THE DNC LEAKED EMAILS
in
SMOKE AND MIRRORS
Having worked in
Advertising I can tell you that the key to a great advertising campaign is
DRAWING ON HUMAN EMOTIONS. If you pay attention to the titles of the leaked DNC
emails and then read the ACTUAL EMAILS you'll be amazed as to how one thing
does not always reflect the other.
Just because I
care, here are three emails to get you started. I took the liberty of
highlighting passages I thought interesting (red) and giving you my take (blue).
EMAIL ONE
View email
View source
RE: FNS 4-24-16
From:BrinsterJ@dnc.org
To: Comm_D@dnc.org
Date: 2016-04-24 11:54
Subject: RE: FNS 4-24-16
Panel on Dems path forward
* HRC ran through June in 2008, but
right about this point she started to back off Obama attacks, Sanders isn't
really.
o We'll see what happens after Tues, Sanders
will probably lose big in PA
o He's doing damage by hitting her on trust,
honesty, authenticity, judgment
* What is Sanders going to do to get his
supporters on board? Dem party planks taking on Wall St, oil/gas
o There will be negotiations, but Clinton
people will have much more leverage
* HRC will go into gen election has
vulnerable candidate
o Dems don't even pay attention to email story
o Clinton Foundation quid-pro-quo worries are
lingering, will be exploited in general
* Move to the left on illegal
immigration, tougher for Hillary?
o Yes, Super PAC paying young voters to push
back online on Sanders supporters
o She's forced to continue to appeal to young
liberals as opposed to pivoting back to center
From: Brinster,
Jeremy
Sent: Sunday,
April 24, 2016 9:43 AM
To: Comm_D
Subject: RE: FNS
4-24-16
HRC private email
section got a little harry, I didn't catch everything
DWS interview
* Given that HRC seems to have path to
nomination, does Sanders need to tone down attacks / unify party
o I actually have been very proud
of both candidates, seen at debates, discussions on trail, substance /
commitment to laying out vision to move country forward, particularly compared
to circus on other side
* If you could answer my question-
o I'm about to. I need to preface
it for a moment, they've done a great job. I've cautioned over last few weeks, made
it clear that rhetoric of candidates needs to be such that doesn't make it
harder for party to reunify, but in the final stretch of the campaign it could
get more intense.(NOTE: The use of CANDIDATES. Plural means more
than one)
* Plays Sanders clip on
differences with HRC on trade, super pacs. Is that helpful to electing a Dem
president? (NOTE: It does use a specific name, “is that helpful to electing Bernie
or Hilary”)
o When you look at other side of the aisle,
toto pulling back curtain on the wizard, showing Trump is a faker running for
POTUS, he has been most extreme, misogynistic candidate put forward by any
party. It pales in comparison.
* But the fact is Sanders talks
repeatedly about HRC taking millions from Wall St, not standing up to them,
drug companies, fossil fuels-is that helpful?
o I'm glad to deal with my own party, but it
has to deal with frame in which campaign is playing out
o Most of our candidates are focused on
achieving same goal, if
either is president,
they would build on Obama's success (EITHER,
is not a specific name)
o Both candidates have talked about making
sure success reaches the middle class
* But Sanders talking about HRC being a
corporate sellout?
o Because I think we have two
candidates focused on building on success rather than bringing us backward to
failed policies, even sharp differences pale in comparison (NOTE:
WE HAVE which means the embracing of both and seeing the similarities between
the two as opposed to differences)
o We had a much more divisive primary, arguably,
in 2008, Obama won and chose HRC as Sec State, I was an HRC supporter until the
last day in '08, and Obama chose me as DNC chair, so I don't think it's hard to
reunify.
* Sanders driving up HRC's
unfavorable. Trump's are worse, but he may not be nominee (NOTE:
They dodn’t see Bernie as a threat, Donald is.)
o Some GOPers hope that Trump won't be
nominee, with good reason
o Exit polls show 7 in 10 Dems energized by
primary, less than 40% of Republicans say the same thing
* Turnout gap, Republicans have 5 m vote edge
o HRC has had 10.6 m people vote for her,
Sanders 7.1 m people, more votes than Trump for HRC and Sanders has more than
Cruz/Kasich
o Far more support and energy on our side
o We are continuing to head toward a unified
effort when our primary is over
* You've dismissed the idea that
HRC could face legal troubles over her private server, how do you know that? (NOTE:
a great question showing objectivity and not favoritism)
o I'm simply confident that as
investigation moves forward, HRC has made clear and many within the government has
made clear that she acted legally
o Former
secretaries of state have used private email
* FBI has had dozens of agents working
on this for month, Comey said it can go past July
o I'm not commenting one way or
another (NOTE: Again, an objective response)
o HRC has released 55,000 pages
of email, more transparent in terms of conversations than any presidential
candidate (Note: Fact)
o John Kerry, Condi Rice, Collin
Powell, all used private email
* But not
30,000 emails...
o I'm not counting
o Voters looking at candidates who will
give them a fair shot at success, not focused on distractions like this
o Trump wants to ban Muslims, etc
From: Brinster,
Jeremy
Sent: Sunday,
April 24, 2016 9:28 AM
To: Comm_D
Subject: RE: FNS
4-24-16
Panel
* Not only handlers are trying to change
Donald's image, Trump is saying himself he needs to change, but he can't let
voters who want entertainment down. He wants to have it both ways
* Trump
can't be elected with these unfavorables, but HRC also has very high
unfavorables, so it makes you a little less confident in saying no way Trump
gets elected (NOTE: More objective conversation)
* Federalist guy: There are fewer
transgender Americans than registered sex offenders, and that's what people are
worried about, concern men will sneak into women's bathrooms. Trump is to the
left of HRC on transgender issues, suggested again that Cruz isn't eligible to
be president
* Politifact has said there is no
evidence of people arrested for taking advantage of trans protections to commit
crimes
* Juan Williams: solution in search of a
problem, gay rights wedge issue (it worked in '04)
* Is there a shift, GOP coming around to
Trump as the nominee? Yes, people now expect that to happen.
From: Brinster,
Jeremy
Sent: Sunday,
April 24, 2016 9:15 AM
To: Comm_D
Subject: RE: FNS
4-24-16
Nothing real
interesting on Trump being more presidential. Says multiple times there will be
no second ballot at the convention and that is why the campaign isn't focused
on stealing state delegates like Cruz is
Paul Manafort
interview
* You met with RNC to reassure
them, said Trump has been playing a part. He's been campaigning for 10 monhs
and we haven't seen real man? (NOTE: WE WERE ALL THINKING THIS)
o That was about what settings he's been.
You've seen real Trump in campaign mode
o RNC has a different mode-wants to know if
Trump is going to be giving policy speeches, etc, which he will
* But it does sound like spin, doesn't
seem like you were talking about rallies vs speeches
o But that is what I was saying, it's been
distorted
o Trump has been saying when I'm at rallies, I
want to show you who I am in this environment, when I'm giving policy speeches,
I'm giving policy speeches
* Cruz has said Trump the Conservative
is just a show, trying to fool gullible voters
o Well there's the liar, not Trump
o He's got to change to conversation,
narrative, because he's had the nomination eliminated for him
o Cruz made this up from whole cloth, trump
never said he isn't building a wall
o Cruz is going to
lose all five Tues states, come in third in most (NOTE: THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT
HAPPENED. Email is dated 4/24. Tuesday was 4/26 and TC came in 3 in
Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island)
o Like with Carson and Rubio, Cruz just makes
things up
* Cruz had a good weekend-one of your
jobs is to get delegates committed, Cruz won a lot of their support, 65-2 for
you
o You've been around a long time Chris, the
only vote that matters is the vote cast when the roll is called. Cruz won 0
delegates for that vote yesterday
o Other problems happened before I was involved
o Cruz is bending to rules, in Maine the
governor put together a slate based on primary results, Cruz broke the deal,
didn't care about local officials, steamrolled it. That's not the trump
approach
o We're running a campaign to win folks on
first ballot, and we are
o What Cruz is doing is hurting the party.
There will be no second ballot.
* You became a lobbyist after Reagan
white house, you have controversial clients (foreign dictators), your firm were
called torturer's lobby
o I was representing the administration's
chosen groups in Philippines, other countries
* Not Yanukovich
o I worked with Europeans to bring Ukraine
into Europe, role I played was to help that happen
* Cruz calls yours a lobbyist campaign
o The people he's talking about haven't been
lobbying for 10-20 years
* His point is that Trump's
anti-establishment outsider status is no longer valid
o I'm not running, Trump is, Trump is clearly
an outsider, and he's established that
o Cruz is trying to say the process, voting,
doesn't matter
o He wants to destroy the party and see who
can pick up the pieces on the 2nd, 3rd ballot
o We're trying to work with Mitch
McConnell in KY to put together a unity slate (NOTE: HUH? What is a Unity
slate? Is it between Dems and Reps? Were they considering a joint DP/RP
ticket?)
o We're working with party officials, we
didn't want to go into a state in be disruptive, as Cruz did
o We want to make sure people who Trump hasn't
been exposed to know we're going to work with them
* Trump said transgender people can use
whatever bathroom they want (it would be discriminatory, expensive), but then
Trump said it was state's rights. What does he think about NC law
o He thinks what he said, that it's a states'
rights issues
o It's not a reversal
* But 12 hours before he said leave it
the way it is, no real problem there
o Trump said what his personal opinion was,
and then he said how he would handle it, called it state's rights issue
* Trump foreign policy speech using
teleprompters, are you trying to drag him kicking to be more presidential
o It's not a new campaign, it's an expanded
campaign
o Trump had to establish legitimacy, win
primaries, become presumptive nominee, all of which he did, now he's in next
phase
THIS EMAIL IS A WHOLE LOT OF FACT AND NO
FICTION.
QUESTION: Oh, did I miss the part in the
email where the Super Pac talks offers to young voters to push back on Sanders
supporters online?
EMAIL TWO
Here is another one.
READ THE TITLE then ACTUALLY READ THE EMAIL
RE: Tv coverage of protest great
From:MirandaL@dnc.org
To: HelmstetterT@dnc.org, RegionalPress@dnc.org
Date:
2016-05-12 11:41
Subject:
RE: Tv coverage of protest great
Yes,
but going forward, when our allies screw up and don't deliver bodies in time, we either send all our interns
out there or we stay away from it.. we don't want to own a bad picture: (NOTE:
To say that this was a “fake” protest is inferring a lot from these few lines
of dialogue)
https://twitter.com/ZekeJMiller/status/730738717711867904
Following
[https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/595261015731740673/uvXc_cII_bigger.jpg]Zeke
MillerVerified accountþ@ZekeJMiller 1h
Three person
protest outside the RNC. Sad!
[https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CiQZmmEUgAAyeKl.jpg]
· RETWEETS4
· LIKES8
· [Danny Freeman]
[Brian Duncan]
[David Marnell]
[Ben Haygood]
[Mark Leibovich] [laurenfritts]
[Lionel Mandrake]
[pff]
[Political Rationale]
-----Original
Message-----
From:
Helmstetter, TJ
Sent: Thursday,
May 12, 2016 9:38 AM
To: Regional
Press
Subject: Tv
coverage of protest great
Shockingly good
coverage despite abysmal turnout. CNN and MSNBC using prominently. Fox News
covering new developments in Benghazi.
MOVE ON PEOPLE. NOTHING TO
SEE HERE.
EMAIL THREE
Saved the best for
LAST.
Re: No shit
From:DaceyA@dnc.org
To: MARSHALL@dnc.org, MirandaL@dnc.org,
PaustenbachM@dnc.org
Date:
2016-05-05 12:23
Subject:
Re: No shit
AMEN
Amy K. Dacey | Chief Executive Officer
Democratic National Committee
430 S. Capitol Street, SE Washington, D.C. 20003
202-528-7492 (c) | 202-314-2263 (o)
DaceyA@dnc.org
On 5/5/16, 1:33 AM, "Brad Marshall"
wrote:
>It's these Jesus thing.
>
>> On May 5, 2016, at 1:31 AM, Brad Marshall
wrote:
>>
It might may no difference, but for KY and WVA can
we get someone to ask his belief. Does
he believe in a God. He had skated on
saying he has a Jewish heritage. I think
I read he is an atheist. This could make
several points difference with my peeps.
My Southern Baptist peeps would draw a big difference between a Jew and
an atheist.
MY
DOLLAR
Let’s
be honest with ourselves! In this country the President’s religion matters!
Should it matter? No, but our reality is that there is an entire Party that can
win and has won an election on that one platform.
If
you are a Sanders support and didn’t know his spiritual believes then I worry
about you. If his faith or lack thereof is something he wants under wraps, then
I worry about him. If you are running for President I want to know everything
about you that could affect my life. I want to know if Jesus speaks to you
randomly throughout the day, coz stuff like led to the Crusades back in
1095-1291? Remember those? The wars between Christianity & Islam? I
know, way before your time.
For
the record, I don’t care what Bernie’s faith is. What I care about is giving
people all the information they need to make an informed decision.
No
here are the rest of the emails...have fun.
