podesta_email_19344.txt

podesta-emails 4,638 words email

V12 P17 P19 V11 V16

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- mQQBBGBjDtIBH6DJa80zDBgR+VqlYGaXu5bEJg9HEgAtJeCLuThdhXfl5Zs32RyB I1QjIlttvngepHQozmglBDmi2FZ4S+wWhZv10bZCoyXPIPwwq6TylwPv8+buxuff B6tYil3VAB9XKGPyPjKrlXn1fz76VMpuTOs7OGYR8xDidw9EHfBvmb+sQyrU1FOW aPHxba5lK6hAo/KYFpTnimsmsz0Cvo1sZAV/EFIkfagiGTL2J/NhINfGPScpj8LB bYelVN/NU4c6Ws1ivWbfcGvqU4lymoJgJo/l9HiV6X2bdVyuB24O3xeyhTnD7laf epykwxODVfAt4qLC3J478MSSmTXS8zMumaQMNR1tUUYtHCJC0xAKbsFukzbfoRDv m2zFCCVxeYHvByxstuzg0SurlPyuiFiy2cENek5+W8Sjt95nEiQ4suBldswpz1Kv n71t7vd7zst49xxExB+tD+vmY7GXIds43Rb05dqksQuo2yCeuCbY5RBiMHX3d4nU 041jHBsv5wY24j0N6bpAsm/s0T0Mt7IO6UaN33I712oPlclTweYTAesW3jDpeQ7A ioi0CMjWZnRpUxorcFmzL/Cc/fPqgAtnAL5GIUuEOqUf8AlKmzsKcnKZ7L2d8mxG QqN16nlAiUuUpchQNMr+tAa1L5S1uK/fu6thVlSSk7KMQyJfVpwLy6068a1WmNj4 yxo9HaSeQNXh3cui+61qb9wlrkwlaiouw9+bpCmR0V8+XpWma/D/TEz9tg5vkfNo eG4t+FUQ7QgrrvIkDNFcRyTUO9cJHB+kcp2NgCcpCwan3wnuzKka9AWFAitpoAwx L6BX0L8kg/LzRPhkQnMOrj/tuu9hZrui4woqURhWLiYi2aZe7WCkuoqR/qMGP6qP EQRcvndTWkQo6K9BdCH4ZjRqcGbY1wFt/qgAxhi+uSo2IWiM1fRI4eRCGifpBtYK Dw44W9uPAu4cgVnAUzESEeW0bft5XXxAqpvyMBIdv3YqfVfOElZdKbteEu4YuOao FLpbk4ajCxO4Fzc9AugJ8iQOAoaekJWA7TjWJ6CbJe8w3thpznP0w6jNG8ZleZ6a jHckyGlx5wzQTRLVT5+wK6edFlxKmSd93jkLWWCbrc0Dsa39OkSTDmZPoZgKGRhp Yc0C4jePYreTGI6p7/H3AFv84o0fjHt5fn4GpT1Xgfg+1X/wmIv7iNQtljCjAqhD 6XN+QiOAYAloAym8lOm9zOoCDv1TSDpmeyeP0rNV95OozsmFAUaKSUcUFBUfq9FL uyr+rJZQw2DPfq2wE75PtOyJiZH7zljCh12fp5yrNx6L7HSqwwuG7vGO4f0ltYOZ dPKzaEhCOO7o108RexdNABEBAAG0Rldpa2lMZWFrcyBFZGl0b3JpYWwgT2ZmaWNl IEhpZ2ggU2VjdXJpdHkgQ29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbiBLZXkgKDIwMjEtMjAyNCmJBDEE EwEKACcFAmBjDtICGwMFCQWjmoAFCwkIBwMFFQoJCAsFFgIDAQACHgECF4AACgkQ nG3NFyg+RUzRbh+eMSKgMYOdoz70u4RKTvev4KyqCAlwji+1RomnW7qsAK+l1s6b ugOhOs8zYv2ZSy6lv5JgWITRZogvB69JP94+Juphol6LIImC9X3P/bcBLw7VCdNA mP0XQ4OlleLZWXUEW9EqR4QyM0RkPMoxXObfRgtGHKIkjZYXyGhUOd7MxRM8DBzN yieFf3CjZNADQnNBk/ZWRdJrpq8J1W0dNKI7IUW2yCyfdgnPAkX/lyIqw4ht5UxF VGrva3PoepPir0TeKP3M0BMxpsxYSVOdwcsnkMzMlQ7TOJlsEdtKQwxjV6a1vH+t k4TpR4aG8fS7ZtGzxcxPylhndiiRVwdYitr5nKeBP69aWH9uLcpIzplXm4DcusUc Bo8KHz+qlIjs03k8hRfqYhUGB96nK6TJ0xS7tN83WUFQXk29fWkXjQSp1Z5dNCcT sWQBTxWxwYyEI8iGErH2xnok3HTyMItdCGEVBBhGOs1uCHX3W3yW2CooWLC/8Pia qgss3V7m4SHSfl4pDeZJcAPiH3Fm00wlGUslVSziatXW3499f2QdSyNDw6Qc+chK hUFflmAaavtpTqXPk+Lzvtw5SSW+iRGmEQICKzD2chpy05mW5v6QUy+G29nchGDD rrfpId2Gy1VoyBx8FAto4+6BOWVijrOj9Boz7098huotDQgNoEnidvVdsqP+P1RR QJekr97idAV28i7iEOLd99d6qI5xRqc3/QsV+y2ZnnyKB10uQNVPLgUkQljqN0wP XmdVer+0X+aeTHUd1d64fcc6M0cpYefNNRCsTsgbnWD+x0rjS9RMo+Uosy41+IxJ 6qIBhNrMK6fEmQoZG3qTRPYYrDoaJdDJERN2E5yLxP2SPI0rWNjMSoPEA/gk5L91 m6bToM/0VkEJNJkpxU5fq5834s3PleW39ZdpI0HpBDGeEypo/t9oGDY3Pd7JrMOF zOTohxTyu4w2Ql7jgs+7KbO9PH0Fx5dTDmDq66jKIkkC7DI0QtMQclnmWWtn14BS KTSZoZekWESVYhORwmPEf32EPiC9t8zDRglXzPGmJAPISSQz+Cc9o1ipoSIkoCCh 2MWoSbn3KFA53vgsYd0vS/+Nw5aUksSleorFns2yFgp/w5Ygv0D007k6u3DqyRLB W5y6tJLvbC1ME7jCBoLW6nFEVxgDo727pqOpMVjGGx5zcEokPIRDMkW/lXjw+fTy c6misESDCAWbgzniG/iyt77Kz711unpOhw5aemI9LpOq17AiIbjzSZYt6b1Aq7Wr aB+C1yws2ivIl9ZYK911A1m69yuUg0DPK+uyL7Z86XC7hI8B0IY1MM/MbmFiDo6H dkfwUckE74sxxeJrFZKkBbkEAQRgYw7SAR+gvktRnaUrj/84Pu0oYVe49nPEcy/7 5Fs6LvAwAj+JcAQPW3uy7D7fuGFEQguasfRrhWY5R87+g5ria6qQT2/Sf19Tpngs d0Dd9DJ1MMTaA1pc5F7PQgoOVKo68fDXfjr76n1NchfCzQbozS1HoM8ys3WnKAw+ Neae9oymp2t9FB3B+To4nsvsOM9KM06ZfBILO9NtzbWhzaAyWwSrMOFFJfpyxZAQ 8VbucNDHkPJjhxuafreC9q2f316RlwdS+XjDggRY6xD77fHtzYea04UWuZidc5zL VpsuZR1nObXOgE+4s8LU5p6fo7jL0CRxvfFnDhSQg2Z617flsdjYAJ2JR4apg3Es G46xWl8xf7t227/0nXaCIMJI7g09FeOOsfCmBaf/ebfiXXnQbK2zCbbDYXbrYgw6 ESkSTt940lHtynnVmQBvZqSXY93MeKjSaQk1VKyobngqaDAIIzHxNCR941McGD7F qHHM2YMTgi6XXaDThNC6u5msI1l/24PPvrxkJxjPSGsNlCbXL2wqaDgrP6LvCP9O uooR9dVRxaZXcKQjeVGxrcRtoTSSyZimfjEercwi9RKHt42O5akPsXaOzeVjmvD9 EB5jrKBe/aAOHgHJEIgJhUNARJ9+dXm7GofpvtN/5RE6qlx11QGvoENHIgawGjGX Jy5oyRBS+e+KHcgVqbmV9bvIXdwiC4BDGxkXtjc75hTaGhnDpu69+Cq016cfsh+0 XaRnHRdh0SZfcYdEqqjn9CTILfNuiEpZm6hYOlrfgYQe1I13rgrnSV+EfVCOLF4L P9ejcf3eCvNhIhEjsBNEUDOFAA6J5+YqZvFYtjk3efpM2jCg6XTLZWaI8kCuADMu yrQxGrM8yIGvBndrlmmljUqlc8/Nq9rcLVFDsVqb9wOZjrCIJ7GEUD6bRuolmRPE SLrpP5mDS+wetdhLn5ME1e9JeVkiSVSFIGsumZTNUaT0a90L4yNj5gBE40dvFplW 7TLeNE/ewDQk5LiIrfWuTUn3CqpjIOXxsZFLjieNgofX1nSeLjy3tnJwuTYQlVJO 3CbqH1k6cOIvE9XShnnuxmiSoav4uZIXnLZFQRT9v8UPIuedp7TO8Vjl0xRTajCL PdTk21e7fYriax62IssYcsbbo5G5auEdPO04H/+v/hxmRsGIr3XYvSi4ZWXKASxy a/jHFu9zEqmy0EBzFzpmSx+FrzpMKPkoU7RbxzMgZwIYEBk66Hh6gxllL0JmWjV0 iqmJMtOERE4NgYgumQT3dTxKuFtywmFxBTe80BhGlfUbjBtiSrULq59np4ztwlRT wDEAVDoZbN57aEXhQ8jjF2RlHtqGXhFMrg9fALHaRQARAQABiQQZBBgBCgAPBQJg Yw7SAhsMBQkFo5qAAAoJEJxtzRcoPkVMdigfoK4oBYoxVoWUBCUekCg/alVGyEHa ekvFmd3LYSKX/WklAY7cAgL/1UlLIFXbq9jpGXJUmLZBkzXkOylF9FIXNNTFAmBM 3TRjfPv91D8EhrHJW0SlECN+riBLtfIQV9Y1BUlQthxFPtB1G1fGrv4XR9Y4TsRj VSo78cNMQY6/89Kc00ip7tdLeFUHtKcJs+5EfDQgagf8pSfF/TWnYZOMN2mAPRRf fh3SkFXeuM7PU/X0B6FJNXefGJbmfJBOXFbaSRnkacTOE9caftRKN1LHBAr8/RPk pc9p6y9RBc/+6rLuLRZpn2W3m3kwzb4scDtHHFXXQBNC1ytrqdwxU7kcaJEPOFfC XIdKfXw9AQll620qPFmVIPH5qfoZzjk4iTH06Yiq7PI4OgDis6bZKHKyyzFisOkh DXiTuuDnzgcu0U4gzL+bkxJ2QRdiyZdKJJMswbm5JDpX6PLsrzPmN314lKIHQx3t NNXkbfHL/PxuoUtWLKg7/I3PNnOgNnDqCgqpHJuhU1AZeIkvewHsYu+urT67tnpJ AK1Z4CgRxpgbYA4YEV1rWVAPHX1u1okcg85rc5FHK8zh46zQY1wzUTWubAcxqp9K 1IqjXDDkMgIX2Z2fOA1plJSwugUCbFjn4sbT0t0YuiEFMPMB42ZCjcCyA1yysfAd DYAmSer1bq47tyTFQwP+2ZnvW/9p3yJ4oYWzwMzadR3T0K4sgXRC2Us9nPL9k2K5 TRwZ07wE2CyMpUv+hZ4ja13A/1ynJZDZGKys+pmBNrO6abxTGohM8LIWjS+YBPIq trxh8jxzgLazKvMGmaA6KaOGwS8vhfPfxZsu2TJaRPrZMa/HpZ2aEHwxXRy4nm9G Kx1eFNJO6Ues5T7KlRtl8gflI5wZCCD/4T5rto3SfG0s0jr3iAVb3NCn9Q73kiph PSwHuRxcm+hWNszjJg3/W+Fr8fdXAh5i0JzMNscuFAQNHgfhLigenq+BpCnZzXya 01kqX24AdoSIbH++vvgE0Bjj6mzuRrH5VJ1Qg9nQ+yMjBWZADljtp3CARUbNkiIg tUJ8IJHCGVwXZBqY4qeJc3h/RiwWM2UIFfBZ+E06QPznmVLSkwvvop3zkr4eYNez cIKUju8vRdW6sxaaxC/GECDlP0Wo6lH0uChpE3NJ1daoXIeymajmYxNt+drz7+pd jMqjDtNA2rgUrjptUgJK8ZLdOQ4WCrPY5pP9ZXAO7+mK7S3u9CTywSJmQpypd8hv 8Bu8jKZdoxOJXxj8CphK951eNOLYxTOxBUNB8J2lgKbmLIyPvBvbS1l1lCM5oHlw WXGlp70pspj3kaX4mOiFaWMKHhOLb+er8yh8jspM184= =5a6T -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Thank you. Sent from my iPhone On Oct 25, 2015, at 9:37 PM, John Podesta <[email protected]> wrote: We are blowing this people. Chains of 40 emails aren't helping. we need to get a statement out that says that no matter what the context 20 years ago the law was a discriminatory vestige of a less tolerant era as WJC said in his editorial appealing to SCOTUS to overturn it. On Sunday, October 25, 2015, Dominic Lowell <[email protected]> wrote: > Everyone I talked to today was in a pretty whipped up state. Based on who > reached out to me and what I've seen people express online, the energy is > not relegated to just the rabble rouser crowd. There is, IMO, deep > discontent out there stemming from what she said on Friday. > > I recognize I might be in a small minority, but my opinion continues to be > that we are better served by addressing this. > > Just to play it out, though, if we don't respond on this round of > stories, what will her answer be if pressed to clarify in future interviews > about this? > > On Sunday, October 25, 2015, Brian Fallon <[email protected] > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>> wrote: > >> Rosen suggested in her email she at least would be satisfied if we never >> repeated the theory again. Defer to political on whether others want >> something approximating a walkback. >> On Oct 25, 2015 9:09 PM, "Kristina Schake" <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> I agree with not issuing a statement - it doesn't help us. In terms of >>> the huffington post how strongly do we feel we even need to be in the >>> story? Are we under strong pressure to walk back? >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> On Oct 25, 2015, at 9:05 PM, Brian Fallon <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Yes, if we want to be in the story. Keep in mind: the story will suck >>> regardless. But I would just say we should use it as the vehicle for giving >>> a statement that reads as a walkback, even as HRC will never approve a true >>> walkback, and then we circulate the story to our LGBT friends so they see >>> that both they humbled us with a bad story and we highlight our statement >>> giving a win-win walkback, and we move on. >>> On Oct 25, 2015 9:01 PM, "Robby Mook" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Do we need to get back to Huffpo tonight? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Oct 25, 2015, at 8:40 PM, Brian Fallon <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Here is what we have: Huffington post is doing a story tomorrow "fact >>>> checking" the idea that there was a push for a constitutional amendment in >>>> 1996, as HRC claimed was true. The piece will essentially say there was >>>> not, and will quote Rosen's tweet and Evan Wolfson saying this was not true >>>> and was hardly a basis for DOMA to be signed by WJC. >>>> >>>> Xochitl has also gotten an inquiry from the Blade. >>>> >>>> In addition to this, Socarides tells us he heard from NYT on this, >>>> though the campaign has not, so we do not know what he is referring to. I >>>> would not be surptised, however, if activists we're pitching this. >>>> >>>> All that said, I do not think a statement from HRC is warranted simply >>>> based on these inquiries. Indeed, I think a statement from her likely >>>> attracts more coverage than just these inquiries and also could give the >>>> appearance that we are responding to Bernie at JJ, rather than clarifying >>>> our own remarks to Maddow. I missed the beginning of tbe conf call this >>>> afternoon on thia, but i had assumed we were preparing an HRC statement >>>> less for HuffPo and more because that is what political thought was needed >>>> to quell the LGBT backlash. >>>> >>>> If that is not the case, then for my purposes, I would just propose a >>>> spokesman statement that accounts for Dan's point (that she will not >>>> disavow her theory about the constitutional amendment) but also addresses >>>> the community's outrage over the idea that we might be trying to justify >>>> support for the law in 96 by saying something like, "Regardless of the >>>> differing motives that led to the passage of DOMA, none were justifiable >>>> since, as both Hillary and President clinton have said, the law was clearly >>>> discriminatory." >>>> I'm not sure anyone has asked. We would put it out there. >>>> >>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>> >>>> On Oct 25, 2015, at 7:53 PM, Kristina Schake < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Sorry to be late to this but what outlets have made the statement >>>> request and what is the deadline? >>>> >>>> On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 7:46 PM, Dominic Lowell < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Amanda and I tried to address Tony and Dan's points -- as well as >>>>> Karen who pointed out the context is bigger than just Maddow -- while >>>>> taking into account the concerns of our cabinet. Below is what we landed >>>>> on. Appreciate feedback. >>>>> >>>>> ** >>>>> >>>>> On Friday, and in many instances previously, I was asked about my >>>>> position on the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). I appreciate that people >>>>> have differing views of the DOMA situation [other word?] in 1996. The >>>>> environment for gays and lesbians was different then and there were >>>>> struggles about the best paths to take. That is common in all social change >>>>> movements. I have been very open that my own views have evolved over the >>>>> years. >>>>> >>>>> I hope the important thing is that we are now moving forward toward >>>>> justice, together. >>>>> In 2013, I added my voice in support of marriage equality “personally >>>>> and as a matter of policy and law.” As I said then, LGBT Americans are >>>>> full and equal citizens and they deserve the full and equal rights of >>>>> citizenship. Like so many others, my personal views have been shaped over >>>>> time by people I have known and loved, by my experience representing our >>>>> nation on the world stage, my devotion to law and human rights, and the >>>>> guiding principles of my faith. That’s why, as a Senator, I pushed for laws >>>>> that would extend protections to the LGBT community in the workplace and >>>>> that would make violence towards LGBT individuals a hate crime. And as >>>>> Secretary of State, I put LGBT rights on the global agenda and told the >>>>> world that “gay rights are human rights and human rights are gay rights.” >>>>> In my speech last night in Iowa, I didn’t look back to the America of the >>>>> past, I looked forward to the America we need to build together. I pledged >>>>> to fight for LGBT Americans who, despite all our progress, in many places >>>>> can still get married on Saturday and fired on Monday just because of who >>>>> they are and who they love. In this campaign and as President, I will keep >>>>> fighting for equality and opportunity for every American. >>>>> >>>>> On Sunday, October 25, 2015, Amanda Renteria < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> The hope is to squash the story bc it's not going away. >>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>>> >>>>>> On Oct 25, 2015, at 7:35 PM, Kristina Schake < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> What do we actually have to do here? I'm not sure a statement will >>>>>> help us. Do we need to response to the Huffington Post? Is that the main >>>>>> request? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 7:04 PM, Amanda Renteria < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> What about broadening the perspectives at that time? >>>>>>> Acknowledging there were a lot of diff views vs she was wrong. ? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Oct 25, 2015, at 6:57 PM, Tony Carrk <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> And also for awareness for everyone to have, attached are HRC’s >>>>>>> comments on DOMA Carter from my team put together. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *From:* Dan Schwerin [mailto:[email protected]] >>>>>>> *Sent:* Sunday, October 25, 2015 6:56 PM >>>>>>> *To:* Amanda Renteria <[email protected]> >>>>>>> *Cc:* Dominic Lowell <[email protected]>; Karen Finney < >>>>>>> [email protected]>; Maya Harris <[email protected]>; >>>>>>> Heather Stone <[email protected]>; Robby Mook < >>>>>>> [email protected]>; Jake Sullivan < >>>>>>> [email protected]>; Jennifer Palmieri < >>>>>>> [email protected]>; Brian Fallon < >>>>>>> [email protected]>; Kristina Schake < >>>>>>> [email protected]>; Marlon Marshall < >>>>>>> [email protected]>; Tony Carrk <[email protected]>; >>>>>>> Brynne Craig <[email protected]>; Sally Marx < >>>>>>> [email protected]>; Teddy Goff <[email protected]>; >>>>>>> John Podesta <[email protected]>; Christina Reynolds < >>>>>>> [email protected]> >>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: one chain on DOMA >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think everyone agrees we shouldn't restate her argument. Question >>>>>>> is whether she's going to agree to explicitly disavow it. And I doubt it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Oct 25, 2015, at 6:53 PM, Amanda Renteria < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is no way we have friends to back us up on her >>>>>>> interpretation. This is a major problem if we revisit her argument like >>>>>>> this. It's better to do nothing than to re-state this although she is >>>>>>> going to get a question again. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Working w Dominic now. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Oct 25, 2015, at 6:34 PM, Dan Schwerin < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm not saying double down or ever say it again. I'm just saying >>>>>>> that she's not going to want to say she was wrong about that, given she and >>>>>>> her husband believe it and have repeated it many times. Better to reiterate >>>>>>> evolution, opposition to DOMA when court considered it, and forward looking >>>>>>> stance. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Oct 25, 2015, at 6:28 PM, Dominic Lowell < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jumping on a call with the kitchen cabinet now to give them an >>>>>>> update. Will turn to this ASAP. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The most recent Blade article has Elizabeth Birch quoted as saying >>>>>>> there was no amendment threat in 1996. Hilary Rosen has already tweeted the >>>>>>> same. I'll ask on the call, but my sense is that there aren't many friends >>>>>>> who will back us up on the point. That's why I'm urging us to back off as >>>>>>> much as we can there. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> More soon. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sunday, October 25, 2015, Dan Schwerin < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'd welcome specific edits. I'm fine not mentioning WJC if that's >>>>>>> problematic, but my two cents is that you're not going to get her to >>>>>>> disavow her explanation about the constitutional amendment and this >>>>>>> exercise will be most effective if it provides some context and then goes >>>>>>> on offense. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Oct 25, 2015, at 6:15 PM, Karen Finney < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If the criticism is that she has said before and reiterated on >>>>>>> Friday then hit by Bernie yesterday is t that the context? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Oct 25, 2015, at 6:00 PM, Dominic Lowell < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sorry, on phone so focused more on overall thoughts than line edits. >>>>>>> Can call you directly if any of this is unclear. Sending to all so people >>>>>>> can react, push back, etc. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I originally flagged HRC's Maddow remarks as potentially problematic >>>>>>> in part because her wording closely linked her to two unfavorable policies >>>>>>> of the past even as no one in the community was asking her to "own" them. >>>>>>> Given that, my recommendation would be to make this statement about just >>>>>>> her, her evolution, and her record -- not bring in WJC. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Relatedly, if we release a statement tonight, it will very clearly >>>>>>> be in response to the Maddow interview. To the extent we can, I advocate >>>>>>> for owning that so that we can clean this up completely, rightly position >>>>>>> her as a champion of LGBT issues, and make sure we move on from any >>>>>>> discussion of looming amendments or her being involved in passing either >>>>>>> DADT or DOMA. Without getting into the weeds, can we say that the broader >>>>>>> point is that the country is in a different place now on LGBT issues -- and >>>>>>> thank goodness it is -- and that she's so happy each policy has been placed >>>>>>> in the dustbin of history? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Last thought: I have raised this a few times to a smaller number of >>>>>>> people on this thread but will flag this for the larger group as well. At >>>>>>> Keene State College, she specifically cited friends playing a part in her >>>>>>> evolution, which we echo here. That's fine, IMO, and quite believable. But >>>>>>> if I were a reporter and wanted to keep the evolution story alive, I would >>>>>>> start asking which friends she was talking to and ask us to provide them. >>>>>>> Not a problem per se, but I think it is worth flagging now so we aren't >>>>>>> caught by surprise later. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sunday, October 25, 2015, Dan Schwerin < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is a little long, but see what you think. Tried to 1) place >>>>>>> this in a context of 'asked and answered,' 2) point to how they've both >>>>>>> forthrightly explained their evolution, 3) cite her positive LGBT record, >>>>>>> 4) get in a little dig at Sanders for being so backwards looking. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> STATEMENT >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In 2013, when the Supreme Court was considering whether to uphold >>>>>>> the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), Bill and I explained publicly how and >>>>>>> why we became strong supporters of marriage equality. Bill, who signed >>>>>>> DOMA nearly twenty years ago after an overwhelming vote in Congress, called >>>>>>> the law a discriminatory vestige of a less tolerant America and urged the >>>>>>> Court to strike it down. I added my voice in support of marriage equality >>>>>>> “personally and as a matter of policy and law.” As I said then, LGBT >>>>>>> Americans are full and equal citizens and they deserve the full and equal >>>>>>> rights of citizenship. Like so many others, my personal views have been >>>>>>> shaped over time by people I have known and loved, by my experience >>>>>>> representing our nation on the world stage, my devotion to law and human >>>>>>> rights, and the guiding principles of my faith. That’s why, as a Senator, >>>>>>> I pushed for laws that would extend protections to the LGBT community in >>>>>>> the workplace and that would make violence towards LGBT individuals a hate >>>>>>> crime. And as Secretary of State, I put LGBT rights on the global agenda >>>>>>> and told the world that “gay rights are human rights and human rights are >>>>>>> gay rights.” In my speech last night in Iowa, I didn’t look back to the >>>>>>> America of the past, I looked forward to the America we need to build >>>>>>> together. I pledged to fight for LGBT Americans who, despite all our >>>>>>> progress, in many places can still get married on Saturday and fired on >>>>>>> Monday just because of who they are and who they love. In this campaign >>>>>>> and as President, I will keep fighting for equality and opportunity for >>>>>>> every American. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 4:03 PM, Dominic Lowell < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> +Amanda's work account. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sunday, October 25, 2015, Maya Harris <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> From Richard: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Since I was asked on Friday about the Defense of Marriage Act in an >>>>>>> interview on MSNBC, I've checked with people who were involved then to make >>>>>>> sure I had all my facts right. It turns out I was mistaken and the effort >>>>>>> to pass a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage came some >>>>>>> years later. The larger point I was trying to make about DOMA, however, is >>>>>>> still true. It was neither proposed nor supported by anyone in the Clinton >>>>>>> administration at the time. It was an effort by the Republicans in Congress >>>>>>> to distract attention from the real issues facing the country by using gay >>>>>>> marriage, which had very little support then, as a wedge issue in the >>>>>>> election. The legislation passed by overwhelming veto-proof margins in both >>>>>>> houses of Congress and President Clinton signed it with serious >>>>>>> reservations he expressed at the time. Luckily the country has evolved way >>>>>>> beyond this in the last 20 years and most Americans, including the Supreme >>>>>>> Court, now embrace LGBT equality. We are a better country for it. Although >>>>>>> there is much work that remains, and I'm eager to help advance the day when >>>>>>> we are all truly equal. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Dominic Lowell < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> + JP's personal email >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sunday, October 25, 2015, Dominic Lowell < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Here is what Gautam put together to be helpful: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "I'm not my husband. I understand why he believed that was the right >>>>>>> thing to do at the time, but obviously I wish it had gone differently. >>>>>>> Look, we've all come along way since the 90s and I'm proud to have been a >>>>>>> part of an Administration that has made it possible for gay troops to serve >>>>>>> openly and loving gay couples to get married. I'm also proud of MY record >>>>>>> as Secretary of State. I think the community knows I will be the ally they >>>>>>> deserve." >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sunday, October 25, 2015, Dan Schwerin < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This WJC op-Ed may be helpful: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/bill-clinton-its-time-to-overturn-doma/2013/03/07/fc184408-8747-11e2-98a3-b3db6b9ac586_story.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Bill Clinton: It’s time to overturn DOMA >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *The writer is the 42nd president of the United States.* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *I*n 1996, I signed the Defense of Marriage Act. Although that was >>>>>>> only 17 years ago, it was a very different time. In no state in the union >>>>>>> was same-sex marriage recognized, much less available as a legal right, but >>>>>>> some were moving in that direction. Washington, as a result, was swirling >>>>>>> with all manner of possible responses, some quite draconian. As a >>>>>>> bipartisan group of former senators stated in their March 1 amicus brief to >>>>>>> the Supreme Court, many supporters of the bill known as DOMA believed that >>>>>>> its passage “would defuse a movement to enact a constitutional amendment >>>>>>> banning gay marriage, which would have ended the debate for a generation or >>>>>>> more.” It was under these circumstances that DOMA came to my desk, opposed >>>>>>> by only 81 of the 535 members of Congress. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On March 27, DOMA will come before the Supreme Court >>>>>>> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2012/12/07/the-supreme-court-takes-up-doma/>, >>>>>>> and the justices must decide whether it is consistent with the principles >>>>>>> of a nation that honors freedom, equality and justice above all, and is >>>>>>> therefore constitutional. As the president who signed the act into law, I >>>>>>> have come to believe that DOMA is contrary to those principles and, in >>>>>>> fact, incompatible with our Constitution. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Because Section 3 of the act defines marriage as being between a man >>>>>>> and a woman, same-sex couples who are legally married in nine states and >>>>>>> the District of Columbia are denied the benefits of more than a thousand >>>>>>> federal statutes and programs available to other married couples. Among >>>>>>> other things, these couples cannot file their taxes jointly, take unpaid >>>>>>> leave to care for a sick or injured spouse or receive equal family health >>>>>>> and pension benefits as federal civilian employees. Yet they pay taxes, >>>>>>> contribute to their communities and, like all couples, aspire to live in >>>>>>> committed, loving relationships, recognized and respected by our laws. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> When I signed the bill, I included a statement >>>>>>> <http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/user/scotts/ftp/wpaf2mc/clinton.html> with >>>>>>> the admonition that “enactment of this legislation should not, despite the >>>>>>> fierce and at times divisive rhetoric surrounding it, be understood to >>>>>>> provide an excuse for discrimination.” Reading those words today, I know >>>>>>> now that, even worse than providing an excuse for discrimination, the law >>>>>>> is itself discriminatory. It should be overturned. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We are still a young country, and many of our landmark civil rights >>>>>>> decisions are fresh enough that the voices of their champions still echo, >>>>>>> even as the world that preceded them becomes less and less familiar. We >>>>>>> have yet to celebrate the centennial of the 19th Amendment, but a society >>>>>>> that denied women the vote would seem to us now not unusual or >>>>>>> old-fashioned but alien. I believe that in 2013 DOMA and opposition to >>>>>>> marriage equality are vestiges of just such an unfamiliar society. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Americans have been at this sort of a crossroads often enough to >>>>>>> recognize the right path. We understand that, while our laws may at times >>>>>>> lag behind our best natures, in the end they catch up to our core values. >>>>>>> One hundred fifty years ago, in the midst of the Civil War, President >>>>>>> Abraham Lincoln concluded a message to Congress by posing the very question >>>>>>> we face today: “It is not ‘Can any of us imagine better?’ but ‘Can >>>>>>> we all do better >>>>>>> <http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=29503>?’ ” >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The answer is of course and always yes. In that spirit, I join with >>>>>>> the Obama administration, the petitioner Edith Windsor >>>>>>> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/edie-windsors-fight-for-same-sex-marriage-rights-continues-even-after-partners-death/2012/07/19/gJQARguhwW_story.html>, >>>>>>> and the many other dedicated men and women who have engaged in this >>>>>>> struggle for decades in urging the Supreme Court to overturn the Defense of >>>>>>> Marriage Act. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Oct 25, 2015, at 4:19 PM, Kate Offerdahl < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi all - we are going to do 4:30. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Those here at the Hilton can take the call from the staff room. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Call-In: 718-441-3763, no pin >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Oct 25, 2015, at 4:14 PM, Heather Stone < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Looping in Kate. She is going to get it scheduled. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sunday, October 25, 2015, Dominic Lowell < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> All times are good for me. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sunday, October 25, 2015, Heather Stone < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sounds like tony can do 4:15? Can others? If not I could do anytime >>>>>>> before 5:15 or after 6. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sunday, October 25, 2015, Robby Mook <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Adding Dominic. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Agree--let's get our people on a call and push back >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm also tied up for next few hours @ finance stuff. But let's get >>>>>>> this moving. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Oct 25, 2015, at 3:48 PM, Jake Sullivan < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Adding Tony, who recalls this from ’08 when she made a similar >>>>>>> argument. We did not turn up much to support idea that alternative was a >>>>>>> constitutional amendment. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Also adding Schwerin. I think we should pull her statements around >>>>>>> the time she embraced marriage equality and place greatest emphasis on the >>>>>>> fact that she fully acknowledges that she evolved. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I’m on calls next two hours but Maya has my proxy. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *From:* Jennifer Palmieri [mailto:[email protected]] >>>>>>> *Sent:* Sunday, October 25, 2015 3:46 PM >>>>>>> *To:* Brian Fallon <[email protected]>; John Podesta < >>>>>>> [email protected]>; Robby Mook <[email protected]>; >>>>>>> Kristina Schake <[email protected]>; Maya Harris < >>>>>>> [email protected]>; Jake Sullivan < >>>>>>> [email protected]>; Marlon Marshall < >>>>>>> [email protected]>; Heather Stone < >>>>>>> [email protected]> >>>>>>> *Subject:* one chain on DOMA >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Think all of us are getting incoming from friends in LGBT community >>>>>>> about DOMA comments. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> HuffPo has reached out to us. I heard from Socarides that NYT was >>>>>>> doing something. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have no understanding of the issue – but clear this has a head of >>>>>>> steam. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Brian can put a statement out, but policy and political need to tell >>>>>>> us what you want us to do. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I would suggest a conference call with relevant parties for how we >>>>>>> are going to handle all around – press, groups, politics. I have a bad >>>>>>> schedule for rest of day and may not be able to be on such a call but >>>>>>> don’t think I am needed. We just need guidance and then on political end >>>>>>> think we need a plan for how to hose down anxious friends. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dominic Lowell >>>>>>> >>>>>>> LGBT Outreach Director | Hillary for America >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 661.364.5186 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dominic Lowell >>>>>>> >>>>>>> LGBT Outreach Director | Hillary for America >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 661.364.5186 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dominic Lowell >>>>>>> >>>>>>> LGBT Outreach Director | Hillary for America >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 661.364.5186 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dominic Lowell >>>>>>> >>>>>>> LGBT Outreach Director | Hillary for America >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 661.364.5186 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dominic Lowell >>>>>>> >>>>>>> LGBT Outreach Director | Hillary for America >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 661.364.5186 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dominic Lowell >>>>>>> >>>>>>> LGBT Outreach Director | Hillary for America >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 661.364.5186 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <HRC DOMA.DOCX> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Kristina Schake | Communications >>>>>> Hillary for America >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Dominic Lowell >>>>> LGBT Outreach Director | Hillary for America >>>>> 661.364.5186 >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Kristina Schake | Communications >>>> Hillary for America >>>> >>>> >>>> > > -- > Dominic Lowell > LGBT Outreach Director | Hillary for America > 661.364.5186 > [email protected] > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');> > >