758/http://www.journal.dnd.ca/vo6/no3/views-vues-eng.asp to http://www.journal.dnd.ca/vo6/no3/views-vues-eng.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110605032733/http://www.pc.gc.ca/lhn-nhs/on/plan/pd-mp_KingFortifications_e.pdf to http://www.pc.gc.ca/lhn-nhs/on/plan/pd-mp_KingFortifications_e.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110615054420/http://www.heritagefdn.on.ca/userfiles/HTML/nts_1_5596_1.html to http://www.heritagefdn.on.ca/userfiles/HTML/nts_1_5596_1.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120524015313/http://www.heritagefdn.on.ca/userfiles/HTML/nts_1_5604_1.html to http://www.heritagefdn.on.ca/userfiles/HTML/nts_1_5604_1.html
 * Added tag to http://www.pc.gc.ca/apps/beefp-fhbro/FHB_Rech_Search_e.asp
 * Added tag to http://www.pc.gc.ca/apps/beefp-fhbro/FHB_Rech_Search_e.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121019171131/http://www.ocul.on.ca/members to http://www.ocul.on.ca/members
 * Added tag to http://www.rmc.ca/cam/mus/index-eng.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110718032818/http://www.westvan60.com/stamps/stampsregseries.html to http://www.westvan60.com/stamps/stampsregseries.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131004223845/http://nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/mediacentre/releases/news_release.cfm?news_release_id=466 to http://nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/mediacentre/releases/news_release.cfm?news_release_id=466
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100211062404/http://www.sja.ca/Ontario/Events/Pages/125inOntario.aspx to http://www.sja.ca/Ontario/Events/Pages/125inOntario.aspx
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061013020753/http://www.warmuseum.ca/cwm/disp/dis013_e.html to http://www.warmuseum.ca/cwm/disp/dis013_e.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061107205931/http://www.rmcclub.ca/PDFs/HistoryEnglish.pdf to http://www.rmcclub.ca/PDFs/HistoryEnglish.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070615130712/http://www.journal.dnd.ca/engraph/Vol6/no3/PDF/11-ViewsOpinions1_e.pdf to http://www.journal.dnd.ca/engraph/Vol6/no3/PDF/11-ViewsOpinions1_e.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061107205933/http://www.journal.dnd.ca/engraph/vol2/no3/pdf/5-12_e.pdf to http://www.journal.dnd.ca/engraph/vol2/no3/pdf/5-12_e.pdf
 * Added tag to http://www.cda-acd.forces.gc.ca/CFLI/engraph/research/pdf/84.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081030215141/http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/caj/documents/vol_06/iss_2/CAJ_vol6.2_04_e.pdf to http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/caj/documents/vol_06/iss_2/CAJ_vol6.2_04_e.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110610174907/http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/CAJ/default_e.asp?view=more&issueID=11 to http://www.army.forces.gc.ca/CAJ/default_e.asp?view=more&issueID=11
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060331195227/http://www.civilisations.ca/cwm/disp/dis013_e.html to http://www.civilisations.ca/cwm/disp/dis013_e.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070615130716/http://www.journal.dnd.ca/engraph/Vol2/no3/pdf/13-20_e.pdf to http://www.journal.dnd.ca/engraph/Vol2/no3/pdf/13-20_e.pdf
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20130115231502/http://www.rmc.ca/aca/dcs-dep/co-cc-eng.asp to http://www.rmc.ca/aca/dcs-dep/co-cc-eng.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110518165937/http://www.aucc.ca/can_uni/our_universities/rmc_e.html to http://www.aucc.ca/can_uni/our_universities/rmc_e.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:32, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Royal Military College of Canada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://www.rmc.ca/aca/me-gm/index-eng.asp
 * Added tag to http://www.rmc.ca/aca/ce-gc/index-eng.asp
 * Added tag to http://www.rmc.ca/aca/me-gm/index-eng.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110326090627/http://www.queensu.ca/cir/ to http://www.queensu.ca/cir
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050624074703/http://www.innovation.gc.ca/gol/innovation/site.nsf/en/in01981.html to http://innovation.gc.ca/gol/innovation/site.nsf/en/in01981.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110206030940/http://www.queensu.ca/news/articles/queens-and-rmc-launch-canadas-first-military-and-veteran-health-research-network to http://www.queensu.ca/news/articles/queens-and-rmc-launch-canadas-first-military-and-veteran-health-research-network
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090102201741/http://www.rmcclub.ca/everitaswp/?p=1071 to http://www.rmcclub.ca/everitaswp/?p=1071
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20110706181727/http://www.cda-acd.forces.gc.ca/dli-dai/dmasc-dascm/index-eng.asp to http://www.cda-acd.forces.gc.ca/dli-dai/dmasc-dascm/index-eng.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120118182932/http://www.forces.ca/interactive/rmc/kingston/index.html to http://www.forces.ca/interactive/rmc/kingston/index.html
 * Added tag to http://www.thewhig.com/webapp/sitepages/content.asp?contentid=644872&catname=Local+news
 * Added tag to http://www.kingstonthisweek.com/webapp/sitepages/content.asp?contentid=639781&catname=Local+News
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110615065013/http://www.dcc-cdc.gc.ca/documents/publications/dcc_at_work_aug_03_e.pdf to http://www.dcc-cdc.gc.ca/documents/publications/dcc_at_work_aug_03_e.pdf
 * Added tag to http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/sheetmusic/m5-206-e.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080517030310/http://www.ontarioplaques.com/Plaques_DEF/Plaque_Frontenac29.html to http://ontarioplaques.com/Plaques_DEF/Plaque_Frontenac29.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:09, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:51, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
 * V279 20070111 arms royalmilitarycollegeofcanada collegeofarms.jpg

Commons files used on this page have been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:06, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Gatehouse 1 Royal Military College of Canada.jpg
 * Gatehouse 2 Royal Military College of Canada.jpg

Athletics Wall of Distinction
The Royal Military College of Canada (RMC) Athletics Wall of Distinction (AWOD) was established to honour those who have brought distinction to the Canadian Military Colleges (CMC) through significant achievements and contributions in sport while at a CMC and/or following graduation throughout their athletics careers. The AWOD program was conceived of by the Class of 1970 and is supported through an endowment funded by the Class to honour its entry into the RMC Club of Canada Old Brigade in the fall of 2015.

Le Mur de la renommée sportive (MRS) du Collège militaire royal du Canada (CMR) a été établi pour rendre hommage à ceux qui ont fait honneur aux Collèges militaires du Canada (CMC) par des exploits sportifs ou d’importantes contributions aux sports pendant qu’ils fréquentaient un CMC ou au fil de leur carrière sportive après obtention de leur diplôme. Le Mur de la renommée sportive a été mis sur pied par la promotion de 1970 et est financé au moyen d'un fonds établi par cette promotion en l'honneur de son entrée dans la Vieille Brigade du Club des CMR du Canada à l'automne 2015.

SECONDARY SOURCE: RMC Athletics Wall of Distinction Inductees (rmc-cmr.ca)

TERTIARY SOURCE: Sports: RMC Celebrates Athletic Wall of Distinction Inductees Virtually – eVeritas (rmcalumni.ca) 00:16, 17 April 2023 (UTC)00:16, 17 April 2023 (UTC)00:16, 17 April 2023 (UTC)~ 198.103.111.110 (talk) 00:16, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:Royal Military College of Canada


text:
Starr Report

The Starr Report, officially the Referral from Independent Counsel Kenneth W. Starr in Conformity with the Requirement of Title 28, United States Code, Section 595(c), is a United States federal government report by Independent Counsel Ken Starr concerning his investigation of President Bill Clinton. Delivered to the United States Congress on September 9, 1998, the allegations in the report led to the impeachment of Bill Clinton and the five-year suspension of Clinton's law license.

Background
Initially chosen as Independent Counsel in 1994, and charged with investigating Bill and Hillary Clinton's pre-presidency financial dealings with the Whitewater Land Company, Ken Starr, with the approval of Attorney General Janet Reno, conducted a wide-ranging investigation of alleged abuses including the firing of White House travel agents, the alleged misuse of FBI files, and Clinton's conduct while he was a defendant in a sexual harassment lawsuit filed by a former Arkansas state government employee, Paula Jones. In the course of the investigation, Linda Tripp provided Starr with taped phone conversations in which Monica Lewinsky, a former White House Intern, discussed having oral sex with the president. Clinton gave a sworn deposition in the Jones case on January 17, 1998, during which he denied having a "sexual relationship", "sexual affair" or "sexual relations" with Lewinsky. He also denied that he was ever alone with her. Seven months later, on August 17, Clinton faced a federal grand jury, convened by Ken Starr, to consider whether the president committed perjury in his January deposition, or otherwise obstructed justice, in the Jones case. A much-quoted statement from the deposition shows Clinton questioning the precise use of the word "is", saying, "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the—if he—if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not—that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement". Clinton contended that his January statement that "there's nothing going on between us" had been truthful because he had no ongoing relationship with Lewinsky at the time he was questioned. He also stated that oral sex was not, in his opinion, "sexual relations" within the meaning of that term as adopted in the Jones case (i.e. vaginal intercourse).

The Office of the Independent Counsel concluded its four-year-long investigation of the president soon after Clinton's grand jury testimony, and on September 9, 1998, delivered its report to the House Judiciary Committee. Republican House leaders argued for the report's immediate release via the internet, while Democrats appealed for delay in order to allow the White House time to prepare a response. After two days of debate, on September 11, the House voted 363–63 to release the report to the public. When the report, a 453-page document summarizing the evidence against the president, was uploaded to the internet, it became a sensation, with 20 million people (12% of adult Americans) accessing the document at least once. "It's probably the single highest number of people who have ever used the computer to access a single document," David Webber of the Frank Luntz polling company told CNN.

Summary
The long-awaited report cited 11 possible grounds for impeachment in four categories: perjury, obstruction of justice, witness tampering and abuse of power. These allegations all arose from President Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky.

In the report's introduction, Starr asserted that Clinton had lied under oath during a sworn deposition on January 17, 1998, while he was a "defendant in a sexual harassment lawsuit" and "to a grand jury." He additionally alleged that Clinton had "attempted to influence the testimony of a grand jury witness who had direct knowledge of facts that would reveal the falsity of his deposition testimony; attempted to obstruct justice by facilitating a witness' plan to refuse to comply with a subpoena; attempted to obstruct justice by encouraging a witness to file an affidavit that the president knew would be false ... ; lied to potential grand jury witnesses, knowing that then they would repeat those lies before the grand jury; and engaged in a pattern on conduct that was inconsistent with his constitutional duty to faithfully execute the laws."

Starr included a detailed timeline of Lewinsky's various sexual encounters with Clinton during her White House internship. He concluded the report with a section entitled "Grounds," where he provided supporting evidence to each of the 11 grounds for potential impeachment of Clinton—including physical evidence such as the DNA test results of a semen stain on a dress owned by Lewinsky which matched Clinton's blood sample. Starr also alleged that Clinton had conversations with witnesses during his investigation which he ascribed as "witness-tampering and obstruction of justice by hiding evidence and giving misleading accounts to lawyers for Paula Jones."

Stated possible grounds for impeachment
Specifically, Starr reported: "There is substantial and credible information supporting the following eleven possible grounds for impeachment:

1. President Clinton lied under oath in his civil case when he denied a sexual affair, a sexual relationship, or sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky. 2. President Clinton lied under oath to the grand jury about his sexual relationship with Ms. Lewinsky. 3. In his civil deposition, to support his false statement about the sexual relationship, President Clinton also lied under oath about being alone with Ms. Lewinsky and about the many gifts exchanged between Ms. Lewinsky and him. 4. President Clinton lied under oath in his civil deposition about his discussions with Ms. Lewinsky concerning her involvement in the Jones case. 5. During the Jones case, the President obstructed justice and had an understanding with Ms. Lewinsky to jointly conceal the truth about their relationship by concealing gifts subpoenaed by Ms. Jones's attorneys. 6. During the Jones case, the President obstructed justice and had an understanding with Ms. Lewinsky to jointly conceal the truth of their relationship from the judicial process by a scheme that included the following means: (i) Both the President and Ms. Lewinsky understood that they would lie under oath in the Jones case about their sexual relationship; (ii) the President suggested to Ms. Lewinsky that she prepare an affidavit that, for the President's purposes, would memorialize her testimony under oath and could be used to prevent questioning of both of them about their relationship; (iii) Ms. Lewinsky signed and filed the false affidavit; (iv) the President used Ms. Lewinsky's false affidavit at his deposition in an attempt to head off questions about Ms. Lewinsky; and (v) when that failed, the President lied under oath at his civil deposition about the relationship with Ms. Lewinsky.

7. President Clinton endeavored to obstruct justice by helping Ms. Lewinsky obtain a job in New York at a time when she would have been a witness harmful to him were she to tell the truth in the Jones case.

8. President Clinton lied under oath in his civil deposition about his discussions with Vernon Jordan concerning Ms. Lewinsky's involvement in the Jones case. 9. The President improperly tampered with a potential witness by attempting to corruptly influence the testimony of his personal secretary, Betty Currie, in the days after his civil deposition.

10. President Clinton endeavored to obstruct justice during the grand jury investigation by refusing to testify for seven months and lying to senior White House aides with knowledge that they would relay the President's false statements to the grand jury – and did thereby deceive, obstruct, and impede the grand jury. 11. President Clinton abused his constitutional authority by (i) lying to the public and the Congress in January 1998 about his relationship with Ms. Lewinsky; (ii) promising at that time to cooperate fully with the grand jury investigation; (iii) later refusing six invitations to testify voluntarily to the grand jury; (iv) invoking Executive Privilege; (v) lying to the grand jury in August 1998; and (vi) lying again to the public and Congress on August 17, 1998 – all as part of an effort to hinder, impede, and deflect possible inquiry by the Congress of the United States."

Response to report
At the time it was released, the report was criticized for making accusations about exactly what Clinton did. The report claimed "the details are crucial to an informed evaluation of the testimony, the credibility of witnesses, and the reliability of other evidence. Many of the details reveal highly personal information; many are sexually explicit. This is unfortunate, but it is essential." Because Starr's office allegedly leaked portions to press about sexual details that were mentioned in his report, he was criticized for using the scandal as a political maneuver and was charged for violating legal ethics by presenting information irrelevant to an investigation as evidence of legal wrongdoing. Also, it is unclear whether Starr had the legal authority to ask Clinton questions about his sexual relationship with Lewinsky, as the OIC was convened solely to investigate Whitewater and Paula Jones' claim that Clinton sexually harassed her. Questioning about a sexual relationship void of assault appears to be both irrelevant under the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) as a whole and under Rule 413, which allows questioning about separate allegations of sexual assault (which was never asserted about Lewinsky's relationship with Clinton).

The report was also criticized for exaggerating what the legal definition of perjury is, accusing Clinton of committing perjury after only one witness claimed he did so and saying that Clinton lied when he said he did not have sexual relations with Lewinsky in terms described by Paula Jones' attorneys. Two of the three parts of the definition of "sexual relations" described by Jones' attorneys during her lawsuit had been ruled out by presiding Judge Susan Webber Wright as "too broad" and legally unacceptable.

The report alleged that Clinton considered oral sex to be a form of sexual relations and that the relationship between him and Lewinsky lasted longer than the date he described, but presented nothing relevant to back its claims. The report also claimed that Clinton falsely denied under oath ever meeting with Lewinsky alone at times, despite the fact that Clinton did admit to this when he testified, and that Clinton obstructed justice by concealing gifts he gave to Lewinsky and destroying an intimate note that was left in a book he claimed Lewinsky gave him when she visited the White House on January 4, 1998. Lewinsky's testimony that Clinton concealed gifts was contradicted by both Clinton's testimony and that of his personal secretary Betty Currie, who each said that it was Lewinsky who asked him for some gifts and that he tended to give a number of his staff gifts as an act of courtesy. Betty Currie also produced some of the gifts Clinton gave to Lewinsky before the grand jury. Clinton also denied ever seeing such an intimate note and the Secret Service WAVES records showed Lewinsky did not visit the White House on any given date in 1998. Starr also presented nothing credible to back his claim that Clinton obstructed justice by asking Lewinsky to file an affidavit denying there was ever a relationship between the two or that both Lewinsky and Clinton denied what had truly happened during the relationship under oath. The report also alleged Clinton's job offer to Lewinsky was an attempt to keep her from admitting the relationship to the public and thus obstruct justice, but had nothing relevant to back this claim either.

Starr also accused Clinton of denying under oath that he ever had a conversation with Vernon Jordan about Lewinsky's involvement in the Paula Jones lawsuit. Clinton, however, was never asked this when he testified during the Jones case. Starr also accused Clinton of witness tampering by influencing Currie to testify in favor of him. Currie, however, was not called as a witness when stated what she saw had happened during the relationship between Clinton and Lewinsky and it was demonstrated that Lewinsky was a friend of Currie's who had exchanged some of the gifts Clinton gave Lewinsky during a visit. While Starr did acknowledge that Currie did visit Lewinsky's apartment and exchanged the gifts with her, he also claimed that the fact that Currie drove to Lewinsky's apartment proved Lewinsky's testimony that Clinton concealed the gifts was correct and Currie's and Clinton's were both false. This claim about was denounced as without any basis or logic.

Starr also claimed that Clinton simultaneously delayed testimony for seven months and lied to potential grand jury witnesses by publicly denying the relationship, and thus committed a criminal felony by refusing to testify. When Clinton made his claim about his relationship with Lewinsky to the public, however, he was not under oath and thus it legally was not a felony. There was also no evidence that Clinton committed witness tampering by privately denying the relationship to these witnesses and asking them to testify in his favor.

Starr also argued that Clinton abused power by: denying the relationship with Lewinsky ever occurred; using executive privilege to both pursue an appeal against the case without Starr's knowledge; using executive privilege to cover up the relationship; delaying his grand jury testimony until August, and by getting the Secret Service to agree to assist in covering up the relationship in an acquiescing matter. However, a letter was discovered that showed Clinton's legal team had informed Starr before the appeals took place. The report was also misleading when it reflected the Supreme Court's ruling that the President could not use the Secret Service to assist in whatever they wanted help with. Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist, who wrote the majority opinion, had also stated that any case with merit, the prospect of an appeal would be granted. When Clinton pursued the appeal before the DC District Court, the court's Chief Justice Norma Holloway Johnson acknowledged that Clinton was cooperating with Starr and did not use executive privilege to cover up the relationship. Abuse of power had also been defined in The Federalist Papers as "corrupt use of the office for personal gain or some other improper purpose," which was not demonstrated in this case.

Partial retraction
In January 2020, while testifying as a defense lawyer for U.S. President Donald Trump during his Senate impeachment trial, Starr himself would retract some of the allegations he made in the report. Slate journalist Jeremy Stahl pointed out that as he was urging the Senate not to remove Trump as president, Starr contradicted various arguments he used in 1998 to justify Clinton's impeachment. In defending Trump, Starr also claimed he was wrong to have called for impeachment against Clinton for abuse of executive privilege and efforts to obstruct Congress and also stated that the House Judiciary Committee was right in 1998 to have rejected one of the planks for impeachment he had advocated for. He also invoked a 1999 Hofstra Law Review article by Yale law professor Akhil Amar, who argued that the Clinton impeachment proved just how impeachment and removal causes "grave disruption" to a national election.

title: Starr Report


text:
The International

The International may refer to:

Arts, entertainment, media

 * The International (2006 film), a 2006 Turkish film written and directed by Sırrı Süreyya Önder
 * The International (2009 film), a 2009 film starring Clive Owen and Naomi Watts
 * The International, a literary journal founded in 1912 by George Sylvester Viereck
 * The International (play), a 1927 play by American playwright John Howard Lawson
 * The International, a character in the television cartoon Popeye

Competitions and sports

 * The International (Dota 2), the annual esports tournament for the video game Dota 2
 * The International (golf), a golf tournament on the United States PGA tour
 * The International (golf course), a golf course located in Bolton, Massachusetts
 * The International (greyhounds), a former greyhound racing competition

Socialism

 * "The Internationale", an anthem of international socialism
 * One of several political internationals, typically communist or socialist political organisations that span multiple countries
 * (see List of left-wing internationals)
 * The various editions of Webster's New International Dictionary, used as a jocular allusion to these political organisations

Other uses

 * A short name for The International Society of Sculptors, Painters and Gravers
 * The International Nightclub Manchester, in England

title: The International


text:
Blue Amberol Records

Blue Amberol Records was the trademark name for cylinder records manufactured by Thomas A. Edison, Inc. in the US from 1912 to 1929. They replaced the 4-minute black wax Amberol cylinders introduced in 1908, which had replaced the 2-minute wax cylinders that had been the standard format since the late 1880s. Blue Amberols can play for as long as 4 minutes and 45 seconds and have a surface layer of the "indestructible" plastic celluloid, which Edison tinted a trademark blue color. Edison brand phonographs designed to play Amberol cylinders were named Amberolas.

Edison wax Amberols
The four-minute Amberol cylinder made its debut in 1908. Amberols were made of a fragile, black, wax-like compound which was harder than the original 1902 black wax. This Amberol wax was also used for 2-minute standard records from 1908 until the Blue Amberol appeared in 1912. The introduction of the Amberol started a resurgence of interest in cylinder records, but problems soon became apparent. Amberols crack rather easily and could break during playback. Amberols often shattered when they broke, unlike some kinds of 2-minute wax cylinders that would simply crack into a few pieces. Another problem was that wax Amberols wore out too quickly. Some Amberols mistracked or played with a wavering pitch due to uneven shrinkage during the manufacturing process.

Edison Blue Amberols
By 1912, the shortcomings of the wax Amberol were obvious. Edison, who did not want to pay royalties to Thomas B. Lambert for his celluloid cylinder patent, eventually bought it and changed production over to a thin but tough blue-tinted celluloid reinforced with a plaster of Paris core. The introduction of these "Blue Amberols" helped to hike cylinder sales. The early Blue Amberol releases offered excellent audio quality for their era — better, in fact, than later issues, because from January 1915 onward Thomas A. Edison, Inc., which had been concentrating its efforts on improving the quality of Diamond Disc phonograph records, began to release cylinders which were acoustically dubbed from Diamond Discs. The dubbing technique used was non-electronic (the disc phonograph horn played into the cylinder recording horn) until December 1927, when electronic dubbing was introduced. This resulted in a somewhat hollow "dead" sound on the cylinders compared to the original discs. On many dubbed cylinders, when the cylinder's own 160 rpm surface noise is low enough, 80 rpm disc surface noise can be heard starting up shortly before the music begins.

Beyond the main popular and sacred music series, which began with record number 1501 in 1912 and ended with record number 5719 in 1929, Edison offered a special line of prestigious Concert Blue Amberols of opera arias, light classical pieces, and other "cultured" music performed by "name" artists, later supplanted by the distinctively tinted Royal Purple Amberol cylinders. A set of special wax Amberols or Blue Amberols identified by the letters A through H, rather than the more usual numbers, were given away with 4-minute conversion kits sold for updating some earlier 2-minute phonographs. There were Blue Amberol instructional records to accompany the Edison School Phonograph, ICS language courses, Blue Amberols for Morse code training, Blue Amberols for the French and German markets, special 2-minute Blue Amberols for the rural Mexican market, and 6-inch-long (15 cm) dictation instruction cylinders for the Ediphone that were essentially long Blue Amberols and remained in production for many years after the demise of the cylinder format as an entertainment medium.

Technical

Edison Blue Amberols are made of celluloid on a molded plaster core. The celluloid surface is able to withstand hundreds of playings with only a moderate increase in surface noise if played on a well-maintained machine with a stylus in good condition.

Blue Amberols have a maximum playing time of about 4 minutes and 45 seconds and play at the standard post-1902 cylinder speed of 160 rpm. Like the preceding black wax Amberols, they provide twice the playing time of 2-minute cylinders by using a finer groove with a pitch of 200 lines per inch instead of 100. They cannot be played on older machines set up to play only the earlier standard 2 minute cylinders, as both wax and celluloid Amberols require a smaller stylus tip to fit the finer groove and the worm-gear which moves the stylus over the surface of the cylinder must turn at a different rate. Thomas A. Edison, Inc. sold kits with gear assemblies and reproducers that could be installed by the owner of an older Edison machine so that both standard and 4-minute records could be played. The Edison company also marketed new models capable of playing both. With these combination machines the operator needed to adjust a knob or lever that shifted gears and make sure the correct reproducing stylus was in position when switching from one record type to the other.

Internal horn Edison phonographs designed to play 4-minute cylinders were called Amberolas. The earliest Amberola model, the 1909 Amberola IA, was equipped with selectable 2 and 4-minute gearing, and after initially being sent out fitted with an unmarked Model "L" reproducer with a flattened fishtail weight that was recalled almost immediately as being "unsatisfactory", was refitted with the Model "M" reproducer with flip-over 2 and 4-minute sapphire styli for playing wax cylinders. There is at least one known example of an early Model M reproducer also fitted with a flattened fishtail weight.

Upon the introduction of Blue Amberols in 1912, the M reproducer was supplanted by the Diamond A reproducer, which was designed for playing only celluloid cylinders. Its small-tipped conical diamond stylus and increased stylus pressure would seriously damage wax cylinders. External horn Edison phonographs were available with the Diamond B reproducer. Several other Amberola models less expensive than the IA (and later the 4-minute-only IB and III) were available, such as the V, VI, and X.

After an Edison factory fire in December 1914, the Amberola line was simplified in both mechanical and cabinet design, resulting in the 4-minute-only Amberola 30, 50, and 75, each model number indicating the initial retail price in dollars. They were equipped with the Diamond C reproducer. The 4-minute-only external horn Opera (later renamed Concert) model of 1911-1912, which used the same mechanism as the IB and III, was initially fitted with the Model L reproducer, which had an elliptical sapphire stylus for playing wax Amberols, but after the introduction of Blue Amberols it shipped with the Diamond A reproducer.

Archival storage of cylinders
The "Amberol" plastic is on a plaster of Paris core. This core is proving to be problematic for the long-term survival of Blue Amberol Records, as the plaster often tends to expand over the decades, especially if exposed to moisture or kept in humid conditions. In moderate cases, swollen plaster can make the record not fit properly on the phonograph mandrel (this can be fairly easily remedied by gently reaming out the plaster to restore the correct inner diameter) or can warp the cylinder out of round, making it not play properly. In worse cases, the expanding plaster will crack or split the plastic playing surface, rendering the record unusable. Freezing causes any moisture in the plaster to expand but makes the celluloid contract, a combination which can cause the celluloid to split lengthwise very abruptly.

The Blue Amberol plastic is nitrocellulose and therefore flammable. Being an organic plastic, celluloid is subject to chemical decomposition, but acute deterioration, as seen in nitrate film reels, has so far rarely if ever been observed in Blue Amberols or other (e.g., Lambert, Albany Indestructible, and US Everlasting) celluloid cylinders.

title: Blue Amberol Records