Recently released Huma Abedin State Department emails - acquired by Judicial Watch via FOIA request, reveal Clinton State Department staff planning to summon New York Times reporter David Brooks for an "OTR" (off the record) conversation over a "shot" he took at Hillary in a Feburary 2010 article. This isn't the first time we've learned of the Democrat apparatus wrapping their tentacles around the MSM, and it's the second time in weeks Judicial Watch has delivered a bombshell. They're doing good work.
In summary; Hillary Clinton - code named "Evergreen," fired off an email on February 9th, 2010 to advisors Philippe Reines and Jake Sullivan regarding an article written by NYT's David Brooks (links added):
To which senior advisor Philippe Reines responds:
Followed by Jake Sullivan's response:
So a top Clinton advisor wanted to get 'back in the habit' of bringing people or groups in every few weeks? This clearly suggests the Clinton State Dept. was at some point regularly meeting with members of the MSM to discuss content. And how exactly did Hillary, assuming the 'OTR' meeting with David Brooks took place, help him to 'figure out' how things work?
Of course this is old news for those paying attention or for those not purposely playing stupid.
Now, for all of you out there who still aren't convinced that the polls are "adjusted", we present to you the following Podesta email, leaked earlier today, that conveniently spells out, in detail, exactly how to "manufacture" the desired data. The email starts out with a request for recommendations on "oversamples for polling" in order to "maximize what we get out of our media polling."
The email even includes a handy, 37-page guide with the following poll-rigging recommendations. In Arizona, over sampling of Hispanics and Native Americans is highly recommended:
For Florida, the report recommends "consistently monitoring" samples to makes sure they're "not too old" and "has enough African American and Hispanic voters." Meanwhile, "independent" voters in Tampa and Orlando are apparently more dem friendly so the report suggests filling up independent quotas in those cities first.
Meanwhile, it's suggested that national polls over sample "key districts / regions" and "ethnic" groups "as needed."
~
"You lie!" The Prophet Joe Wilson
In summary; Hillary Clinton - code named "Evergreen," fired off an email on February 9th, 2010 to advisors Philippe Reines and Jake Sullivan regarding an article written by NYT's David Brooks (links added):
From: Evergreen
To: PIR (Philippe Reines), Jake Sullivan
Subject: David Brooks
"Took a shot at me in his column today. Any ideas what prompted it?"
To which senior advisor Philippe Reines responds:
"Not sure - but this is a good excuse to bring him in for an OTR [off the record] with you. Lona mentioned you wanted to see [NYT Journalist] Tom Friedman - with your ok, we could schedule both (separately) over the next month or so.
I'd very much like to get back in the habit of bringing someone or a small group in every few weeks"
Followed by Jake Sullivan's response:
Phillippe and I had an offline conversation about this and I agree entirely. I think it makes sense for you to meet with influencers on a regular -- though not intrusive -- basis. An OTR conversation with you is the best way to help guys like Brooks 'figure out' how things work.
So a top Clinton advisor wanted to get 'back in the habit' of bringing people or groups in every few weeks? This clearly suggests the Clinton State Dept. was at some point regularly meeting with members of the MSM to discuss content. And how exactly did Hillary, assuming the 'OTR' meeting with David Brooks took place, help him to 'figure out' how things work?
Of course this is old news for those paying attention or for those not purposely playing stupid.
Now, for all of you out there who still aren't convinced that the polls are "adjusted", we present to you the following Podesta email, leaked earlier today, that conveniently spells out, in detail, exactly how to "manufacture" the desired data. The email starts out with a request for recommendations on "oversamples for polling" in order to "maximize what we get out of our media polling."
I also want to get your Atlas folks to recommend oversamples for our polling before we start in February. By market, regions, etc. I want to get this all compiled into one set of recommendations so we can maximize what we get out of our media polling.
The email even includes a handy, 37-page guide with the following poll-rigging recommendations. In Arizona, over sampling of Hispanics and Native Americans is highly recommended:
Research, microtargeting & polling projects
- Over-sample Hispanics
- Use Spanish language interviewing. (Monolingual Spanish-speaking voters are among the lowest turnout Democratic targets)
- Over-sample the Native American population
For Florida, the report recommends "consistently monitoring" samples to makes sure they're "not too old" and "has enough African American and Hispanic voters." Meanwhile, "independent" voters in Tampa and Orlando are apparently more dem friendly so the report suggests filling up independent quotas in those cities first.
- Consistently monitor the sample to ensure it is not too old, and that it has enough African American and Hispanic voters to reflect the state.
- On Independents: Tampa and Orlando are better persuasion targets than north or south Florida (check your polls before concluding this). If there are budget questions or oversamples, make sure that Tampa and Orlando are included first.
Meanwhile, it's suggested that national polls over sample "key districts / regions" and "ethnic" groups "as needed."
- General election benchmark, 800 sample, with potential over samples in key districts/regions
- Benchmark polling in targeted races, with ethnic over samples as needed
- Targeting tracking polls in key races, with ethnic over samples as needed
~
"You lie!" The Prophet Joe Wilson