Posted on 10/16/2016 6:20:42 AM PDT by hardspunned
https://wikileaks.com/podesta-emails/emailid/1762
Revelations such as this stopped being shocking a long time ago. The MSM doesn't even try to hide their allegiance anymore.
Collusion.
5.56mm
NYT==traitors to the Republic.
Re: FOR REVIEW: Statement for NYT story on Clinton Cash
From:craig@minassianmedia.com To: bfallon@hillaryclinton.com Date: 2015-04-19 22:29 Subject: Re: FOR REVIEW: Statement for NYT story on Clinton Cash
Looks good. Thank you. Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 19, 2015, at 8:09 PM, Brian Fallon bfallon@hillaryclinton.com wrote: All,
As you are all aware, Jo Becker from the NYT’s investigative unit is one of several reporters at work on stories based on material provided by the publisher of the upcoming Clinton Cash book. Jo’s story is scheduled to run in as soon as one week.
Separately, this afternoon, Amy Chozick from the NYT called us to indicate she had obtained a copy of the book on her own and intends to file a separate story tomorrow. Her story will not unpack all of the book’s claims — she will leave that to Jo. Instead, she will do a more process-y story about the book’s existence, the fact that the publisher has approached multiple media outlets in advance of the book’s publication to spoon-feed them some of the book’s research, and also remark on the fact that Rand Paul continues to drop hints about the book’s contents such that it appears they may be some coordination with individual Republican campaigns.
We think this story, though it was not originated by us, could end up being somewhat helpful in casting the book’s author as having a conservative agenda. Moreover, we think Amy is suspicious of the arrangements that the book’s publisher has reached with the various media outlets (including her own paper). In fact, Jo Becker is apparently trying to get this story killed because she thinks it will undermine her investigative piece later this month. But so far it is running in tomorrow’s paper.
Amy is seeking a response from us on what our approach is to the looming publication of the book and the apparently well coordinated rollout. We have drafted the below response, and wanted you all to see it and provide feedback before we sent it off. Please note, however, that in order to get the statement into the story, we probably need to provide it by about 8:30 tonight. So apologies for the tight turnaround, but here it is:
“We always expected that while Hillary Clinton was focused on how to help everyday Americans get ahead, the Republicans would focus their efforts on attacks rather than ideas. It appears that this book is being used to aid this coordinated attack strategy, twisting previously known facts into absurd conspiracy theories. It will not be the first work of partisan-fueled fiction about the Clintons’ record, and we know it will not be the last.”
Thank you,
Brian
Re: FOR REVIEW: Statement for NYT story on Clinton Cash
From:craig@minassianmedia.com
To: bfallon@hillaryclinton.com
Date: 2015-04-19 22:29
Subject: Re: FOR REVIEW: Statement for NYT story on Clinton Cash
Looks good. Thank you.
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 19, 2015, at 8:09 PM, Brian Fallon bfallon@hillaryclinton.com wrote:
All,
As you are all aware, Jo Becker from the NYT’s investigative unit is one of several reporters at work on stories based on material provided by the publisher of the upcoming Clinton Cash book. Jo’s story is scheduled to run in as soon as one week.
Separately, this afternoon, Amy Chozick from the NYT called us to indicate she had obtained a copy of the book on her own and intends to file a separate story tomorrow. Her story will not unpack all of the book’s claims — she will leave that to Jo. Instead, she will do a more process-y story about the book’s existence, the fact that the publisher has approached multiple media outlets in advance of the book’s publication to spoon-feed them some of the book’s research, and also remark on the fact that Rand Paul continues to drop hints about the book’s contents such that it appears they may be some coordination with individual Republican campaigns.
We think this story, though it was not originated by us, could end up being somewhat helpful in casting the book’s author as having a conservative agenda. Moreover, we think Amy is suspicious of the arrangements that the book’s publisher has reached with the various media outlets (including her own paper). In fact, Jo Becker is apparently trying to get this story killed because she thinks it will undermine her investigative piece later this month. But so far it is running in tomorrow’s paper.
Amy is seeking a response from us on what our approach is to the looming publication of the book and the apparently well coordinated rollout. We have drafted the below response, and wanted you all to see it and provide feedback before we sent it off. Please note, however, that in order to get the statement into the story, we probably need to provide it by about 8:30 tonight. So apologies for the tight turnaround, but here it is:
“We always expected that while Hillary Clinton was focused on how to help everyday Americans get ahead, the Republicans would focus their efforts on attacks rather than ideas. It appears that this book is being used to aid this coordinated attack strategy, twisting previously known facts into absurd conspiracy theories. It will not be the first work of partisan-fueled fiction about the Clintons’ record, and we know it will not be the last.”
Thank you,
Brian
Corruption is ok if it is opposed by conservatives?
We face a number problems at this point in the race:
(1) There is so much damaging information about Hillary being introduced that it all blurs together. It becomes “white noise”.
(2) The negative stories about Hillary aren’t heard on the radio news during your commute to and from work. The stories are not on the evening news or in your newspaper. Only sites like Drudge and FR carry the real news.
(3) Many of the negative Hillary stories are complex and require more than two sentences to explain. Many folks can’t listen long enough to understand.
(4) The media and the DNC are masters at dishonest spin. They curtly mock, misdirect and dismiss the truth. The average Joe doesn’t know what to believe.
(5) The complex Hillary revelations are coming too late. It takes time for these stories to sink in. But “he groped me” sinks in instantly.
“My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere”.
~ Hillary Clinton
I think the biggest impact is social media. I don’t see a lot of MSM articles here that expose Clinton’s misdeeds.
CIRCA 1999/Podesta is Bill's COS.
“Revelations such as this stopped being shocking a long time ago. The MSM doesn’t even try to hide their allegiance anymore. “
I think it’s time to start taking down advertisers.
Very damning, but to be expected from the twofer.
At this point, one of the most effective ways to do this, IMHO, is to use a synergistic combination of political advertising, social media, and the internet. Television ads, and some newspaper ads, will be seen by the widest audiences (especially if aired during highly watched programming). These should, for the most part, be focused on Trump's plans and his commitment to fix the economy and create jobs, but some should also use bullet points to showcase Hillary's deceit and collusion - and these ads should reference a website that lists and simplifies the most important and damaging information about the Clintons.
Trump should also ask his voters to use social media to get the truth out, and emphasize that the political establishment is afraid of losing its power and having that power go back to the American people - with whom it belongs.
“I think it’s time to start taking down advertisers.”
Another very important point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.