Wikileaks - "we have to make examples now of people who have violated the trust of HRC"

[ABX]

This one is also full of gold....

Re: Wash Post story -- Sorry to write this on a Saturday night

               From:robbymook2015@gmail.com
               To: john.podesta@gmail.com
               Date: 2015-02-22 21:20
               Subject: Re: Wash Post story -- Sorry to write this on a Saturday night
               
            

               I agree--when we have press staff, this will be MUCH easier.
And I would love an example being made.

On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 6:12 PM, John Podesta <john.podesta@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Agree. Happy to talk to the David's. Call me crazy, but I think if we can
> survive the next month, it will be possible, maybe even straightforward to
> get our arms around this once there is an actual campaign.  I'm definitely
> for making an example of a suspected leaker whether or not we have any real
> basis for it.
>
> JP
> --Sent from my iPad--
> john.podesta@gmail.com
> For scheduling: eryn.sepp@gmail.com
>
> On Feb 22, 2015, at 5:56 PM, Joel Benenson <jbenenson@bsgco.com> wrote:
>
>  John,
>
> We are in massive agreement that we need a strategy and process now to
> enable and disable as you say and I think this is worth spending some time
> making it practicable.  I would strongly recommend either one of you or
> both talking with Plouffe about he and Axe created that culture from the
> start in 07.
>
>
>
> Here are some thoughts but I realize this topic will take a dedicated
> conversation to figure out what will work.
>
>
>
> I do believe that this starts with alignment on our campaign culture and a
> paradigm shift in the old Clinton M.O.   I know HRC believes the more
> people you talk to the better but it simply isn’t.  Especially for her. We
> really need to tighten who she talks to and make sure that Huma/schedulers
> route most people through high level folks on the campaign so that they are
> being listened to.
>
>
>
> I think Robby rightly says that a lot of our leaks are coming through job
> searches we’re doing.  I think every conversation has to either begin or
> end by telling people if you’re name appears in print as a result of the
> conversations the job is off the table.
>
>
>
> I think we have to make examples now of people who have violated the trust
> of HRC and the rest of the team.  People going forward need to know there
> are stiff consequences for leaking, self-promotion, unauthorized talking
> with the press.  No one – literally no one talked to the press in either
> Obama campaign without clearing it with campaign brass.
>
>
>
> Joel
>
>
>
> *From:* John Podesta [mailto:john.podesta@gmail.com
> <john.podesta@gmail.com>]
> *Sent:* Sunday, February 22, 2015 10:47 AM
> *To:* Joel Benenson
> *Cc:* Robby Mook 2015 (robbymook2015@gmail.com)
> *Subject:* Re: Wash Post story -- Sorry to write this on a Saturday night
>
>
>
> Joel,
>
> I generally agree with the point, but we need a strategy on this that goes
> beyond internal discipline. This story could have been written without any
> of these big mouths blabbing. The mere involvement of Wendy gave them
> license to write this. The only thing in the story that indicated that
> someone on the inside was talking was the reference to the H, although one
> of Peter Sealey's big clients is Coke so we probably know where that came
> from. We can and should try to shut this down, but it is going to be tough
> until we get to a point where someone can actually talk on behalf of the
> campaign. One particular challenge is Spence. He's worked with them for 40
> years. He's like Harold Ickes-Reporters will think he's inside even if he's
> not. We need a strategy to enable people who are real and disable those
> that aren't.
>
> John
>
> JP
>
> --Sent from my iPad--
>
> john.podesta@gmail.com
>
> For scheduling: eryn.sepp@gmail.com
>
>
> On Feb 21, 2015, at 10:12 PM, Joel Benenson <jbenenson@bsgco.com> wrote:
>
>  But this is by far the most damaging story and most damaging type of
> story we can have.
>
>
>
> The press will love writing these. I did when I was a reporter.
>
>
>
> I think we need a paradigm shift in how this world operates we have to
> convince  HRC and probably WJC that her meeting with 200 people doesn’t
> help her. Hiring corporate wizards has never been a successful strategy in
> campaigns.  And anyone whose name is in the paper 48 hours after they meet
> with her needs to be cut off completely from her campaign. .
>
>
>
> Almost everyone on this team that has been assembled has been busting
> their tail to make this work and to work against this kind of stuff and
> it’s going to get demoralizing in a hurry.
>
>
>
> I’m open to all and any alternatives on how to truly solve this but I
> really feel that when she is back from CA we have to solve this.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Joel
>
>
>
>
>
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/the-making-of-hillary-50-marketing-wizards-help-reimagine-clinton-brand/2015/02/21/bfb01120-b919-11e4-aa05-1ce812b3fdd2_story.html
>
>
            

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/36082

[Cripplecreek]

I haven't forgotten Wikileaks helping Bradley Manning betray our troops and our allies.

[ABX]

I haven't forgotten Wikileaks helping Bradley Manning betray our troops and our allies.

I agree.. and they still defend him. But they are shining a light on corruption right now and I'm just going to report what they find.

Remember, Wikileaks is a vehicle, not the actual hackers.

[skeeter]

I agree.. and they still defend him. But they are shining a light on corruption right now and I'm just going to report what they find.

Remember, Wikileaks is a vehicle, not the actual hackers.

Yes, thank God for these scumbag hackers - they're uncovering information our perfidious scummierbag MSM is desperately trying to cover up.

[geronl]

sounds like Trump

[mountaineer]

These nitwits really seem to enjoy the intrigue of it all, don't they? Self-important nothings.