Subject: Re: CLIPS ON EMAIL RELEASE
From: Charles Hicks <[email-masked]>
To: Nick Merrill <[email-masked]>
Cc: Tyson Brody <[email-masked]>, Jake Sullivan <[email-masked]>, Ian Sams <[email-masked]>, Josh Schwerin <[email-masked]>, Cheryl Mills <[email-masked]>, Karen Finney <[email-masked]>, Jennifer Palmieri <[email-masked]>, Brian Fallon <[email-masked]>, Christina Reynolds <[email-masked]>, HRCRR <[email-masked]>, Kristina Schake <[email-masked]>, John Podesta <[email-masked]>, Robby Mook <[email-masked]>, Huma Abedin <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 16:37:15 -0400

Panelists all around are saying there’s no smoking gun in this release.

Fox has a couple of different storylines on the emails: Harris Faulkner
(filling in for Shepard Smith) went through and talked about specific
emails with James Rosen, who cherry-picked a handful of emails to discuss;
Gretchen Carlson and Ed Henry got caught up in reports that HRC sent
now-classified information over her email account after her UN press
conference when she said she didn’t send classified information (most
reporters are noting that the information was not classified at the time,
though).

On MSNBC, the only flag is that Alex Seitz-Wald brought up that NARA took
only two days to analyze emails to determine whether emails were personal
or professional while the State Department is taking months to look over
those same emails. He did not mention the redaction process State is going
through.

On CNN, correspondent Chris Frates noted positively that HRC’s personality
comes out in some of these emails.

On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 4:06 PM, Nick Merrill <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> How are they covering this on TV now that it's been a few hours?
>
>
>
> On May 22, 2015, at 4:02 PM, Tyson Brody <[email-masked]>
> wrote:
>
>
> http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/clinton-emails-silent-on-deadly-danger-facing-americans-in-benghazi/article/2564920Clinton
> emails silent on deadly danger facing Americans in Benghazi
> BY BYRON YORK <http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/author/byron-york>
> <http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/clinton-emails-silent-on-deadly-danger-facing-americans-in-benghazi/article/2564920?rel=author>
>  | MAY 22, 2015 | 3:51 PM
>
> <http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/clinton-emails-silent-on-deadly-danger-facing-americans-in-benghazi/article/2564920/comments#disqus_thread>
> <https://plus.google.com/share?url=http://washex.am/1Q1PjUH>
>
> The newly-released Hillary Clinton Benghazi emails do not contain any
> communications relating to security from the critical last month before the
> September 11, 2012 terrorist attack on the U.S. facility in Libya. During
> that period, Ambassador Christopher Stevens, who along with three other
> Americans would die in the attack, warned Clinton and other State
> Department officials of a growing danger, indeed a security emergency, in
> Libya. Stevens specifically noted that the possibility of an attack on
> Americans was growing, and, if such an attack occurred, the U.S. contingent
> did not have the strength to repel it. But to judge from the emails made
> public Friday, Clinton gave not a thought to the matter.
>
> Go back to August 2012. On the 15th of that month, U.S. security officers
> in Libya held an "emergency" meeting to address the very real possibility
> that growing violence in the area could soon target Americans. The next
> day, August 16, Stevens sent a cable to Clinton concluding that the
> Americans in Libya could not defend U.S. facilities "in the event of a
> coordinated attack, due to limited manpower, security measures, weapons
> capabilities, host nation support, and the overall size of the compound."
>
> It was a clear call for help, one that, judging by the newly-public
> emails, went entirely unheard at the highest level of the State Department.
> Apart from some hugger-mugger analyses of Libyan politics by Clinton's
> friend Sidney Blumenthal, there is nothing at all in the emails concerning
> Benghazi from the month before the attack.
>
> Clinton has long maintained she never saw the August 16, 2012 cable. "That
> cable did not come to my attention," Clinton testified under oath before
> the House Foreign Affairs Committee in January 2013. "I have made it very
> clear that the security cables did not come to my attention or above the
> assistant-secretary level, where the [State Department internal
> investigation] placed responsibility."
>
> Clinton explained that she was simply too busy, and there were simply too
> many cables, for her to see every one. "One-point-43 million cables a year
> come to the State Department," she told the House committee. "They're all
> addressed to me. They do not all come to me."
>
> But wasn't that August 16, 2012 cable -- warning of dire consequences
> should the existing violence in Libya target Americans -- a pretty
> important communication? What struck Republicans investigating Benghazi is
> that, while they knew Clinton was indeed busy, other equally busy top Obama
> administration officials did read the cable. In an appearance before the
> Senate Armed Services Committee, both former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta
> and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey -- two busy men with
> pretty big jobs -- testified they knew about it.
>
> "You were aware that Ambassador Stevens -- of his cable that said that the
> consulate could not withstand a coordinated attack, is that right?"
> Republican Sen. Kelly Ayotte asked Panetta.
>
> "Correct," said Panetta.
>
> "General, you had said that you previously were aware of that?" Ayotte aid
> to Dempsey.
>
> "Yes, I was aware of the communication back to the State Department,"
> Dempsey answered.
>
> Clinton, on the other hand, insists to this day that she knew nothing. And
> there is nothing in the newly-released emails to contradict her sworn
> testimony on the matter. That should not come as a surprise to anyone.
> After all, because Clinton kept her communications on a separate, secret
> system, the only emails that State Department officials possess are the
> ones Clinton has given them. Clinton and her lawyers, of course, chose the
> emails that she gave to the State Department and then destroyed all of her
> email communications, including backups. Could anyone possibly be surprised
> that nothing Clinton turned over to the State Department -- and ultimately
> to the public -- contradicted her testimony under oath?
>
> The period leading up to the Benghazi attacks is the most critical time in
> the entire tragic episode. What did Clinton know about the danger to
> American officials there, and what did she do about it? That is the key
> question of Benghazi. What happened afterward -- the blame-the-video spin
> -- can be interpreted as an attempt to cover up Clinton's inaction before
> the attack. Yes, the spin campaign was dishonest. But the more serious
> offense was allowing the conditions that led to the deaths of Stevens and
> three other Americans. The crime is worse than the cover-up. And if
> Republicans thought they would receive any new information in the
> Clinton-edited version of the emails released Friday, they will surely be
> disappointed.
>
> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Tyson Brody <[email-masked]>
> wrote:
>
>> Defer to those who know better on Morocco but in the days after the
>> attack HRC attended the opening plenary on the US-Morocco strategic
>> dialogue: http://m.state.gov/md197711.htm
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 3:42 PM, Jake Sullivan <
>> [email-masked]> wrote:
>>
>>> The other casualty was Sean Smith.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On May 22, 2015, at 2:54 PM, Tyson Brody <[email-masked]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> https://twitter.com/lachlan/status/601822415807770625
>>>
>>> @lachlan
>>>
>>> HRC in Hard Choices: "My thoughts immediately went to Chris" (Stevens)
>>> HRC email on 9/11/12 asks abt "Chris Smith"
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Ian Sams <[email-masked]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Looks to have just been response to the clip. Email chain at bottom.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/hillary-request-chris-stevens-dad-not-politicize-benghazi-very-nice_953218.html
>>>> Hillary on Request From Chris Stevens Dad Not To Politicize Benghazi:
>>>> 'Very Nice'
>>>>
>>>> 3:27 PM, MAY 22, 2015 • BY MICHAEL WARREN
>>>> <https://www.weeklystandard.com/author/michael-warren>
>>>>
>>>> <https://www.weeklystandard.com/rss/michael%20warren/rss.xml>
>>>>
>>>> Send to Kindle
>>>>
>>>> Single Page
>>>> <https://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/hillary-request-chris-stevens-dad-not-politicize-benghazi-very-nice_953218.html?nopager=1>
>>>> Print
>>>> <https://www.weeklystandard.com/print/blogs/hillary-request-chris-stevens-dad-not-politicize-benghazi-very-nice_953218.html>Larger
>>>> Text
>>>> <https://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/hillary-request-chris-stevens-dad-not-politicize-benghazi-very-nice_953218.html>Smaller
>>>> Text
>>>> <https://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/hillary-request-chris-stevens-dad-not-politicize-benghazi-very-nice_953218.html>
>>>> Alerts
>>>> <https://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/hillary-request-chris-stevens-dad-not-politicize-benghazi-very-nice_953218.html>
>>>>
>>>> Hillary Clinton was forwarded an article a month after the terrorist
>>>> attack on Benghazi that killed U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens that quoted
>>>> Stevens's father. In the October 14, 2012, Bloomberg article
>>>> <http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-10-14/libyan-ambassador-s-death-not-a-political-issue-says-dad>,
>>>> Jan Stevens, the late ambassador's father, was quoted saying that it would
>>>> be "abhorrent" to make his son's death a political issue in the
>>>> presidential campaign.
>>>>
>>>> According to the State Department's release of several emails sent to
>>>> Clinton's private email address, the link to the article was forwarded on
>>>> the same day to State Department employee Chris Hensman, who forwarded it
>>>> to Clinton advisers Cheryl Mills and Philippe Reines. Mills forwarded that
>>>> email to Clinton.
>>>>
>>>> "Very nice," replied Clinton. "Can you talk?" See a sreenshot of the
>>>> email below:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Josh Schwerin [mailto:[email-masked]]
>>>> *Sent:* Friday, May 22, 2015 2:41 PM
>>>> *To:* Cheryl Mills
>>>> *Cc:* Karen Finney; Ian Sams; Jennifer Palmieri; Brian Fallon; Tyson
>>>> Brody; Christina Reynolds; HRCRR; Kristina Schake; John Podesta; Robby
>>>> Mook; Huma Abedin; Jake Sullivan
>>>>
>>>> *Subject:* Re: CLIPS ON EMAIL RELEASE
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The image posted on twitter just shows the top of the email. Wondering
>>>> if there's any additional context that they cropped out
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Cheryl Mills <[email-masked]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> What do you mean?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 2:38 PM, Josh Schwerin <
>>>> [email-masked]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Can we get the rest of this email?
>>>>
>>>> *Joe Pounder* <https://twitter.com/PounderFile>
>>>>
>>>> @PounderFile <https://twitter.com/PounderFile>
>>>>
>>>> In response to email w/ this story "Bloomberg: Libyan Ambassador's
>>>> Death Not a Political Issue, Says Dad", @HillaryClinton
>>>> <https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/> says "very nice"
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Karen Finney <
>>>> [email-masked]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This is from the Gowdy  release - per the question from Jon Allen at
>>>> Reuters do we want to respond ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> He makes 3 points, reporters picking up:
>>>>
>>>> 1) the emails highlight "investigative questions".
>>>>
>>>> 2) Emails show the Secretary had been warned about Benghazi
>>>>
>>>> 3) There are gaps in what the committee has. (Note that the examples he
>>>> cites happened before the actual attack)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I suggest we don't respond to Gowdy and refer Allen to HRC remarks.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Background Information on Released Emails:*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Among the emails the Select Committee finds highlight the existence of
>>>> significant investigative questions:*
>>>>
>>>> ·         September 24, 2012—“Compiled protest and Benghazi
>>>> Statements.” A document that reinforces issues relating to characterization
>>>> of the motives for the attacks. For example, Jake Sullivan noted, “You
>>>> never said spontaneous or characterized the motives. In fact you were
>>>> careful in your first statement to say we were assessing motive and method.
>>>> The way you treated the video in the Libya context was to say that some
>>>> sought to *justify* the attack on that basis.*”  *
>>>>
>>>> ·         August 24, 2012 — “H: Intel on new Libya president. Sid.” In
>>>> this document two and a half weeks before the attacks, Jake Sullivan writes
>>>> to the Secretary, “Some warning signs,” in response to the deteriorating
>>>> security situation in Benghazi, which forced the Red Cross to suspend
>>>> activities, and reinforces questions about what was done in response to
>>>> these warnings.
>>>>
>>>> ·         April 4, 2012—“Secretary Clinton’s Leadership on
>>>> Libya.” This document characterizes Secretary Clinton’s ownership of U.S.
>>>> policy in Libya.
>>>>
>>>> ·         April 8, 2011—“UK game playing; new rebel strategists; Egypt
>>>> moves in. Sid” In this document, Secretary Clinton responded to a
>>>> Blumenthal memo with, “Fyi. The idea of using private security experts to
>>>> arm the opposition should be considered.”
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *There are several instances of State personnel notifying the Secretary
>>>> about security concerns and issues:*
>>>>
>>>> ·         April 10, 2011 – Forwarded email about deteriorating security
>>>>
>>>> ·         April 22, 2011 – Request for continuous coverage in
>>>> Benghazi, “security permitting”
>>>>
>>>> ·         April 24, 2011 – Forwarded email about hotels being targeted
>>>>
>>>> ·         June 10, 2011 – Email including information about credible
>>>> threat info against hotel and that personnel are evacuating to alternate
>>>> locations
>>>>
>>>> ·         August 21, 2011 – Email regarding concerns about Islamist
>>>> militias
>>>>
>>>> ·         January 9, 2012 – Email stating that disarming and
>>>> reintegrating of militias isn’t going as well as they had hoped
>>>>
>>>> ·         February 24, 2012 – Email stating that militia rivalries are
>>>> dangerous
>>>>
>>>> ·         August 24, 2012 – Email stating that there are “some warning
>>>> signs”
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *The Committee also has an interest in understanding the inexplicable
>>>> gaps in the Secretary’s emails during key times of her involvement in
>>>> Libyan policy, including:*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> June 10-August 8, 2011—Time period where Secretary Clinton was heavily
>>>> involved in Libya policy
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> September 14-October 21 2011—Dates of Secretary Clinton’s trip to
>>>> Libya, when the now-famous picture of Clinton on her blackberry was taken
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> October 21, 2011-January 5, 2012—Time period when the State Department
>>>> was extending the Benghazi mission for another year
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> April 27- July 4 2012—Time period of increased security during which an
>>>> IED was thrown at the compound blasting a hole through the wall and during
>>>> which the British ambassador was attacked
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On May 22, 2015, at 2:13 PM, Ian Sams <[email-masked]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Another:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ·         *2:08 pm*
>>>>
>>>> ·         *by Byron Tau*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Mrs. Clinton was informed several times in 2011 about the deteriorating
>>>> security situation in Benghazi and the dangers that diplomatic staff on the
>>>> ground were facing, *emails show*
>>>> <http://foia.state.gov/searchapp/DOCUMENTS/HRC_Email_1_296/HRCH1/DOC_0C05739666/C05739666.pdf>
>>>> .
>>>>
>>>> Chris Stevens, then a special representative to the transitional
>>>> government, considered aborting a mission in Benghazi in April 2011 because
>>>> of the danger. But State Department officials warned that an abrupt
>>>> departure would send a signal.
>>>>
>>>> “Departure would send a significant political signal, and would be
>>>> interpreted as the U.S. losing confidence in the [Libyan transitional
>>>> government],” a state department staff member named Timmy Davis wrote in a
>>>> note forwarded to Mrs. Clinton.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Ian Sams [mailto:[email-masked]]
>>>> *Sent:* Friday, May 22, 2015 2:03 PM
>>>> *To:* Jennifer Palmieri
>>>> *Cc:* Brian Fallon; Tyson Brody; Josh Schwerin; Christina Reynolds;
>>>> HRCRR; Kristina Schake; John Podesta; Robby Mook; Huma Abedin; Cheryl
>>>> Mills; Jake Sullivan
>>>> *Subject:* RE: CLIPS ON EMAIL RELEASE
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Of note from the WSJ live blog:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ·         *1:34 pm*
>>>>
>>>> ·         *by Byron Tau*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Mrs. Clinton was given in-depth operational details of a visit by Chris
>>>> Stevens to Benghazi in 2011, *according to an email forwarded to her
>>>> on March 27, 2011*
>>>> <http://foia.state.gov/searchapp/DOCUMENTS/HRC_Email_1_296/HRCH1/DOC_0C05739591/C05739591.pdf>.  Mr.
>>>> Stevens — who was then serving as special representative to Libya’s
>>>> transitional government — was killed in Benghazi during the September 2012
>>>> attacks.
>>>>
>>>> The former secretary of state has maintained that the real-time
>>>> operational details of diplomatic security were handled below her level.
>>>> But information on the logistics around a 2011 visit to Benghazi were
>>>> forwarded to Mrs. Clinton, according to emails released Friday.
>>>>
>>>> ·         *1:37 pm*
>>>>
>>>> ·         *by Daniel Nasaw*
>>>>
>>>> ·
>>>>
>>>> Here’s the memo Byron just referred to.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Ian Sams [mailto:[email-masked]]
>>>> *Sent:* Friday, May 22, 2015 1:57 PM
>>>> *To:* Jennifer Palmieri
>>>> *Cc:* Brian Fallon; Tyson Brody; Josh Schwerin; Christina Reynolds;
>>>> HRCRR; Kristina Schake; John Podesta; Robby Mook; Huma Abedin; Cheryl
>>>> Mills; Jake Sullivan
>>>> *Subject:* RE: CLIPS ON EMAIL RELEASE
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sorry for the mixup earlier when I sent an old NYT clip. Here’s their
>>>> latest on the release:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/05/22/state-department-releases-more-hillary-clinton-emails/?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=second-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *1:16PM ET*
>>>> By Michael S. Schmidt
>>>> <https://twitter.com/intent/user?screen_name=MichaelSSchmidt> State
>>>> Department Releases Hillary Clinton Emails
>>>> <http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/05/22/state-department-releases-more-hillary-clinton-emails/>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> WASHINGTON — The State Department said on Friday it was releasing 296
>>>> emails that Hillary Rodham Clinton sent and received when she was secretary
>>>> of state.
>>>>
>>>> The emails are the first tranche of many that will be released by the
>>>> State Department over the next year. After it was revealed in March that
>>>> Mrs. Clinton had exclusively used a personal email account when she was
>>>> secretary of state, she asked the State Department to release all of the
>>>> emails she had provided it from her time in office.
>>>>
>>>> The State Department said the emails it was releasing Friday were
>>>> provided to a specially appointed House committee investigating the
>>>> 2012 attack
>>>> <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/b/benghazi_attack_2012/index.html?8qa> on
>>>> the American mission in Benghazi, Libya. The emails were sent from January
>>>> 2011 and December 2012, the State Department said.
>>>>
>>>> The New York Times on Thursday obtained and published an initial batch
>>>> of the emails
>>>> <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/22/us/politics/first-batch-of-hillary-clinton-emails-captures-concerns-over-libya.html>
>>>>  online.
>>>>
>>>> “The emails we release today do not change the essential facts or our
>>>> understanding of the events before, during, or after the attacks, which
>>>> have been known since the independent Accountability Review Board report on
>>>> the Benghazi attacks was released almost two and a half years ago,” the
>>>> State Department said.
>>>>
>>>> The website that the State Department uses was not working on Friday
>>>> when it said it was releasing the emails.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Ian Sams [mailto:[email-masked]]
>>>> *Sent:* Friday, May 22, 2015 1:53 PM
>>>> *To:* Jennifer Palmieri
>>>> *Cc:* Brian Fallon; Tyson Brody; Josh Schwerin; Christina Reynolds;
>>>> HRCRR; Kristina Schake; John Podesta; Robby Mook; Huma Abedin; Cheryl
>>>> Mills; Jake Sullivan
>>>> *Subject:* Re: CLIPS ON EMAIL RELEASE
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> America Rising is already clipping and pushing her gaggle Q&A on the
>>>> emails, which is weird since she did a good job.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *America Rising PAC @AmericaRising <https://twitter.com/AmericaRising>*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> VIDEO: @HillaryClinton <https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/> Pressed
>>>> On Receiving Now-Classified And Sensitive Information
>>>> youtube.com/watch?v=qdiQxJ… <https://t.co/k2HYiCyot6>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 1:50 PM, Jennifer Palmieri <
>>>> [email-masked]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> HRC took three or four q's.   Sounds like it went well. Hopefully we
>>>> will see soon on msnbc or cnn. Varun will transcribe.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On May 22, 2015, at 1:45 PM, Brian Fallon <[email-masked]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> They concede the pt and will fix
>>>>
>>>> On Friday, May 22, 2015, Jennifer Palmieri <
>>>> [email-masked]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Brian - I think we should push back.  It is not "document" not
>>>> "documents."
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On May 22, 2015, at 1:31 PM, Tyson Brody <[email-masked]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Should someone push back on politico with regards to "now classified
>>>> documents?" It's 23 words out of one single email.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Josh Schwerin <
>>>> [email-masked]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> First batch of Hillary's State Department emails released
>>>>
>>>> By LAUREN FRENCH, JOSH GERSTEIN and BRYAN BENDER
>>>>
>>>> 5/22/15 12:13 PM EDT
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/hillary-clinton-emails-release-118214.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The first batch of emails
>>>> <http://foia.state.gov/Search/results.aspx?searchText=*&beginDate=&endDate=&publishedBeginDate=20150522&publishedEndDate=20150522&caseNumber> from
>>>> Hillary Clinton’s four years running the State Department was released
>>>> Friday.
>>>>
>>>> Even before the emails were made public, the State Department argued
>>>> that the nearly 900 pages of documents do not fundamentally alter the
>>>> findings of the State Department’s Accountability Review Board that probed
>>>> the Benghazi terrorist attacks.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> “The emails we release today do not change the essential facts or our
>>>> understanding of the events before, during, or after the attacks, which
>>>> have been known since the independent Accountability Review Board report on
>>>> the Benghazi attacks was released almost two and a half years ago,” wrote
>>>> the department’s deputy spokeswoman Marie Harf.
>>>>
>>>> These highly anticipated emails, some of which have already leaked out,
>>>> give insight into Clinton’s tenure as the top U.S. diplomat. They’re also
>>>> serving as fodder for critics of the Democratic presidential front-runner,
>>>> who is still dogged by questions about a 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi
>>>> that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> And they are sure to raise more questions about the administration’s
>>>> and Clinton’s response to what quickly became a political scandal. There is
>>>> an email dated Sept. 15 with Clinton providing “talking points” for an
>>>> upcoming closed-door hearing before the House Select Committee on
>>>> Intelligence, but with the exception of Jake Sullivan the recipients are
>>>> blacked out, along with the entire document.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It states only: “Per the discussion at Deputies, here are the revised
>>>> TPs for HPSCI.”
>>>>
>>>> The emails also show that Clinton received now-classified documents on
>>>> her personal email address. One of the documents State recently deemed
>>>> classified was a November 2012 email reporting possible arrests in Libya
>>>> related to the Benghazi attack. The memo was sent through unclassified
>>>> State Department channels and forwarded to Clinton’s private account by
>>>> Sullivan, State’s Director of Policy Planning. A notation on the document
>>>> released says it was classified as –“SECRET”—the middle tier of national
>>>> security classification—on Friday, the same day the records were released.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Clinton has been under intense pressure for weeks since it was revealed
>>>> that she used a non-official email address while at the State Department
>>>> and stored those emails on a personal server in her New York home.
>>>> Republicans jumped on those revelations to accuse Clinton of attempting to
>>>> runaround federal records laws and keep key documents about Libya and
>>>> Benghazi from the public.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Republican Rep. Trey Gowdy, chairman of the House Select Committee on
>>>> Benghazi, has subpoenaed the State Department for all documents on Libya
>>>> from Clinton’s time at the State Department and is refusing to schedule the
>>>> former secretary to testify until the Obama administration turns the emails
>>>> over to congressional investigators.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/insiders-benghazi-testimony-works-to-hillarys-advantage-118202.html?ml=ri>
>>>>
>>>> *ALSO ON POLITICO
>>>> <http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/insiders-benghazi-testimony-works-to-hillarys-advantage-118202.html?ml=ri>*
>>>> Insiders: Benghazi testimony works to Hillary's advantage
>>>> <http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/insiders-benghazi-testimony-works-to-hillarys-advantage-118202.html?ml=ri>
>>>>
>>>> *KATIE GLUECK* <http://www.politico.com/reporters/KatieGlueck.html>
>>>>
>>>> Gowdy said in a statement Friday that the committee will continue to
>>>> seek all documents from Clinton’s tenure at the State Department on Libya
>>>> and Benghazi and not the “self-selected” emails the former secretary made
>>>> available.
>>>>
>>>> “To assume a self-selected public record is complete, when no one with
>>>> a duty or responsibility to the public had the ability to take part in the
>>>> selection, requires a leap in logic no impartial reviewer should be
>>>> required to make and strains credibility,” Gowdy said.
>>>>
>>>> The Benghazi Committee has had access to this first batch of email,
>>>> which represents less than 2 percent of the 55,000 emails Clinton returned
>>>> to State, for months. Leaked portions of the emails contain extensive
>>>> communications between Clinton and Sidney Blumenthal — a longtime family
>>>> ally. Blumenthal would often send Clinton memos on the security in Libya
>>>> before the 2012 attacks that left four Americans dead.
>>>>
>>>> Blumenthal’s analyses of Libya was often met with skepticism from
>>>> senior State Department officials, including Clinton. Gowdy asked the U.S.
>>>> Marshals Service to serve Blumenthal with a subpoena on Tuesday.
>>>>
>>>> The emails also give a personal look at Clinton’s habits and
>>>> relationships.
>>>>
>>>> A Oct. 7, 2012 email from Blumenthal invited Clinton and her husband,
>>>> former President Bill Clinton, to a dinner.
>>>>
>>>> “Postelection, we’d like to have you over for dinner. Bill can come,
>>>> too, if he’s in town. Whatever works,” Blumenthal wrote.
>>>>
>>>> The rest of the 55,000 emails will be released to the public in stages.
>>>> State proposed releasing those records next January, but a judge rejected
>>>> that plan and ordered the agency to come up with a rolling schedule, which
>>>> has yet to be finalized.
>>>>
>>>> The documents released Friday are from January 2011 to Dec. 31, 2012,
>>>> “and relate to the security of, and attacks on, the State Department
>>>> facility in Benghazi and to the United States’ diplomatic presence in
>>>> Libya, including in Benghazi,” Harf said.
>>>>
>>>> Maryland Rep. Elijah Cummings, the top Democrat on the Benghazi panel,
>>>> said in a statement that the committee should now schedule Clinton to
>>>> testify.
>>>>
>>>> “Instead of the selective leaking that has happened so far, the
>>>> American people can now read all of these emails and see for themselves
>>>> that they contain no evidence to back up claims that Secretary Clinton
>>>> ordered a stand-down, approved an illicit weapons program, or any other
>>>> wild allegation Republicans have made for years,” Cummings said.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Read more:
>>>> http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/hillary-clinton-emails-release-118214.html#ixzz3atDON74L
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Ian Sams <[email-masked]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This strikes me as a selective placement from someone with access to
>>>> the emails, maybe Benghazi committee staff since Alex has strong House GOP
>>>> relationships. Hard to imagine Alex found this tidbit in an email and wrote
>>>> this piece exclusively after the emails published 45 minutes ago.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> He also gets the email address wrong.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/22/hillary-discussed-speculation-about-her-health-with-aides-in-emails/
>>>>
>>>> Hillary Discussed Speculation About Her Health With Aides In Emails
>>>>
>>>> *ALEX PAPPAS <http://dailycaller.com/author/pappas/>*
>>>>
>>>> Political Reporter <http://dailycaller.com/author/pappas/>
>>>>
>>>> 1:15 PM 05/22/2015
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton discussed with aides the
>>>> chatter on cable news about whether she actually suffered a concussion in
>>>> 2012, according to emails released by the State Department on Friday.
>>>>
>>>> A week before she was to testify before Congress in December 2012 about
>>>> the attacks in Benghazi, Clinton postponed her appearance with aides
>>>> explaining she had fainted and suffered a concussion.
>>>>
>>>> On Dec. 20, chief of staff Cheryl Mills forwarded Clinton by email a
>>>> transcript of Fox News host Greta Van Susteren discussing Clinton’s health
>>>> with Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain.
>>>>
>>>> “Senator,” Van Susteren said during that segment, “there is a report
>>>> from the State Department that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will
>>>> testify on Benghazi before the middle of January. There has been some
>>>> criticism of whether or not she has a concussion. I believe she has a
>>>> concussion. What do you think?”
>>>>
>>>> McCain replied: “I have never seen her back down. And I believe that
>>>> she is now not physically well enough to testify and she will testify the
>>>> middle of January.”
>>>>
>>>> Mills sent a transcript of that interview to Clinton’s personal email —
>>>> [email-masked] — and to close aide Huma Abdein.
>>>>
>>>> Speaking of McCain, Clinton replied: “Huma called him and [South
>>>> Carolina Sen. Lindsey] Graham.”
>>>>
>>>> “Also,” Clinton added, “someone should call Greta VS to thank her for
>>>> ‘knowing the truth.’”
>>>>
>>>> The emails released Friday, ahead of the Memorial Day weekend, are a
>>>> few of the thousands the Democratic presidential candidate has turned over
>>>> to the State Department from her personal email account. Clinton
>>>> acknowledges she used that email account for both personal and official
>>>> business.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Tyson Brody [mailto:[email-masked]
>>>> <[email-masked]>]
>>>> *Sent:* Friday, May 22, 2015 1:21 PM
>>>> *To:* Ian Sams
>>>> *Cc:* Josh Schwerin; Brian Fallon; Christina Reynolds; HRCRR; Jennifer
>>>> Palmieri; Kristina Schake; John Podesta; Robby Mook; Huma Abedin; Cheryl
>>>> Mills; Jake Sullivan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Subject:* Re: CLIPS ON EMAIL RELEASE
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Attached are the redacted and unredacted versions of the email as a
>>>> side by a side.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Tyson Brody <[email-masked]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Want to flag that if you look at the email in this link, HRC's email is
>>>> redacted. But in yesrterday's new york times dump, the same email is
>>>> unredacted. Could it be because Committee leaked?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://twitter.com/gabrielmalor/status/601796614060167169
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> See it unredacted from the times below:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 1:16 PM, Ian Sams <[email-masked]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> *Lachlan Markay @lachlan <https://twitter.com/lachlan>*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Email with Hillary's revised Benghazi talking points is completely
>>>> redacted pic.twitter.com/A3uGN0erHW <http://t.co/A3uGN0erHW>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Ian Sams [mailto:[email-masked]
>>>> <[email-masked]>]
>>>> *Sent:* Friday, May 22, 2015 1:05 PM
>>>> *To:* Josh Schwerin; Brian Fallon
>>>> *Cc:* Tyson Brody; Christina Reynolds; HRCRR; Jennifer Palmieri;
>>>> Kristina Schake; John Podesta; Robby Mook; Huma Abedin; Cheryl Mills; Jake
>>>> Sullivan
>>>> *Subject:* RE: CLIPS ON EMAIL RELEASE
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:*
>>>>
>>>> *Date: May 22, 2015*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Contact:*
>>>>
>>>> *Jamal D. Ware*
>>>>
>>>> *202-226-7100 <202-226-7100>*
>>>>
>>>> *Amanda Duvall*
>>>>
>>>> *202-225-6030 <202-225-6030>*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Statement on the Release of Secretary Clinton’s Benghazi Emails*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Washington, DC*— Select Committee on Benghazi Chairman Trey Gowdy,
>>>> R-S.C., today issued the following statement after the State Department
>>>> released 300 self-selected emails from former Secretary Hillary Clinton,
>>>> over which the department had no control and no custody for nearly two
>>>> years. These emails were turned over to the State by former Secretary
>>>> Clinton in the fall of 2014 in reaction to a request from the Select
>>>> Committee:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> “More than six months after the Select Committee first discovered
>>>> Secretary Clinton’s unusual email arrangement with herself, and after the
>>>> media discovered Secretary Clinton relied exclusively on a personal server
>>>> housing a personal email account eschewing any official email address,
>>>> State Department transferred 300 messages exclusively reviewed and released
>>>> by her own lawyers,” Gowdy said. “These lawyers, it must be noted, owed and
>>>> continue to owe a fiduciary responsibility to Secretary Clinton to protect
>>>> her interests. To assume a self-selected public record is complete, when no
>>>> one with a duty or responsibility to the public had the ability to take
>>>> part in the selection, requires a leap in logic no impartial reviewer
>>>> should be required to make and strains credibility."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> “It is also important to remember these email messages are just one
>>>> piece of information that cannot be completely evaluated or fully
>>>> understood without the total record. The Committee is working to collect
>>>> and evaluate all of the relevant and material information necessary to
>>>> evaluate the full range of issues in context.  We will not reach any
>>>> investigative conclusions until our work is complete, but these emails
>>>> continue to reinforce the fact that unresolved questions and issues remain
>>>> as it relates to Benghazi.”
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> “The Select Committee continues to believe the American people have a
>>>> right to the full and complete record of her official emails and,
>>>> therefore, asked Secretary Clinton to turn her server and the full body of
>>>> emails over to a neutral, detached, independent third party for review.
>>>> This is also why the State Department must comply with a months-old
>>>> subpoena for emails of the former Secretary’s top aides, whose emails have
>>>> never been received or reviewed by any congressional committee."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> “The Committee’s interest is in building a complete record from which
>>>> the final, definitive accounting regarding the terrorist attacks in
>>>> Benghazi can be provided.  The best way to answer all questions related to
>>>> the attacks in Benghazi continues to be having access to the full public
>>>> record, not a "record" controlled, possessed and screened exclusively by
>>>> Secretary Clinton's personal lawyers.”
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ###
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Background Information on Released Emails:*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Among the emails the Select Committee finds highlight the existence of
>>>> significant investigative questions:*
>>>>
>>>> ·  September 24, 2012—“Compiled protest and Benghazi Statements.” A
>>>> document that reinforces issues relating to characterization of the motives
>>>> for the attacks. For example, Jake Sullivan noted, “You never said
>>>> spontaneous or characterized the motives. In fact you were careful in your
>>>> first statement to say we were assessing motive and method. The way you
>>>> treated the video in the Libya context was to say that some sought
>>>> to *justify* the attack on that basis.*”  *
>>>>
>>>> ·  August 24, 2012 — “H: Intel on new Libya president. Sid.” In this
>>>> document two and a half weeks before the attacks, Jake Sullivan writes to
>>>> the Secretary, “Some warning signs,” in response to the deteriorating
>>>> security situation in Benghazi, which forced the Red Cross to suspend
>>>> activities, and reinforces questions about what was done in response to
>>>> these warnings.
>>>>
>>>> ·  April 4, 2012—“Secretary Clinton’s Leadership on Libya.” This
>>>> document characterizes Secretary Clinton’s ownership of U.S. policy in
>>>> Libya.
>>>>
>>>> ·  April 8, 2011—“UK game playing; new rebel strategists; Egypt moves
>>>> in. Sid” In this document, Secretary Clinton responded to a Blumenthal memo
>>>> with, “Fyi. The idea of using private security experts to arm the
>>>> opposition should be considered.”
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *There are several instances of State personnel notifying the Secretary
>>>> about security concerns and issues:*
>>>>
>>>> ·  April 10, 2011 – Forwarded email about deteriorating security
>>>>
>>>> ·  April 22, 2011 – Request for continuous coverage in Benghazi,
>>>> “security permitting”
>>>>
>>>> ·  April 24, 2011 – Forwarded email about hotels being targeted
>>>>
>>>> ·  June 10, 2011 – Email including information about credible threat
>>>> info against hotel and that personnel are evacuating to alternate locations
>>>>
>>>> ·  August 21, 2011 – Email regarding concerns about Islamist militias
>>>>
>>>> ·  January 9, 2012 – Email stating that disarming and reintegrating of
>>>> militias isn’t going as well as they had hoped
>>>>
>>>> ·  February 24, 2012 – Email stating that militia rivalries are
>>>> dangerous
>>>>
>>>> ·  August 24, 2012 – Email stating that there are “some warning signs”
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *The Committee also has an interest in understanding the inexplicable
>>>> gaps in the Secretary’s emails during key times of her involvement in
>>>> Libyan policy, including:*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> June 10-August 8, 2011—Time period where Secretary Clinton was heavily
>>>> involved in Libya policy
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> September 14-October 21 2011—Dates of Secretary Clinton’s trip to
>>>> Libya, when the now-famous picture of Clinton on her blackberry was taken
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> October 21, 2011-January 5, 2012—Time period when the State Department
>>>> was extending the Benghazi mission for another year
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> April 27- July 4 2012—Time period of increased security during which an
>>>> IED was thrown at the compound blasting a hole through the wall and during
>>>> which the British ambassador was attacked
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]
>>>> <[email-masked]>] *On Behalf Of *Josh Schwerin
>>>> *Sent:* Friday, May 22, 2015 1:03 PM
>>>> *To:* Brian Fallon
>>>> *Cc:* Tyson Brody; Christina Reynolds; HRCRR; Jennifer Palmieri;
>>>> Kristina Schake; John Podesta; Robby Mook; Huma Abedin; Cheryl Mills; Jake
>>>> Sullivan
>>>> *Subject:* Re: CLIPS ON EMAIL RELEASE
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> First Batch of Hillary Clinton's Emails on Libya Made Public
>>>>
>>>> BY CARRIE DANN
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/hillary-clinton/first-batch-hillary-clintons-emails-libya-made-public-n362506
>>>>
>>>> A batch of Hillary Clinton's personal emails made public on Thursday
>>>> morning offers a glimpse into her team's initial exchange of information in
>>>> the wake of the Benghazi attacks as well as her relationship with longtime
>>>> confidante Sidney Blumenthal, who sent her at least two dozen memos
>>>> regarding Libya during her tenure as Secretary of State.
>>>>
>>>> The State Department plans to release about 850 pages of the emails,
>>>> which had been handed over to the congressional panel investigating the
>>>> Benghazi attacks. But on Thursday, the New York Times released about a
>>>> third of that batch of correspondence, which Clinton exchanged using a
>>>> private server rather than a government email account.
>>>>
>>>> The documents show that, while Clinton used her personal email account
>>>> to receive information the government calls "sensitive," she did not appear
>>>> to use her private server to exchange classified information.
>>>>
>>>> The "sensitive" information included details like the location of State
>>>> Department officials in Libya during a time of instability in the country
>>>> in 2011.
>>>>
>>>> The documents released by the New York Times also show that Clinton
>>>> received numerous briefing memos about Libya from Blumenthal, a longtime
>>>> friend of the Clintons who was not employed by the State Department. The
>>>> New York Times reported earlier this week that Blumenthal was also involved
>>>> with a possible business venture in the country at the time.
>>>>
>>>> Two of those memos from Blumenthal came in the days immediately
>>>> following the September 11, 2012 Benghazi attacks.
>>>>
>>>> In one, sent on September 12, Blumenthal suggested that top security
>>>> officers in the country believed that the attacks "were inspired by what
>>>> many devout Libyan viewed as a sacrilegious internet video on the prophet
>>>> Mohammed originating in America." Clinton forwarded that information to top
>>>> adviser Jake Sullivan with the message "more info."
>>>>
>>>> But another memo sent the following day indicated that the attacks may
>>>> have actually been carried out by a militia group. Blumenthal wrote that
>>>> officials in the country "believe that the attackers having prepared to
>>>> launch their assault took advantage of the cover provided by the
>>>> demonstrations in Benghazi protesting an internet production seen as
>>>> disrespectful to the prophet Mohammed."
>>>>
>>>> The release of the emails comes after a prolonged political fight for
>>>> Clinton over her use of a private email server while serving as Secretary
>>>> of State.
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, Clinton urged the State Department to expedite the vetting
>>>> of the emails after initial reports suggested that the data trove would not
>>>> be ready for public release until January of next year
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 1:00 PM, Brian Fallon <
>>>> [email-masked]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> State did a nice job with this, despite the initial, sensationalized
>>>> tweet by AP
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Friday, May 22, 2015, Josh Schwerin <[email-masked]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> State Dept. releases Hillary Clinton e-mails in Benghazi probe
>>>>
>>>> AP  MAY 22, 2015
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2015/05/22/state-dept-set-release-hillary-clinton-mails-benghazi-probe/E48MdmnEHKruEi5sTKzOwM/story.html
>>>>
>>>> WASHINGTON (AP) — Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton
>>>> received information on her private email server about the deadly attack on
>>>> U.S. diplomatic facilities in Benghazi that was classified Friday at the
>>>> FBI’s request.
>>>>
>>>> The email in question, forwarded to Clinton by her deputy chief of
>>>> staff, relates to reports of arrests in Libya of possible suspects in the
>>>> attack.
>>>>
>>>> The information was not classified at the time the email was sent and
>>>> was upgraded from unclassified to ‘‘secret’’ on Friday, according to State
>>>> Department officials. The officials said 23 words of the November 2012
>>>> message were redacted from the release of 896 emails totaling 296 pages, to
>>>> protect information that may damage foreign relations.
>>>>
>>>> They said no other redactions were made for classification reasons.
>>>>
>>>> Spokeswoman Marie Harf says publication includes 296 e-mails given to a
>>>> House committee investigating the 2012 attack on the US diplomatic post in
>>>> Benghazi, Libya.
>>>>
>>>> She says redactions were made according to Freedom of Information Act
>>>> standards. The emails will be released via the State Department’s FOIA
>>>> website, foia.state.gov.
>>>>
>>>> The documents cover e-mails between 2011 and 2012 related to the
>>>> Benghazi facility and its security, and to the broader issue of a US
>>>> diplomatic presence in Libya.
>>>>
>>>> Harf says the e-mails don’t provide new facts about how four Americans
>>>> were killed on Sept. 11, 2012. The State Department also said on Twitter
>>>> that the emails don’t provide a change in its understanding of the events.
>>>>
>>>> The State Department is still reviewing 55,000 further pages of e-mails
>>>> from Clinton’s private email account. They’ll be published on a rolling
>>>> basis.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Tyson Brody <
>>>> [email-masked]> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > User Actions
>>>> >  Following
>>>>
>>>> > Matt Lee@APDiploWriter
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> > Matt Lee retweeted Brian Fallon
>>>> >
>>>> > Classified this morning - as the story makes clear.
>>>> >
>>>> > Matt Lee added,
>>>> >
>>>> > Brian Fallon @brianefallon
>>>> > Classified only in recent days MT @KThomasDC: Clinton received
>>>> now-classified Benghazi info on private email server, documents show.
>>>> >
>>>> > On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Tyson Brody <
>>>> [email-masked]> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> WASHINGTON (AP) — Clinton received now-classified #Benghazi info on
>>>> private email server, documents show.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 12:35 PM, Christina Reynolds <
>>>> [email-masked]> wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Please use this email chain to send around clips that are breaking
>>>> on the email release. Thanks!
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> --
>>>> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "HRCRR" group.
>>>> >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>>>> send an email to [email-masked].
>>>> >>> To post to this group, send email to [email-masked].
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> > --
>>>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "HRCRR" group.
>>>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>>>> send an email to [email-masked].
>>>> > To post to this group, send email to [email-masked].
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Josh Schwerin
>>>> Spokesperson
>>>> Hillary for America
>>>> @JoshSchwerin
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "HRCRR" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>>> an email to [email-masked].
>>>> To post to this group, send email to [email-masked].
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Josh Schwerin
>>>>
>>>> Spokesperson
>>>>
>>>> Hillary for America
>>>>
>>>> @JoshSchwerin
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "HRCRR" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>>> an email to [email-masked].
>>>> To post to this group, send email to [email-masked].
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Josh Schwerin
>>>>
>>>> Spokesperson
>>>>
>>>> Hillary for America
>>>>
>>>> @JoshSchwerin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> *Ian Sams* | Rapid Response
>>>>
>>>> Hillary for America
>>>>
>>>> (423) 915-6592 | @IanSams <https://twitter.com/iansams>
>>>>
>>>> Gchat: icsams
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>> Groups "HRCRR" group.
>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>>>> an email to [email-masked].
>>>> To post to this group, send email to [email-masked].
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Josh Schwerin
>>>>
>>>> Spokesperson
>>>>
>>>> Hillary for America
>>>>
>>>> @JoshSchwerin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Josh Schwerin
>>>>
>>>> Spokesperson
>>>>
>>>> Hillary for America
>>>>
>>>> @JoshSchwerin
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "HRCRR" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email-masked].
> To post to this group, send email to [email-masked].
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "HRCRR" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email-masked].
> To post to this group, send email to [email-masked].
>

-- 
Charles Hicks
(912) 429-8253