Subject: Fwd: DRAFT: Opening Statement
From: Dan Schwerin <[email-masked]>
To: John Podesta <[email-masked]>
Cc: Sara Latham <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2015 17:10:03 -0400

John, did the new draft address some of your concerns about appearing like
we're politicizing or self-aggrandizing?

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Kendall, David <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 2:05 PM
Subject: Re: DRAFT: Opening Statement
To: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>, "
[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>, "Turner,
Katherine" <[email-masked]>, "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>, "
[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>, "
[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>, "[email-masked]"
<[email-masked]>, "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>, "
[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>, "
[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>, "
[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>, "
[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>, "
[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>, "
[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>, "
[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>, "[email-masked]" <
[email-masked]>

I like it.

My one question: in the 6th graf, before "At this point . . .", should the
following be inserted--"After previously testifying about this matter in
both the Senate and the House,"?

*From*: Dan Schwerin [mailto:[email-masked]]
*Sent*: Sunday, October 18, 2015 01:40 PM
*To*: Jake Sullivan <[email-masked]>; Turner, Katherine;
Mandy Grunwald <[email-masked]>; Jennifer Palmieri <
[email-masked]>; Kendall, David; John Podesta <
[email-masked]>; Adrienne Elrod <[email-masked]>;
Philippe Reines <[email-masked]>; Sara Latham <[email-masked]>;
Cheryl Mills <[email-masked]>; Heather Samuelson <
[email-masked]>; Brian Fallon <[email-masked]>;
Huma Abedin <[email-masked]>; Phil Schiliro <
[email-masked]>; Phil Barnett <[email-masked]>; Matt
Siegler <[email-masked]>
*Subject*: Re: DRAFT: Opening Statement

Flagging this draft again in hopes folks can take a look.
Thanks
Dan

On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 3:31 PM, Dan Schwerin <[email-masked]>
wrote:

> Here's a revised opening statement based on our discussion this morning.
> Dan
>
> On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 10:23 AM, Jake Sullivan <
> [email-masked]> wrote:
>
>> This is a big line of Gowdy questioning.  How did you strike balance?
>> Elsewhere you so close up shop when things get dangerous.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Oct 17, 2015, at 10:22 AM, Turner, Katherine <[email-masked]> wrote:
>>
>> One further thought on the current draft:  we might consider softening
>> the “Chris did not believe retreat was an option – and neither do I” line.
>> I don’t think we want to suggest that there was a commitment to be there at
>> any and all costs; but rather, that the known risks were being balanced
>> with the reasons for being there, regular assessments of this balance were
>> made, and that the people on the ground were best-positioned to contribute
>> to those assessments.
>>
>>
>>
>> *Katherine Turner*
>>
>> *Williams & Connolly LLP*
>>
>> 725 Twelfth Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20005
>>
>> (P) 202-434-5487 | (F) 202-434-5029
>>
>> [email-masked] | www.wc.com/kturner
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Dan Schwerin [mailto:[email-masked]
>> <[email-masked]>]
>> *Sent:* Friday, October 16, 2015 8:07 PM
>> *To:* Mandy Grunwald; Jennifer Palmieri; Kendall, David; Jake Sullivan;
>> John Podesta; Adrienne Elrod; Philippe Reines; Sara Latham; Cheryl Mills;
>> Heather Samuelson; Turner, Katherine; Brian Fallon; Huma Abedin; Phil
>> Schiliro; Phil Barnett; Matt Siegler
>> *Subject:* Re: DRAFT: Opening Statement
>>
>>
>>
>> A few more edits after talking with Phil S
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 7:42 PM, Dan Schwerin <
>> [email-masked]> wrote:
>>
>> Here are some modest revisions. Am going to send this over to HRC so she
>> can start thinking about it as well.
>>
>> Thanks all.
>>
>> Dan
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 7:00 PM, Dan Schwerin <
>> [email-masked]> wrote:
>>
>> That "backs of dead Americans" line is stolen from Hard Choices, so maybe
>> a good idea to tweak slightly anyhow. I'll play with some alternatives.  If
>> folks have other concerns before I send on to HRC, please let me know.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 6:13 PM, Mandy Grunwald <[email-masked]> wrote:
>>
>> I also think it's strong.
>>
>>
>>
>> I don't mind the "backs of dead Americans" because we need a bit of moral
>> outrage.
>>
>>
>>
>> I suppose we can dial the language back, but the sense of outrage should
>> remain.
>>
>> *Mandy Grunwald*
>>
>> *Grunwald Communications*
>>
>> *202 973-9400 <202%20973-9400>*
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jennifer Palmieri <[email-masked]>
>> To: Kendall, David <[email-masked]>
>> Cc: Dan Schwerin <[email-masked]>; Jake Sullivan <
>> [email-masked]>; John Podesta <[email-masked]>;
>> Adrienne Elrod <[email-masked]>; Mandy Grunwald <
>> [email-masked]>; Philippe Reines <[email-masked]>; Sara Latham <
>> [email-masked]>; Cheryl Mills <[email-masked]>;
>> Heather Samuelson <[email-masked]>; Turner, Katherine <
>> [email-masked]>; Brian Fallon <[email-masked]>; Huma Abedin <
>> [email-masked]>; Phil Schiliro <[email-masked]>; Phil
>> Barnett <[email-masked]>; Matt Siegler <[email-masked]>
>> Sent: Fri, Oct 16, 2015 6:04 pm
>> Subject: Re: DRAFT: Opening Statement
>>
>> I think it is good.  Imagine the clip they will use is the partisan
>> slugfest sentence.  I don't love "backs of dead Americans" in that
>> sentence.  I think that is too graphic and splashes back on her as
>> appearing to exploit their deaths.
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>
>> On Oct 16, 2015, at 3:40 PM, Kendall, David <[email-masked]> wrote:
>>
>> I like it.  Just two thoughts.
>>
>>
>>
>> We twice call the ARB “independent”—I’d prefer to call it “non-partisan”
>> as we do once in the draft.  *Hard Choices* did not call it
>> “independent”, and since it’s appointed by and responsible to the
>> Secretary, I think we open an avenue of attack by calling it “independent”.
>>
>>
>>
>> Can we get some more numbers into the early “diplomacy is dangerous”
>> discussion?  Sixty-six American diplomatic personnel and over a hundred
>> contractors and locally employed staff killed since the 1970’s (or whatever
>> the numbers are).  I recognize we have some numbers on page 3 (Beirut
>> bombing, 1998 attacks).
>>
>>
>>
>> *David E. Kendall*
>>
>> *Williams & Connolly LLP*
>>
>> 725 Twelfth Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20005
>>
>> (P) 202-434-5145 | (F) 202-434-5029
>>
>> [email-masked] | www.wc.com/dkendall
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Dan Schwerin [mailto:[email-masked]
>> <[email-masked]>]
>> *Sent:* Friday, October 16, 2015 2:31 PM
>> *To:* Jake Sullivan; John Podesta; Adrienne Elrod; Mandy Grunwald;
>> Philippe Reines; Sara Latham; Cheryl Mills; Heather Samuelson; Kendall,
>> David; Turner, Katherine; Brian Fallon; Jennifer Palmieri; Huma Abedin;
>> Phil Schiliro; Phil Barnett; Matt Siegler
>> *Subject:* DRAFT: Opening Statement
>>
>>
>>
>> Here is a draft of HRC's opening statement based on our discussion
>> today.  As Cheryl mentioned, we'd love to get this to HRC for a first read
>> tonight or tomorrow, so quick feedback would be great.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Dan
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>>
>> This message and any attachments are intended only for the addressee and
>> may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If you have
>> received this message in error, please do not read, use, copy, distribute,
>> or disclose the contents of the message and any attachments. Instead,
>> please delete the message and any attachments and notify the sender
>> immediately. Thank you.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>