[Boston Herald] Latest WikiLeaks dump highlights Hillary Clinton’s media coziness

[Neural Network]

Newly surfaced purported Hillary Clinton campaign emails appear to show coziness between the Democratic nominee’s operation and the press, including The New York Times and The Boston Globe, and demonstrates just how much staffers agonize over the former secretary of state’s every word, even a casual one-line joke.

 

WikiLeaks yesterday released a third round of what they call emails hacked from the account of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, bringing the total to more than 5,000.

 

Several exchanges involving mainstream media members called into question whether they might be helping the former first lady win the White House. They included:

 

•   A New York Times reporter, who is described by a Clinton staffer as “sympathetic,†emailed a transcript of an interview he conducted with Clinton, allowing the campaign to “veto what you didn’t want.â€

 

The campaign allowed the reporter to mention that Clinton had eaten “moose stew†while in Alaska, but asked him not to use the jab that “I always got a big kick out of Sarah Palin with all of her, ‘We’re cooking up some moose stew here.’ â€

 

“The moose is good, but I’d really love to use the other things i sent, too. They were all on point,†writes the reporter.

 

Eventually, the reporter complied with the requests, and the Clinton staffer signed off, saying, “Pleasure doing business!â€

 

A Times spokeswoman said the reporter and editors believed an “off-the-record interview†was “better than nothing†after initially being rejected and the reporter followed the paper’s guidelines for quotes and disclosed the arrangement in the article.

 

•  The Boston Globe’s Op-Ed Page Editor Marjorie Pritchard suggests to Podesta that a column, apparently from a member of the Clinton campaign, “would be good to get ... in on Tuesday, when she is in New Hampshire. That would give her big presence on Tuesday with the piece and on Wednesday with the news story.â€

 

The broadsheet said in a statement that the editorial page endorsed Clinton both in the primaries and the general election and that the newsroom and opinion section are completely separate.

 

“These communications were nothing startling,†said spokeswoman Ellen Clegg. “When we solicit opinion pieces, we’re mindful of how and when they will play, and we communicate that to writers.â€

 

• In an email with the subject line, “From time to time I get the questions in advance,†Donna Brazile, then a CNN contributor who is now interim chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, passed along to the Clinton campaign a question about the death penalty — just a day before a CNN/TVOne town hall where a question about capital punishment did indeed emerge.

 

“Here’s one that worries me about HRC.†Brazile wrote to a Clinton staffer.

 

CNN’s response: “We have never, ever given a town hall question to anyone beforehand.â€

 

•   CNBC’s John Harwood, who came under fire after he moderated a Republican primary debate, warned a Clinton staffer in an email with the subject line, “Watch out,†that read: “Ben Carson could give you real trouble in a general†and included links to an interview he did with the former neurosurgeon.

 

The emails also show how tightly scripted the Clinton campaign is, even when crafting a joke. Staffers spent an entire day debating whether Clinton should make a joke about her eight-hour Benghazi hearing, using Bernie Sanders’ “damn emails†line.

 

“I think it’s funny and confident and the room would love it,†writes one staffer.

 

“Question for comms team is whether reporters would take it as proof that Bernie ‘saved’ her campaign from the email tempest,†worries another.

 

“Is there some Apprentice joke to make?†wonders yet another staffer.

 

“Email jokes in Iowa usually end up badly,†Podesta warns.

 

The campaign eventually decided to nix the one-liner.

 

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/2016/10/latest_wikileaks_dump_highlights_hillary_clinton_s_media_coziness

[flowerlover]

meh...

 

Is anyone surprised by this? 

[playboi bona]

 

dis OP^

[EXORCIST]

<p>we all know ...</p>

[Slutty Mathlete]

So nothing remotely surprising again. OK

[Neural Network]

So nothing remotely surprising again. OK

As if you would ever surprised had it reveal Clinton was a bloodsucking monster. You wold still be rooting for her because you are a sheep.

[Slutty Mathlete]

As if you would ever surprised had it reveal Clinton was a bloodsucking monster. You wold still be rooting for her because you are a sheep.

I'm rooting for her because I agree with her on 90% of the issues, and because The most important thing for Progressives is to have a Supreme Court appointed by Democrats. When she and the incoming Democratic Senators win the election, she will withdraw Merrick Garland's nomination and nominate a more liberal judge. I suspect if there is a Democratic President and Senate, RBG and Breyer will more than likely choose to retire, so that's two more that she will appoint. If Kennedy retires during her term, there is a real chance of a 6-3 progressive majority.

[Neural Network]

I'm rooting for her because I agree with her on 90% of the issues, and because The most important thing for Progressives is to have a Supreme Court appointed by Democrats. When she and the incoming Democratic Senators win the election, she will withdraw Merrick Garland's nomination and nominate a more liberal judge. I suspect if there is a Democratic President and Senate, RBG and Breyer will more than likely choose to retire, so that's two more that she will appoint. If Kennedy retires during her term, there is a real chance of a 6-3 progressive majority.

Progressives?

 

I agree with her on 90% of the issues?

 

Are you pro-LGBT btw? I guess so. So let me ask you. What do you think about her and other neocons and war hawks from Washington desperately rooting for so called rebels in Syria? It is a known fact that 90% of those "rebels" are islamic extremists from Al Qaeda affiliated groups Jabhat Fateh al-Sham (Al Nusra) and Ahrar Al Sham. Only 10% is remnants of so called Free Syrian Army (disbanded in 2014) aka "moderates". Your media, btw, either swaps these numbers with each other or just stays silent on this detail when reports news from Syria. But, but ... independent of whether these 90% or 10% are jihadists or "moderates", they are all anti-LGBT and anti-any-western-democracy-values. In contrast, pre-2011 Syria was a secular pillar of Middle East with its relatively religion-tolerant and more society oriented style of living. SO what do you think about all this? "Democrats" and "progressives" () rooting for jihadists and extremists... Maybe you think such issues don't affect you in any ways because it's far faaaar away your home?

 

Progressives.............? What? Are you really sure the people you root for are PROGRESSIVES?

[Slutty Mathlete]

Progressives? I agree with her on 90% of the issues?

Are you pro-LGBT btw? I guess so. So let me ask you. What do you think about her and other neocons and war hawks from Washington desperately rooting for so called rebels in Syria? It is a known fact that 90% of those "rebels" are islamic extremists from Al Qaeda affiliated groups Jabhat Fateh al-Sham (Al Nusra) and Ahrar Al Sham. Only 10% is remnants of so called Free Syrian Army (disbanded in 2014) aka "moderates". But, but ... independent of whether these 90% or 10% are jihadists or "moderates", they are all anti-LGBT and anti-any-western-democracy-values. In contrast, pre-2011 Syria was a secular pillar of Middle East with its relatively religion-tolerant and more society oriented style of living. SO what do you think about all this? "Democrats" and "progressives" () rooting for jihadists and extremists... Maybe you think such issues don't affect you in any ways because it's far faaaar away your home?

Progressives.............? What? Are you really sure the people you root for are PROGRESSIVES?

As it happens I am LGBT, but I'm also ex-military, so my feeling about all of this are complicated. We have to sort out the situation in the middle east, I'm not sure that Clinton has all of the answers there, but I do trust her to listen to our generals and take the best course of action we have available. One thing is for sure, 100% withdrawal is not an option. I differ from many of my fellow lefties on this, because the live in a Dream world where if we leave them alone they will do the same for us. I think that is false. If we wait for our allies to have all the same values as us all of the time, the we will never have any allies. We should use the resources in the area, and that means playing nice with many groups that I find quite unsavory. I wish we could break up with the Saudis permanently, but that flies in the face of reality.

 

As for arming the rebels, my thinking is along the lines of what she mentioned in the last debate, and that's arming and supplying the Kurds. The Kurds in Iraq and Syria could be valuable allies if we will use them, and Obama is already leaning that way.

[Vaelin]

If Clinton becomes president WW3 will start. Russia and China don't want her.

[thefacts]

Vote Trump.

 

He will make America great again.

[Itsyaboii don]

There's more to come.